Submit your Article

Most of the motorized vehicles operating in Nepal bear hand-written number plates, a unique practice in this day and age of digital technology.

The government of Nepal wants to switch to embossed number plates as part of the concept of a Digital Nepal and plans to install 2.5m embossed plates in as many vehicles out of 4m vehicles in operation across the country.

As per a revised agreement with the government, a US-Bangla joint venture company tasked with installing the new plates has to install 2.49m embossed plates in the first phase—within November 27 this year.

But stakeholders like transporters, commoners, linguistic rights groups and data security specialists have a lot of reservations regarding the government plan.

For their part, transporters have urged the public not to switch to embossed plates till the government addresses their concerns, including practical difficulties involved and the lack of supporting infrastructure. They have warned that the government will be solely to blame for the consequences if it tries to enforce its will.

Other concerns include a tardy service, high charges associated with installation of embossed plates, the use of English language instead of Nepali, given that traditional number plates are in Nepali, and data security of motorists, bikers and drivers in a day and age where technology has become a double-edged sword. Also, there’s a feeling among members of the public that the use of English language in number plates is part of a sinister design to undermine and discourage the use of Nepali, the official national language of Nepal that uses the Devnagari script.

The government’s intent to enforce the embossed system, come hell or high water, with no regard for public concerns has made the citizenry more suspicious vis-à-vis the former’s designs, perceived or otherwise.

Granted that the new system is likely to contribute to traffic management, curb theft of vehicles,  lead to the recovery of stolen vehicles and improve road safety. Instead of a top-down approach, the government should have taken a bottom-up approach, sensitizing the people about this technology, its benefits and shortcomings, and bothered to address the concerns of the stakeholders to a maximum possible extent. The government, instead, chose to impose its plan in a manner befitting benevolent dictators, who impose their ‘pious wishes’ on the citizenry every now and then.  

It's time for the government to eat the humble pie once again and address the concerns of the stakeholders by giving up its my way or highway attitude. 

Prime Minister KP Sharma Oli is all set to visit China this week to attend the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) summit, marking an important step in Nepal’s high-level diplomatic engagement with its two powerful neighbors—India and China.

This visit comes at a delicate juncture. Concerns in Kathmandu are growing over a renewed India-China agreement on trade through the disputed Lipulekh Pass. Against this backdrop, the SCO summit provides Oli not just a platform to engage with regional powers but also an opportunity to assert Nepal’s interests amid rising geopolitical complexities. Alongside attending the summit’s side events, Oli is scheduled to meet Chinese President Xi Jinping and Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi, which will be his second and third meetings with them respectively since assuming office for the third time in July 2024.

Oli’s foreign outreach has been consistent. In December last year, he visited China to finalize a framework agreement on the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI), one of Beijing’s top priorities in its engagement with Nepal. Similarly, his talks with Modi on the sidelines of the UN General Assembly and the recent BIMSTEC meeting in Thailand highlight the frequency of high-level interactions. Yet, this week’s meetings are under particular scrutiny, as concerns over Lipulekh have resurfaced. On Aug 19,  India and China agreed to resume trade through the territory that Nepal claims as its own.

While Beijing has maintained a largely reserved stance, with Foreign Minister Wang Yi merely assuring that the India-China deal was not “targeted at any third country”, Nepal has been more vocal. Government spokesperson Prithvi Subba Gurung confirmed that Kathmandu will raise the issue directly with both Xi and Modi. Meanwhile, Chinese think tanks argue that the dispute should be settled bilaterally between Nepal and India.

The timing of this trip also underscores a shift in Oli’s priorities—from domestic politics to foreign affairs. After China, he is expected to travel to India next month and later attend the United Nations General Assembly in New York in mid-September. Adding to this momentum, Vietnam’s Vice-president visited Nepal this week, exploring new avenues of cooperation in trade, education, and tourism, a sign that Nepal is quietly broadening its international engagements beyond its immediate neighborhood.

