Submit your Article

Jan 30, Bhaktapur

It is 7:30 in the morning. The sky is partly cloudy, but Kathmandu’s temperature is gradually rising as January nears its end. A man sits in the teashop, reading the Gorkhapatra national daily. He is eager to share a piece of news about a startup conference organized by the Nepali Congress at its headquarters in Sanepa. He sees it as a positive initiative by Nepal’s largest political party but criticizes the government’s failure to create a favorable environment for startups to flourish. While some startups are thriving, he says, others have stagnated due to a lack of market access and skilled workforce. The man, who does not identify himself, appears well-informed about the challenges startups face, including legal hurdles. However, the other patrons in the teashop show little interest in discussing the topic.

Soon, another man enters and abruptly shifts the conversation to politics. He brings up news that former President Bidya Devi Bhandari is preparing to re-enter active politics. A politically conscious man in the teashop immediately responds, mentioning that Prime Minister KP Sharma Oli has sent a clear message discouraging her return. This remark sparks interest among the tea drinkers. One of them asks, “How do you know Oli sent her a message?” The man cites a recent statement by CPN-UML General Secretary Pradeep Kumar Gyawali, who publicly remarked that it would be inappropriate for Bhandari to rejoin active politics. He speculates that Oli may have instructed Gyawali to make the statement. Of the seven people in the teashop, five agree that former presidents and vice presidents should not re-enter politics.

Another person adds that former Vice-president Nanda Kishor Pun is also preparing to return and has attended party meetings, but Maoist Center Chair Pushpa Kamal Dahal is hesitant to offer him a position. The discussion then shifts to the internal dynamics of the UML. One man claims that there is dissatisfaction within the party but that no one dares to speak up, leading some to push for Bhandari’s return. He notes that Gokul Banskota was the first UML leader to invite Bhandari to a party program in Kavre last year, but a rift has since developed between him and Oli. Others in the teashop mention Bhandari’s recent visits to Biratnagar and Pokhara, where she engaged extensively with party leaders and cadres.

The conversation naturally drifts toward international affairs, particularly American politics. Some express strong opinions about former US President Donald Trump’s decision to pause US aid through USAID. One person argues that halting aid is beneficial, as it will reduce Nepal’s dependency and force the government to take more responsibility. He adds that those employed in USAID projects may be unsettled by the decision. Another person interjects, criticizing the misuse of USAID funds, pointing to extravagant expenditures on five-star hotels and other unnecessary areas. The discussion then becomes disorganized, with various people sharing their views on illegal immigration. Someone remarks, “People have spent over Rs 10m to get to the US through traffickers. If they are deported, it will be a devastating blow to their families.” Another voice chimes in, stating, “Countries will never prosper through foreign grants.” Notably, there is little discussion about Rastriya Swatantra Party (RSP) Chairman Rabi Lamichhane—a stark contrast to the frequent debates about him in past weeks.

As the morning progresses, the teashop empties. I wait, hoping for new perspectives. Eventually, a man in his sixties enters, orders milk tea, and begins discussing the durability of the current government. He recalls predictions that the Oli government wouldn’t last long but points out the cordial relationship between Oli and Nepali Congress President Sher Bahadur Deuba. He claims that the two leaders recently met and agreed to keep the coalition intact. “I think Prachanda’s efforts to topple this government will fail,” he states confidently. I ask, “So you believe this coalition will last?” He responds, “Khai, malai chai testai lagcha” (“Well, that’s what I think”). He then speculates that efforts are underway to unite all communist forces under Bhandari’s leadership and suggests that even Maoist Chairman Dahal has agreed to the plan. However, he suddenly grows uneasy, shifts the topic, and confesses, “Forget politics—I am suffering from multiple health issues. Who cares about us? I have a lot of money, but I’m not happy. Both my sons are abroad. They want me to join them in Australia, but I don’t want to leave. Who will take care of us here?”

