Submit your Article

The Supreme Court on Sunday issued an order, paving the way for bringing top decision-makers of the time, including former prime ministers Madhav Kumar Nepal and Baburam Bhattarai, under the purview of police investigation in connection with the Lalita Niwas land-grab—the transfer of ownership of government land located at Baluwatar to individuals. 

The Commission for the Investigation of Abuse of Authority (CIAA) had confirmed earlier that the transfer of the land to individuals began during the prime ministership of Nepal and Bhattarai.  

But the CIAA had exonerated Nepal and Bhattarai in the case, pointing that investigation into the two prime ministers’ cabinet decisions were collective policy decisions that were beyond its jurisdiction. In the wake of reports leveling charges against them in connection with the case, Bhattarai and Nepal had said that they were innocent. 

Sunday’s order came from a division bench of justices Anil Kumar Sinha and Kumar Chudal in response to a habeas corpus petition from Yog Raj Paudel, one of the accused in the scam that has already brought 17 people under its net as a police probe continues. 

The top court instructed that high officials involved in making Cabinet decisions and senior ministry level officials involved in the decision-making process related to the transfer of the government land also be brought under investigation, citing decisions made on 11 April 2010, 14 May 2010, 13 August 2010 and 4 October 2012 without further delay.   

Those implicated in the case so far include Communications Secretary Krishna Bahadur Raut, Bhatbhateni Supermarket Chairman Min Bahadur Gurung, former election commissioner Sudhir Kumar Shah, Dharma Prasad Gautam, Gopal Karki, Shivaji Bhattarai, Ghaman Kumari Karki, Baburaja Maharjan, Ramesh Kumar Pokharel, Dev Narayan Maharjan, Lokhari Ghimire, Dhruba Prasad Aryal, Krishna Bahadur Raut, Yograj Paudel, Narayandas Mishra, Rudra Prasad Shrestha, Bal Krishna Shrestha and Binod Paudel.

In 2016, Nepal-India relations were at one of their all time lows because of India’s economic blockade. The then Minister for Foreign Affairs, Kamal Thapa, frequently traveled to India to convince the Indian side to lift the blockade which had severely affected life in Nepal.

In one of the meetings with his Indian counterpart, Sushma Swaraj, Thapa had proposed forming a panel on Nepal-India Eminent Persons’ Group (EPG), as agreed by the two countries in 2014, to seek experts’ suggestions to settle the long-standing issues between Nepal and India, including the revision of the 1960 Treaty of Peace and Friendship to reflect the present day realities.

Former foreign minister Thapa shared such information while speaking at a program organized by Tanka Prasad Acharya Memorial Foundation on Friday.

Initially, recalls Thapa, Swaraj was reluctant to form such a panel as the bilateral ties between the two countries were going through a rocky patch, but she agreed eventually. The Nepali side announced its EPG members, all of them picked by Thapa without consulting major political parties and stakeholders.

The names were endorsed by the Cabinet of Prime Minister KP Sharma Oli. Former Nepali ambassador to India, Nilambar Acharya, remembers Thapa calling him one evening and asking him to become an EPG member. Acharya asked Thapa for some time to think about the offer, but the latter insisted that the decision had to be made right then and there.

Though it was an expert panel, there were no experts representing the Nepali Congress, CPN (Maoist Center) and Madhes-based parties. Still, the non-represented parties had no issue with the formation of the EPG, as most of the members were non-political figures. The only politician in the EPG, Nepal, was Rajan Bhattarai of the CPN-UML. From India, it was Bhagat Singh Koshiyari of the Bharatiya Janata Party.

In 2018, the EPG prepared its report with its suggestions to the governments of Nepal and India. But Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi refused to receive the report. This turndown essentially halted the progress of the EPG report.  During his India visit in May this year, Prime Minister Pushpa Kamal Dahal did not raise the EPG issue with Prime Minister Modi lest it should spoil the improving relationship between Nepal and India.

Former Prime Minister and UML leader Oli is probably the only leader who has been consistently and publicly speaking about the importance of the EPG report. Other political parties, mainly the NC and Maoist, seem to have no interest in the issue. 