Domestically, Oli continues to stand on firm political ground. His main coalition partner, the Nepali Congress (NC), has remained supportive, allowing him to sideline opposition voices such as the Rastriya Swatantra Party (RSP). NC General Secretary Gagan Kumar Thapa, however, has urged Oli to refrain from repeatedly claiming he will eventually hand over power to NC President Sher Bahadur Deuba—a gesture seen by many as unnecessary flattery.

Within his own party, Oli maintains an even tighter grip. The CPN-UML is preparing for a statute convention that could abolish both the 70-year age limit and the two-term leadership cap, moves widely viewed as paving the way for Oli’s indefinite leadership. At the same time, former President Bidya Devi Bhandari has re-emerged, opening a new office and holding political meetings. While Oli has downplayed her return to active politics, senior UML leaders like Ishwar Pokhrel appear supportive, whereas others such as Surendra Pandey and Yubaraj Gyawali remain cautious.

Interestingly, the Lipulekh controversy—once a dominant political issue—has lost much of its noise. Beyond the CPN (Maoist Center), RSP, and a few fringe left parties, most mainstream actors including NC and UML have chosen silence. This restraint is a stark contrast to earlier years when nationalist rhetoric dominated political discourse. Oli too has avoided inflammatory remarks, perhaps to preserve diplomatic decorum ahead of his meetings in China and India.

At the same time, the Maoist Center is preparing a nationwide campaign to strengthen its base ahead of local and national elections, though Chairperson Pushpa Kamal Dahal’s attempts to topple the government appear ineffective. His tensions with senior leader Janardhan Sharma also persist.

Meanwhile, developments within Parliament continue. Ishwari Neupane of the NC has been elected chair of the State Affairs and Good Governance Committee, following the resignation of Ram Hari Khatiwada over his alleged involvement in document tampering related to cooling-off period provision in the Federal Civil Service Bill.

Outside Parliament, public discontent remains visible. Teachers have returned to the streets demanding better job security, pensions, and reforms in the education bill. The passage of the bill has been delayed due to disputes between NC and UML. 

Adding to these domestic challenges, sugarcane farmers have reignited their agitation over delayed subsidies and unpaid dues from mills. Beginning Aug 24, farmers from the Tarai staged a sit-in at Maitighar Mandala in Kathmandu, demanding full payment of a long-promised Rs 70 per quintal subsidy—half of which was recently slashed to Rs 35 due to budget shortages. They are also pushing for fairer valuation, removal of VAT, and inclusion in price-setting decisions.

Beyond politics and protests, policy issues continue to surface. After last year’s rhino census was postponed due to lack of funds, Nepal will this year conduct both rhino and tiger counts with support from the Department of National Parks and Wildlife Conservation. On the agricultural front, paddy planting remains incomplete even as August draws to a close. Of the 1,376,466 hectares suitable for cultivation, 1,306,293 hectares (about 94 percent) have been planted, leaving 70,176 hectares still fallow.

Public health concerns are also mounting. The National Public Health Laboratory has confirmed cholera cases in Birgunj, with eight of ten tested samples returning positive. The Birgunj Metropolitan Health Division reported that 171 patients suffering from cholera and diarrhea have been treated and discharged, though results from two pending samples are awaited.

Finally, in a culturally significant ruling, the Supreme Court has declared that naked Hindu ascetics, known as Naga sadhus, are not obliged to wear clothes when visiting temples. The court affirmed that their centuries-old tradition of nudity is not obscenity, a decision warmly welcomed by the ash-smeared, dreadlocked devotees of Lord Shiva.

The Sustainable Development Goals (Target 3.4) call to “ensure healthy lives and promote well-being for all at all ages.” One of the key targets is to reduce premature mortality from non-communicable diseases by one-third through prevention and treatment, while also promoting mental health and well-being by 2030. However, progress in reducing suicide rates has been hampered by widespread stigma, underreporting, difficulty in tracking incidents, and a lack of political will to formulate effective suicide prevention strategies.

The government allocates less than one percent of the health budget to mental health. Reports show that the mental health budget declined from 0.8 percent in 2008 to just 0.2 percent in 2020. Such limited resources result in inadequate mental health services, poor access to care, and a shortage of trained personnel and facilities, especially outside urban areas.