Then, unexpectedly, he asks about my profession. This is the first time someone has questioned me directly since I started my teashop column. I answer honestly: “I am a journalist.” This marks the beginning of my uneasy moment. He launches into a tirade about journalism, accusing reporters of being irresponsible and spreading misinformation. “Tell me, why are all journalists against Rabi Lamichhane?” he demands. I try to explain the difference between journalistic and non-journalistic content, cautioning against misinformation and disinformation, but he remains unconvinced. Seeing that my argument is going nowhere, I steer the conversation toward Trump. This successfully diverts his focus, and he asserts, “Nepali people should understand that every politician prioritizes their own country’s interests, and that’s exactly what Trump is doing.”

He offers me a cup of tea, but I decline, having already had two. When I ask about his profession, he reveals that he once worked for a private company and now owns two houses—one in Kathmandu and another in Bhaktapur. Before I leave, he circles back to his criticism of the media, making unverified accusations against certain outlets. I choose to remain silent.

As I left the teashop, a question lingered in my mind: Why do people distrust mainstream media, yet readily consume unverified content elsewhere? Is it a lack of awareness, or are there genuine flaws in journalism today? I had no ready answer. 

At a time when the winter session of Nepal’s Federal Parliament is about to commence following protracted delays resulting from factors best known to the government amid the opposition parties’ plans to hit the streets against some ordinances, it will be worthwhile to start with relevant quotes from some famous personalities.

Walter Bagehot, an English journalist and essayist, goes: A Parliament is nothing less than a big meeting of more or less idle people.

Jean-Louis de Lolme, a Genevan and British political theorist and writer, fires, with the British parliament in his crosshairs: Parliament can do everything but make a woman a man and a man a woman.

Arun Jaitley, an Indian politician and lawyer, argues: Parliament's job is to conduct discussions. But many a time, Parliament is used to ignoring issues, and in such situations, obstruction of Parliament is in the favour of democracy. Therefore, parliamentary obstruction is not undemocratic.

These nuggets of wisdom may not be music to the ears of the government and at least a section of the Parliament. But even a super-powerful government and a sovereign parliament should not stop critics from being critical and skeptics from being skeptical.

Looking back, our decades-long tryst with parliamentary democracy has chapters that are far from glorious. These chapters feature unethical means employed to pass laws with a brute majority mustered through unethical means like horse-trading and floor crossing, with long-term consequences for the country and the people.

In those instances, lawmakers from various political parties have done the bidding of a whip-cracking executive without bothering to protect the interests of the very sovereign people they claim to be serving. More often than not, ruling parties have chosen to bulldoze opaquely drafted laws through the parliament instead of bothering to listen to the opposition. Throughout the years, the main agenda of the opposition bench seems to be to topple the government.

The winter session has given the constituents of the parliament yet another opportunity to mend ways. Magnanimity won’t  hurt the government, restraint won’t hurt the opposition.

For the apex leadership of our country, here’s part of a quote from APJ Abdul Kalam, an  aerospace scientist who went on to become the president of India: When I took over as president, I studied the Constitution, and the more I studied it, the more I realized that it does not prevent the president of India from giving the nation a vision.

Case I

Bhago Devi Sadaya, 40, is one of the many women in Jhutki village, Lahan Municipality-24, Siraha, whose life revolves around the daily struggle of fetching water. In her village of 33 households, there is only one hand pump, which often dries up during the summer months. “The extreme heat in recent years has made the hand pump unusable, forcing us to walk up to two hours to find water,” she explains.

As members of the Dalit community, Bhago Devi and her neighbors are barred from using hand pumps in nearby villages. This systemic discrimination leaves them with no choice but to rely on distant rivers or hand pumps in other Dalit villages.

Previously, two ponds near Jhutki served as vital resources for the community, providing water for cattle, gardening, washing clothes, and cleaning utensils. However, a few years ago, the municipality filled one pond to build a local market and drained the other to construct a temple in its center. “Now, we have to fetch water not just for drinking but for all our daily needs,” Bhago Devi told ApEx.