In a public program on Saturday, Oli said that the Nepal-India relations should move ahead “as per the suggestions provided by the EPG report.” He said the report will serve as a prescription to push forward the ties between the two countries.

It has been more than five years since the EPG report was prepared, and the chances of it moving ahead are slim. Already, discussions have begun on what to do with the report.  Thapa, the former foreign minister, has suggested that members submit the report to Nepali side and close the chapter on the whole issue. As the report has already submitted its report to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Nepal, it can be argued that the EPG has no legal existence.  

There are some people who are demanding that the report must be made public at least, if the two governments are not ready to receive it. EPG Nepal coordinator Thapa says he holds the key to the cupboard where the report has been stored and he has been trying to hand it over to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs.

He adds being the keeper of the report has become a huge burden for him.There are multiple reasons behind the sorry state of the EPG report. First one, obviously, is the composition of the EPG without representations from major political parties.

 But there are those who argue that since the EPG was a panel of experts, there was no need for a party-wise representation. The only thing lacking, they say, is the consensus of parties and involvement of major political actors. The NC, Maoists and Madhes-based parties are not willing to take ownership of the EPG report.

It should also be noted that the Indian side was never in favor of forming a panel for the purpose of, among other things, suggesting revision to the 1950 Peace and Friendship Treaty. Several issues that the EPG was dealing with were heavily politicized.

Experts reiterate that there should be a national consensus for the EPG report to move ahead.

Though the report is yet to be made public, the Indian side has expressed dissatisfaction over some provisions that were leaked through the media.

The document has recommended establishing smart borders in order to limit the seamless cross-border movement. In 2018, The Wire reported:  “EPG has suggested that a technology-driven structure should be put in place for monitoring the movement along the international boundary, with identity cards as the mode of registration.”

Another point that the Nepal side has proposed is ensuring full independence to purchase arms and ammunition from third countries. To this end, Nepal is intending to change the Article 5 of Treaty which says: “The Government of Nepal shall be free to import from or through the territory of India, arms, ammunition or war-like materials and equipment necessary for the security of Nepal.”

This provision provides full right to Nepal to import arms but protocol to the Nepal-India Treaty of Transit states that “arms, ammunition and hazardous cargo shall not be allowed to be transported by road.” Similarly, Nepal-India Railway Agreement is not sufficient to allow the transit of arms and ammunition from India, experts say.

Similarly, the letter of exchange to this treaty bars Nepal’s independent right to import arms and ammunition from India. The paragraph-2 of Letter of Exchange says: “Any arms, ammunition or war-like material and equipment necessary for the security of Nepal that the Government of Nepal may import through the territory of India shall be so imported with the assistance and agreement of the government of India.

 The government of India will take steps for the smooth and expeditious transport of such arms and ammunition through India.” Nepal prefers to scrap both Article 5 and Letter of Exchange with a view that it is fully independent to import arms and other equipment as per its need.

 The 2007 India-Bhutan Friendship Treaty had also changed a similar clause in the 1949 version. The new treaty says that Bhutan can import arms as long as Indian interests are not harmed and there is no re-export of the weapons, either by the government or individuals.

Article 6 and 7 in the current treaty encompass the issue of “national treatment” and equal privileges for citizens on each other’s soil. While the spirit has been preserved to an extent, the EPG members have apparently backed Nepal’s position that the Himalayan republic should be able to institute more protection for its own citizens due to the asymmetry in size and economy between the two neighbors.

Nepal is of the view that such provisions are disadvantageous to a small country like Nepal, and given its population, economy and size, it cannot offer equal treatment to Indian citizens in Nepal.  Another bone of contention between the two countries is Article 2 of the treaty that states: “The two governments hereby undertake to inform each other of any serious frictions or misunderstanding with any neighboring state likely to cause any breach in the friendly relations subsisting between the two governments.” 

 Nepal is of the view that as this provision is not implemented, it is better to scrap. There has been war between India and Pakistan and India and China since the signing of the treaty, but India has not informed Nepal of the tensions.  Similarly, there has not been any military alliances between the two countries. 