According to the WHO, 73 percent of global suicides occur in low- and middle-income countries. In high-income countries, suicides are often linked to mental disorders—particularly depression, alcohol use disorder, and a history of previous suicide attempts.

Every year, many people die by suicide, while many more attempt it. Each suicide is a tragedy with profound and lasting effects on families, communities, and entire societies. Why, then, do people take their own lives?

The French sociologist Émile Durkheim (1858–1917) sought to answer this question in his classic study on suicide, inspired by the death of his close friend Victor Hommay. His theory remains relevant today. Durkheim argued that suicide rates are influenced by levels of social integration and regulation in society. When social integration is very high, altruistic suicide may occur, as when individuals sacrifice themselves for religion, politics, or the nation. When integration is very low, egoistic suicide arises, as people unable to find belonging or meaning choose suicide to escape loneliness or isolation.

Similarly, excessive regulation can lead to fatalistic suicide, seen historically in slavery and persecution, where individuals feel trapped by fate. On the other hand, insufficient regulation results in anomic suicide, often triggered by economic crises or sudden social changes that disrupt people’s expectations—such as financial collapse, divorce, or the loss of a spouse.

Durkheim identified two forms of anomic suicide: acute anomie, caused by abrupt changes like a business failure or divorce, and chronic anomie, a constant state of instability common in modern capitalist societies. Examples include betrayals in love, economic depressions, or other crises that create a gap between people’s lived experiences and their expectations.

In Nepal, police data show that 7,055 people died by suicide in fiscal year 2024/25. Hanging was the most common method (5,798 cases, 82.2 percent), followed by poisoning (961 cases, 13.6 percent). Among these, 3,734 were men, 2,451 women, and 870 children. Hanging was the dominant method across groups, with men (3,112) and women (1,907) most affected. Cases of suicide provocation were higher among women (143) than men (30), reflecting unique gendered dynamics. Other methods—self-immolation, drowning, jumping, or weapons—were less frequent.

Applying Durkheim’s framework to the Nepali context reveals that a lack of social integration, regulatory imbalances, economic hardship, and rapid social change drive many suicides—mostly anomic in nature. Financial crises and relationship breakdowns often lead to hanging, while oppressive norms, early marriage, and abuse may drive women toward fatalistic suicide. Migrants isolated in urban areas may be prone to egoistic suicide. Altruistic suicides appear less common in today’s Nepal.

Karl Marx’s concept of alienation also sheds light on suicide. Marx argued that modern capitalist society separates individuals from their creative potential and from authentic social relationships, undermining equality and freedom. In such conditions, people may feel estranged and hopeless.

Osho, a 21st-century mystic, similarly observed that while traditional societies imposed clear collective values, modern individuals must construct their own identities in a competitive, uncertain environment. This search for meaning, he argued, often leaves people disoriented and vulnerable to despair.

Religions also shape perspectives on suicide. In the West, Judaism and Christianity generally condemn suicide as sinful, historically treating attempts as criminal acts with punishments that even included confiscating property. In South Asia, Hinduism and Buddhism reject suicide but historically permitted forms of altruistic suicide under certain circumstances. For instance, the sati system of self-immolation was once believed to ensure salvation for the widow and her family. Suicide is also often seen as a consequence of past karma.

In Nepal, the Muluki Ain of 2020 criminalized suicide, with survivors facing fines or prison. However, the National Penal Code of 2074 no longer treats suicide as a crime but makes encouraging or assisting suicide a punishable offense, carrying penalties of up to five years in prison and fines of up to Rs 50,000.

Despite decriminalization, stigma persists. Many Nepalis still view suicide or attempts as shameful, discouraging people from seeking help. Yet a suicide attempt can be a turning point—if timely support is provided. Too often, however, families and communities are preoccupied with their own struggles, leaving vulnerable individuals neglected.

Recognizing early warning signs is critical. Verbal cues (expressing a wish to die), emotional changes (hopelessness, mood swings), and situational triggers (loss, trauma, illness, or financial stress) can all indicate risk. High-risk groups include people with a history of attempts, mental illness, substance abuse, or social rejection.