“Women in my community have been walking at least four hours a day, often in two shifts, to fetch water since they were 10 years old,” she adds. The physical toll of this labor has led to menstrual health issues for many women. “The time spent fetching water leaves us with little opportunity to earn a living through other work,” she says.

The loss of the ponds has also deprived the community of their fishing livelihood, further exacerbating their economic struggles.

Case II

In Sisawani village, part of Lahan Municipality-22, the Sadaya community faces similar challenges. The village once had two ponds, but one was filled by the municipality to construct a road, and the other was handed over to the private sector. Now, villagers must pay Rs 100 per kilogram of fish they catch.

Despite these setbacks, the community has shown resilience by initiating collective efforts like community farming and establishing a savings fund. “We don’t face major issues with drinking water since we have a hand pump and a well, but irrigation for farming remains a challenge,” says Cheti Sadaya, 34. “Using the hand pump or well for irrigation dries them up quickly, and changing rainfall patterns make rainwater unreliable,” she explains.

A decade ago, monsoon rains were predictable and timely. Now, heavy rainfall often occurs during harvest time, damaging crops. “The municipality hasn’t provided any support for irrigation, so we struggle to manage,” Cheti says. “Our fishing livelihood is also gone.”

Case III

Aahale, in Dhangadhimai Municipality-12, Siraha, is home to 35 households from the Sadaya community. Despite being in the Tarai region, Aahale’s hilly terrain makes hand pumps impractical. Villagers rely on an electric submersible pump for water, but frequent breakdowns and costly repairs leave them without access for months.

“When the pump breaks down, it takes about six months to collect enough funds for repairs. During that time, we walk an hour to the nearest river to fetch water,” says Ganauri Sadaya, 47. “Relying on river water has led to frequent waterborne diseases in the village.”

A nearby community forest offers some relief, but access is restricted to Saturdays, and villagers must pay Rs 10 for entry. “We’re only allowed to carry as much firewood as we can in one trip, even though there’s plenty of dried wood that could be used or sold,” Ganauri laments.

Case IV

In Bihibare, another hilly region in Dhangadhimai-14, hand pumps are also unfeasible. Villagers store groundwater near rivers, but the sparse population means some households are an hour’s walk from the water source. “Women manage agriculture while men work abroad,” says Shova Thakuri, 34, whose husband has been in the Middle East for a decade. “We’re doing our best, but the changing climate makes it harder every year.”

A decade ago, rainfall began in April, but now it often arrives only in August or September, with heavy downpours destroying crops. “On my three bighas of land, I used to grow 2,000 kilograms of maize. Now, I’m lucky to get 200 kilograms,” says Bhakta Maya Thakuri, 65.

“Winter used to start in December and end by January, but now we face extreme heat in December and cold waves later,” she adds. “Potato plants dry up in December, and those that survive are damaged by late cold waves during harvest.”

The above cases highlight the intertwined challenges of climate change, resource degradation, and systemic inequality. Erratic rainfall and shifting weather patterns have disrupted traditional farming cycles, drastically reducing crop yields and threatening livelihoods. Women, who manage agriculture and daily survival while men seek employment abroad, bear the brunt of these changes.

The loss of public commons like ponds and forests has further exacerbated their struggles. Without reliable water infrastructure, villagers are forced to rely on rivers, increasing their vulnerability to waterborne diseases. Restrictions on forest access limit their ability to collect firewood, cutting off a vital resource.

Despite these challenges, communities are demonstrating resilience through collective efforts like community farming and savings funds. However, the lack of institutional support for irrigation and sustainable resource management underscores the need for urgent policy interventions to protect public commons and adapt to climate change.

Mahesh Prasad Chaudhary, mayor of Lahan Municipality, denies allegations that the municipality has filled ponds. He claims efforts are underway to expand remaining ponds and provide drinking water taps to every household by 2030. “We have already dug around 10 ponds and are collaborating with organizations to construct water tanks,” he says.

Shiva Shankar Mahato, mayor of Dhangadhimai Municipality, claims the Dalit communities “destroy hand pumps themselves,” shifting blame onto marginalized communities rather than addressing structural issues of inequality and inadequate infrastructure. 