Academicians and policy-makers in New Delhi say that India sought Nepal’s favor when there was Doklam crisis in 2017, and Nepal may be asked to take side by India if there is escalating tensions between two countries in coming days. Since the 1962 China-India war, Nepal has maintained a neutral position vis-à-vis India-China conflict and war.

 Along with these key provisions, Nepal has proposed to make changes in several other provisions of bilateral treaties and agreements in trade, transit and other areas, but Nepal’s major concern is the 1950 treaty. 

The main purpose behind the formation of EPG was to suggest ways on how to amend the treaty. There are also views on whether it was prudent to form a panel like the EPG to deal with sensitive issues between two countries.

 Some experts say the two countries should have instead formed government-level mechanisms to work out the outstanding issues, which they can still do with national political consensus. 

As a member of the United Nations and the leader of the Non-Aligned Movement, Nepal continues to be a strong advocate for global peace and brotherhood among all nations. Nepal’s foreign policy is deeply rooted in fostering friendly relations, particularly with its neighboring countries, and the bond with India holds special significance.

The open border shared with India has been a vital aspect of the relationship between the two countries. This unique arrangement has facilitated cultural and religious connections, allowing people from both sides to traverse freely and strengthen the ties that bind them together. The harmonious coexistence of diverse cultures and traditions in the border regions has been a testament to the enduring friendship between Nepal and India.

In recent times, the speeches of Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi during his visits to countries like the USA and France have garnered considerable attention. In the USA, Prime Minister Modi emphasized India’s status as the ‘mother of democracy’, recognizing the USA’s role as a champion of advanced democracy. Such acknowledgment of each other’s democratic values fosters a deeper understanding and mutual respect between the two nations.

The strengthening partnership between India and the USA has extended beyond just diplomatic ties to include economic and cultural cooperation. The return of over 100 stolen antiquities to India by the US government represents not only the commitment to curbing illicit trade in cultural artifacts but also symbolizes the deepening cultural and financial partnerships between the two countries.

During his visit to France, Prime Minister Modi praised the significant contributions of business leaders from both India and France, further bolstering the relations between the two nations. This collaboration has extended to critical areas such as defense and climate change, wherein India and France have cooperated to address global challenges collectively.

While India’s economic growth and progress have been remarkable, there have been calls for a stronger focus on justice and the justice system under Modi’s leadership. As a leader, Modi must strive to bring together different sections of society and make them feel equally included in India’s democratic fabric. It is crucial to listen to and address the concerns of all citizens to truly establish India as the ‘mother of democracy’.

For India to achieve its economic vision of becoming one of the world’s top five economies, it must prioritize crucial issues such as food security, agriculture, economy, and industries. Engaging with opposition parties and formulating common minimum programs to address their concerns will ensure inclusivity and a more balanced approach to governance.

Furthermore, when formulating foreign policies, it is essential for the Modi government to consider the perspectives of not only the opposition but also his colleagues in the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP). In doing so, India can present a united front in its international engagements, projecting a more robust image on the global stage.

While pursuing its growth as a global leader, India should not overlook the situation of its neighboring countries. The Modi government should extend assistance and support to these nations, helping them strengthen their living standards and fostering genuine friendships with them. This approach will not only enhance regional cooperation but also contribute to India's standing as a responsible and caring global leader.

One significant step in enhancing regional cooperation would be to revitalize the South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation (SAARC). Modi can take the lead in encouraging all SAARC member-states to unite on various global issues, thereby presenting a cohesive and influential voice on the international stage.

Neglecting the development and prosperity of neighboring countries, including Sri Lanka, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Bhutan, and Nepal, will undermine India’s overall progress and prosperity. Therefore, India’s focus should encompass regional economic development, fostering peace, and promoting shared prosperity across the entire South Asian region.

In conclusion, Nepal remains committed to advocating for global peace and brotherhood, and India’s role as a neighboring friend is essential in achieving this vision. Prime Minister Modi’s leadership can be further strengthened by emphasizing justice, inclusivity, and cooperation with neighboring countries. By fostering regional cooperation and supporting the prosperity of neighboring nations, India can truly position itself as a global leader and a beacon of democracy in the world.