Timely interventions—listening with empathy, offering care, and connecting individuals to professional help—can save lives. Social environments and family dynamics play a decisive role. As social beings, we carry a responsibility to reach out, talk to, and care for those suffering from depression, anxiety, or despair. Professional support from psychiatrists, trained social workers, and counselors—including meditation and mindfulness practices—can provide immense relief and hope.

Nepal’s rapid progress in digital finance is a well-documented success story. Mobile wallets and QR codes have fundamentally reshaped daily commerce, creating one of South Asia’s most dynamic payment infrastructure. This achievement has laid a vital foundation for a modern economy. Yet, this very success has created a significant imbalance. The nation's fintech ecosystem is heavily tilted toward payments, while the equally crucial domains of credit and investment remain underdeveloped.

While we have solved the problem of how to pay, the more pressing challenge of how to grow remains largely unaddressed by technology. This is more than a theoretical concern. It has tangible economic consequences. The country’s small and medium enterprises (MSMEs), the engine of job creation, face a credit gap estimated in the billions of dollars. Millions of households have savings in low-yield accounts that could be mobilized for productive investment. This imbalance represents a significant missed opportunity for fostering entrepreneurship, democratizing wealth, and accelerating economic growth.

The roots of this lopsided development are twofold: regulatory frameworks that haven’t kept pace with technology, and an institutional focus that has naturally prioritized payments. Key legislation like the Bank and Financial Institutions Act (BAFIA) was designed for a traditional banking era and lacks specific provisions for emerging models like digital-only lenders or peer-to-peer platforms. The Securities Act is similarly silent on innovations like crowdfunding or robo-advisory. This legal ambiguity leaves innovators in a grey area, unable to scale their solutions within a clear, regulated framework.

In addition to this, the institutional focus has logically centered on strengthening the payment systems, which has been essential. However, this has meant that the equally important areas of digital credit and investment have received less strategic impetus. The launch of the Regulatory Sandbox recently is a landmark step forward, but its initial focus on payments, while understandable, limits its potential. What was intended as a gateway for innovation risks becoming a walled garden if its scope is not expanded. To build a more resilient and dynamic digital economy, a balanced approach is essential. This requires a clear vision and decisive action on two fronts: modernizing policy and reimagining the tools for innovation.

First, the regulatory environment needs to evolve. A clear roadmap for amending key financial acts is necessary to create legal categories for new fintech players. This would provide them with a clear path from sandbox experimentation to full-scale, regulated operation, fostering responsible innovation while safeguarding the financial system. Alongside legislative updates, a more consolidated approach to fintech governance could be considered. A dedicated unit or department focused on the full spectrum of financial technology from payments to credit and investment could provide the specialized expertise and coherent policy direction needed to guide the market’s next phase.

Second, the Regulatory Sandbox should be empowered to become a true engine for full-spectrum innovation. Building on its initial success, its scope must be broadened. The next cohort of the sandbox could be transformative if it invited innovators to tackle the economy’s most significant gaps. Imagine a stream dedicated to MSME finance, testing PAN-based digital micro-loans that leverage alternative data to extend credit to viable businesses. Another could focus on retail investment, piloting robo-advisory services and micro-investment platforms to bring first-time savers into the capital markets. A third stream could enable regulated crowdfunding platforms, allowing the Nepali diaspora to invest directly in promising local startups.

Global experience shows this path is both practical and powerful. India has created specific licenses for P2P lenders, while Kenya’s M-Shwari pioneered mobile credit, demonstrating that innovation and regulation can and must evolve together. These examples provide proven models for safely incorporating new financial tools into the mainstream economy. The challenge now is to build upon the remarkable success of our payment infrastructure. Payments are the rails, but the real economic journey involves what runs on them: credit that fuels businesses, and investments that build wealth. By modernizing legal frameworks and expanding innovation initiatives, Nepal can correct its current imbalance. The goal is to create a financial system that is not only digitally efficient but also inclusive, dynamic, and capable of funding the nation's growth for decades to come. The time for this next digital leap is now.

The author is a director of Nepal Rastra Bank