The persistent struggle of Dalit communities to access clean water is a stark reminder of the need for inclusive policy-making and accountability at the local level.

Climate change demands cohesive action across governance levels. For Nepal—one of the most climate-vulnerable countries—the stakes are high. Increasing risks of floods, landslides, and droughts disproportionately affect marginalized groups, particularly women, intensifying the urgency for climate-resilient policies.

Public commons—forests, water sources, and grazing lands—are pivotal tools for climate resilience. However, these resources face growing strain from overexploitation, ineffective governance, and climate impacts. Recognizing their role in addressing climate challenges offers Nepal a sustainable path forward.

“Over the past decade or more, discussions on climate change have largely focused on emissions, but it is not the only pressing issue at hand,” says environmentalist Madhukar Upadhya. “There are many other concerns: loss of biodiversity, land and soil degradation, water shortages, declining productivity. At the heart of it all is the public commons, which is essential not only for maintaining a healthy environment but also for helping communities combat and mitigate the climate crisis.”

As the Climate Change Division falls under the Ministry of Forests and Environment, there have been strong policies and efforts regarding forests. However, there are no dedicated agencies or policies to oversee public commons. 

“Everyone benefits from public commons, but no one has taken responsibility for their protection. It has not even been able to be a part of climate dialogues,” says Upadhya.

The Local Government Operation Act 2017 establishes disaster management, environmental protection and conservation, land management, and natural resource management as joint responsibilities of the federal and provincial governments. However, the Act neglects to specifically address climate change risks and necessary adaptation interventions. Local governments, despite having environmental and disaster management units, often struggle to respond effectively to vulnerable communities—such as Dalits, indigenous groups, and women—due to limited capacity and resources.

Similarly, the Gender Equality Policy 2021 identifies cross-cutting areas to address the vulnerabilities of marginalized groups. However, sectoral policies often treat communities as homogenous entities, disregarding historical discrimination, contextual risks, and differential impacts. This approach risks isolating gender equality and social inclusion (GESI) strategies from broader development policies. While the policy acknowledges the vulnerabilities of women and marginalized groups, it does not recognize their roles as contributors and agents of change, which limits the scope of their involvement in driving climate action.

Furthermore, the National Forest Policy 2019 envisions sustainable and participatory forest management, conservation, and biodiversity protection. While it includes a sectoral GESI policy, it does not prioritize climate change issues or explicitly outline how women and socially excluded groups can benefit from initiatives like REDD+. Forest laws and policies lack a climate justice perspective to adequately protect and empower the poor, women, and marginalized groups disproportionately impacted by climate change. 

“None of our institutions are equipped to address emerging climate challenges, as they still operate under traditional policies,” says Upadhya. 

The loss of ponds has not only worsened water scarcity but also eliminated traditional fishing-based incomes, further deepening economic struggles

The recently organized Bagmati Province-Level Dialogue on ‘Localization of Climate Action: A Gender Lens on Public Commons Conservation and Justice’ in Hetauda underscored the importance of local climate actions enhanced by a gender-inclusive approach, focusing on conserving public commons and ensuring justice for all.  

During the event, a woman from indigenous community shared firsthand accounts of how climate change has impacted their lives. “Agriculture has been greatly affected due to the lack of rain during the rainy season and the continuous increase in temperature. Food production has declined, and irregularities in agriculture have made food supplies unsafe,” she explained. 

Another noted, “Whether it’s the heat or the lack of water and food, the fear of wild animals has increased. They destroy all our crops. If you defend yourself and kill an animal, you go to jail, but if a person dies, no one cares—especially for us slum dwellers, workers, landless, and marginalized groups.”

Subarna Ghimire, a local activist who is also a student of forestry, pointed out that the vulnerable communities lack information about the impacts of climate change. He stressed that  a comprehensive effort is needed to help communities understand and adapt.