The author is a member of the Supreme Court Bar and has been practicing corporate law for around three decades

Have you ever noticed lemons and chili peppers hanging at the doors of Hindu homes? While you might be familiar with the ‘scientific’ explanation that they help ward off flies, mosquitoes, and moths due to their aromas, there’s a deeper cultural and mythological significance to this practice.

Hindu mythology speaks of Laxmi, the goddess of prosperity, having a twin sister named Alakshmi or Jesthadevi, who is considered the goddess of poverty and deprivation. Laxmi prefers sweet dishes, while Alakshmi favors sour and spicy flavors. To attract the blessings of Laxmi while keeping Alakshmi at bay, people hang lemons and chilies outside their homes.

Beyond the mythological aspect, Nepalis share a profound love for chili peppers, which plays a significant role in their culinary traditions. Chili peppers are indeed a distant cousin to the local varieties like jyanmara, dalle, aakase, and jire. Despite its fiery reputation, chili peppers are adored for their ability to enhance the taste of dishes, striking the perfect balance of flavors in Nepali gastronomy.

Chili peppers have a captivating history that spans continents and cultures. Originally from America, these small, vibrant fruits found their way to India, where they became an integral part of the country’s diverse culinary landscape. The pungent and fiery flavor of chilies infused Indian dishes with new dimensions, enriching the complexity and depth of flavors. Over time, chili peppers spread globally, transforming regional cuisines across Europe, Africa, Southeast Asia, and beyond.

In Nepal, chili peppers are cherished for their exceptional taste, and the demand for them is on the rise. One family in Palpa sold akabare (cherry chili) worth four million Nepali rupees last year. It’s expected to reach six million Nepali rupees this year. This surge in demand reflects the unwavering popularity of these spicy delights in the country.

Nepal’s culinary landscape is a reflection of its multi-ethnic, multicultural, and multi-religious fabric. The country embraces a rich tapestry of diverse eating traditions, and chili peppers play a pivotal role in many Nepali dishes. From the sweet and sour flavors of sel-roti prepared during Tihar to attract the blessings of Laxmi, to the fiery delights like ‘choyela’ and ‘nibuwa sadheko’, Nepalis have a deep-rooted love for chili-infused cuisine.

In the world of gastronomy, balancing flavors is an art, and chili peppers are an essential component of achieving that balance. The five fundamental tastes—sweet, sour, bitter, hot, and umami—come together harmoniously in Nepali dishes. Chili peppers provide the fiery element that complements the other tastes, making them a vital supporting ingredient in Nepali kitchens.

Chili peppers have long been known for their medicinal properties, particularly in Ayurveda—the ancient Indian system of medicine. Their use in traditional medicine across India and Nepal is a testament to their cultural significance beyond the realm of culinary arts.

As chili peppers made their way to different parts of the world, they seamlessly integrated into various regional cuisines, leading to culinary adaptations and the creation of unique dishes. Each culture infused its culinary traditions with chili peppers, resulting in a vibrant array of flavors and heat levels. From the smoky chipotle peppers of Mexico to the explosive Thai bird’s eye chilies, the versatility of chili peppers shines through in their adaptability to diverse culinary contexts.

While chili peppers have become an essential ingredient in cuisines worldwide, their presence in traditional European dishes may not be as prevalent compared to other regions like Asia, Africa, or Latin America. Historical factors, such as chili peppers’ introduction to Europe after Christopher Columbus’s voyages in the late 15th century, contributed to their slower integration into European cuisine.

The allure of chili peppers lies not only in the heat they bring to dishes but also in their ability to trigger the body’s natural cooling mechanisms. Despite the temporary heat sensation they create, chili peppers induce the release of endorphins, which contribute to a sense of pleasure and well-being, often referred to as a ‘spice high’ or a ‘chili rush.’

The history of chili peppers is a testament to their remarkable journey from America to becoming an integral part of cuisines worldwide. Their introduction to India and subsequent global spread transformed culinary traditions across continents. As we relish the diverse flavors and fiery sensations that chili peppers offer, let us celebrate their rich history and the culinary experiences they continue to inspire.

The author is a UK-based R&D chef