Despite these systemic challenges, several local governments in Nepal have made commendable efforts to address climate risks and build resilience. Madi Municipality in Chitwan, for instance, has developed a Local Adaptation Action Plan (LAPA) that focuses on agriculture, water management, and disaster risk reduction. The municipality has implemented community-based water management projects, such as rainwater harvesting systems and the rezoning of traditional water sources, while also promoting climate-smart agricultural practices and drought-resistant crops. 

Similarly, Dhangadhi Sub-Metropolitan City has prepared a Disaster Risk Reduction and Climate Change Adaptation (DRR-CCA) plan that integrates climate adaptation strategies with local emergency management. It has undertaken vulnerability assessments to address issues such as floods, heat waves, and water scarcity. The city has focused on promoting climate-resilient crops, training farmers in water conservation techniques, and establishing early warning systems along with flood protection infrastructure to enhance emergency preparedness. 

Meanwhile, Gorkha Municipality has integrated climate adaptation strategies into its urban development plan. It has prioritized building resilient infrastructure, including flood protection and irrigation systems, while promoting sustainable agricultural practices. The municipality has also initiated community-based forest management projects to conserve natural resources and mitigate the risk of landslides.

In Rasuwa, local governments have introduced a Climate-Smart Village Plan to address climate challenges in remote and rural areas. These initiatives emphasize community participation in building climate resilience, particularly in the agricultural sector. The district has initiated watershed management projects to conserve soil and water resources while promoting alternative livelihoods such as eco-tourism. Farmers in the region have been trained in crop diversification, soil conservation techniques, and water-saving irrigation practices, further strengthening the local economy and climate resilience.

Nepal lacks dedicated policies to protect public commons like water sources and forests, making climate adaptation harder for marginalized groups

While these efforts are promising, they reveal persistent challenges, including weak coordination among federal, provincial, and local governments, conflicting jurisdictions, and overlapping responsibilities. The lack of comprehensive data on climate risks and resource constraints further hampers evidence-based planning and implementation. Addressing these challenges requires bridging gaps in policies, empowering local governments with resources and technical capacity, and fostering better coordination across governance levels.

“Local governments are primarily focused on increasing revenue, but they are overlooking how communities are living and struggling with the consequences,” says environmentalist Upadhya. “The constitution grants local governments the authority to manage natural resources, so they should prioritize their people and take action at the ground level.” 

As local governments are responsible for formulating their own policies, he suggests that the central government provide clear guidelines to help align these policies with a climate-focused approach. To build a more inclusive and climate-resilient future, Nepal must integrate gender-sensitive approaches and leverage the potential of public commons. Recognizing vulnerable groups as active agents of change in climate action, rather than passive recipients, is essential. 

Public commons hold immense potential for building climate resilience and supporting adaptation strategies. Forests and wetlands act as carbon sinks, reducing greenhouse gas emissions, while healthy ecosystems mitigate the risks of floods, landslides, and droughts. Empowering women is essential, as they are the primary users and stewards of these resources in many rural communities. Integrating gender perspectives into climate policies can strengthen resource management and resilience efforts.

Provincial governments play a crucial role in bridging the gap between national and international commitments and local priorities. Frameworks like the Paris Agreement and the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) emphasize inclusive governance, providing Nepal with a pathway to integrate public commons into its climate solutions. 

Localizing climate actions requires developing tailored climate plans and budgets that address specific local needs while incorporating gender-sensitive approaches to ensure inclusive participation. Provincial and national synergy can be enhanced by aligning provincial policies with broader frameworks and facilitating data sharing and resource allocation for coherent governance. 

“The conservation of Nepal’s public commons is more than a localized issue. It’s a critical component of global climate strategies,” says Upadhya. “By integrating commons into climate policies and prioritizing gender-sensitive approaches, Nepal can empower its communities and combat the crisis of climate change.”

This week was eventful for Nepal’s domestic and external affairs. As the winter session of Parliament begins on Jan 31, both ruling and opposition parties are busy strategizing. The ruling parties, primarily Nepali Congress and CPN-UML, have attempted to bridge their differences.

Some leaders of NC openly criticized the government's move to introduce ordinances, while ruling parties have been defending them. Although UML leaders strongly support the ordinances, some populist NC leaders object. NC President Sher Bahadur Deuba has instructed party lawmakers not to oppose the ordinances in Parliament, but some may defy him. The winter session is likely to witness heated exchanges between ruling and opposition parties, potentially affecting the lawmaking process.

Former President Bidya Devi Bhandari remains a topic of public discourse. She spent a week in Biratnagar seeking input from local UML leaders and cadres regarding her potential leadership of the party after KP Sharma Oli. Earlier, she had visited Pokhara, and upon her return, Oli held a lengthy meeting with her.

Interestingly, UML General Secretary Pradeep Kumar Gyawali stated that it would be inappropriate for Bhandari to rejoin active party politics. Speaking to reporters in Rupandehi on Wednesday, he emphasized that Bhandari should stay out of party affairs, adding that UML has not internally discussed her return. This highlights a potential conflict between Oli and Bhandari. Social media is abuzz with criticism of Bhandari’s political ambitions, with many arguing it would be inappropriate for her to return. UML leaders claim her residence in Chapali Height is gradually becoming a power center, as UML cadres frequently visit her. Meanwhile, Bhandari has been increasingly vocal about her political ambitions. Oli, displeased with her moves, has publicly stated that he will not tolerate factionalism within the party.

The government has introduced Nepal’s first Social Media Regulation Bill, drawing criticism from the media fraternity. The bill is expected to undergo significant public and parliamentary scrutiny. Senior NC leaders, including General Secretary Gagan Kumar Thapa and Bishwa Prakash Sharma, have voiced concerns, while the Federation of Nepalese Journalists has flagged certain provisions. Parliament is unlikely to pass the bill hastily and may refer it for further review. While social media regulation is necessary, balancing it with freedom of speech and expression remains a challenge. Governments worldwide are grappling with similar issues, but Nepal continues to make the mistake of drafting such bills without consulting stakeholders. Although Parliament has the power to amend or reject the bill, a more consultative approach would have improved its chances of passage.

In another development, Madhes-based parties are working towards forming a coalition to push their regional agenda. This week, eight Madhes-based parties established a task force to draft a concept note for their alliance, holding multiple meetings. Since 2008, these parties have suffered multiple splits, weakening their national political influence. Now, with local and national elections approaching, they seem to recognize the need for unity. While immediate unification is unlikely, their efforts may lead to a loose coalition. Some Madhesi leaders suggest India may have encouraged them to form a united front.

Like last week, speculation continues about the longevity of the current coalition. CPN (Maoist Center) Chairman Pushpa Kamal Dahal’s recent public remarks on the government's stability have annoyed Prime Minister Oli, as they create uncertainty. This week, Oli stated he has full support from NC and will reciprocate the favor by handing over power to Deuba after 17-18 months. Oli has been engaging more with Deuba, who faces pressure to reconsider his alliance with UML but appears inclined to maintain the coalition. NC General Secretary Thapa, often seen as an opposition figure within his party, is now working to keep the coalition intact, offering some relief to Deuba.

In another story that should worry us and policy makers, Nepal faces the risk of being greylisted by the Financial Action Task Force (FATF) due to deficiencies in combating money laundering and terrorist financing. The FATF Working Group Meetings, scheduled for Feb 17-21 in Paris, will assess Nepal’s progress. Nepal Rastra Bank Governor Maha Prasad Adhikari acknowledged the risk, stating that Nepal is in the listing phase after its mutual evaluation. This situation is a direct consequence of government negligence and failure to take necessary action against money laundering.

Finally, there has been significant concern over former US President Donald Trump’s decision to halt foreign assistance. Following an executive order, USAID in Nepal has informed the government and local implementing partners to temporarily suspend all projects for at least 90 days. However, the US Secretary of State has approved a waiver for life-saving humanitarian assistance during this review period. A statement from the US. The State Department clarifies that while humanitarian programs may continue, no new contracts shall be signed during this temporary pause.