Submit your Article

Laxman Datt Pant is a dedicated advocate for independent media, widely recognized for his commitment to media development and press freedom on a global scale. He is the founder of Media Action Nepal, established in 2015, which has now completed nine years of impactful work. Under his leadership, the organization has produced 23 concrete studies and publications on various dimensions of media freedom, directly benefiting over 7,000 journalists—primarily through capacity building, mentoring, legal support, and the documentation of day-to-day press freedom violations across all 77 districts of Nepal.

Pant has strengthened Media Action Nepal’s engagement with global media development and press freedom initiatives, leading the organization to become an active member of key international networks, including the Consultative Network (CN) of the Media Freedom Coalition (MFC), the Global Forum for Media Development (GFMD), and the ACOS Alliance. Furthermore, he served as the elected Co-Chair of the CN for 30 months, effectively presenting civil society organizations' concerns to the MFC and advocating for stronger protections for journalists worldwide.

Media Action Nepal has worked closely with diverse stakeholders to advance media freedom and journalist safety. However, challenges regarding the effectiveness of the constitutional and regulatory bodies such as the National Human RIghts Commission (NHRC) and  Press Council Nepal remain a concern. International collaborations continue to play a crucial role in strengthening Nepal’s journalism, ensuring the sustainability of independent and accountable media in the country.

Media investment

In established democracies worldwide, media investment follows clear guidelines that ensure ethical standards, diversity, and responsible ownership. In contrast, Nepal lacks such regulations, allowing anyone with financial resources to invest in media—without accountability for ethical considerations such as gender sensitivity, conflict sensitivity, or journalistic integrity. The focus is often on revenue generation rather than responsible reporting. If the current trends persist, journalism in Nepal may face severe credibility challenges in the next five to ten years. Without urgent reforms in investment policies, ethical standards, and training, Nepal’s media landscape risks becoming an instrument of political and financial interests rather than a pillar of democracy. If this trend continues unchecked, the media landscape will suffer irreparable damage in the next decade.

Political influences

The integrity of journalism is under increasing threat as more journalists openly align themselves with political parties and business interests, raising concerns about the credibility of media in Nepal. The integrity of journalism will be severely compromised if journalists continue to align themselves with political parties, proudly joining their ranks. While there are exceptions, the current trend sees many journalists closely tied to political factions, and even business groups, which jeopardizes the credibility of the media sector. This growing political and corporate influence creates a crisis for unbiased reporting. If journalists can distance themselves from their interest groups, it would greatly benefit the field. However, if they find it difficult to completely separate, they should at least strive to minimize their involvement and maintain a sense of objectivity. This would help preserve the integrity of journalism and ensure that reporting remains unbiased and credible. However, there are still individuals dedicated to independent journalism, and if their numbers continue to rise, there is hope for positive change in the field. Unfortunately, I don’t see that shift happening in Nepal at the moment.

Policy reforms 

For journalism to regain its integrity, Nepal must implement stronger policies that regulate media investments and promote journalistic independence. A well-structured policy should encourage media organizations that uphold their watchdog role, accept criticism, and prioritize public interest over political or business affiliations. The newsroom should be a space for diverse perspectives, fostering inclusivity and pluralism rather than merely chasing profits. One of the most pressing concerns is the growing entanglement of journalists with political parties and business groups. To counter this, policy reforms must ensure that media professionals maintain their independence by minimizing their ties with vested interests. Some policy changes are already taking place at the federal, parliamentary, and provincial levels.  These reforms must align with Nepal’s constitutional provisions on fundamental rights, as well as the country’s commitments under international human rights treaties such as the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR).

Local to global concept

Our local insights and observations are now being discussed at the global level, focusing on media freedom, journalism integrity, and credibility, all of which are essential for enabling journalists to maintain their role as watchdogs. In the context of global media discussions, we believe Nepal’s media environment will not deteriorate like that of other countries. The state of journalism in neighboring countries does not match the integrity we uphold in Nepal, and this is something we should truly value and praise. However, a key fault line in Nepal’s journalism is the tendency of some journalists to align too closely with state interests, which is fundamentally problematic. While it’s important to acknowledge the positive aspects, we must also remain critical and hold power to account. If reforms are not implemented in this context, the state of journalism in Nepal will remain stagnant, likely unchanged over the next decade.

Journalism education

Nepal’s education system has long been driven by student enrollment rather than industry needs, with universities offering subjects like law, mass communication, social work, and psychology primarily to attract students. However, journalism schools and departments have failed to evolve in response to the media industry’s demands in terms of faculties, teachers, labs etc. While institutions have introduced journalism degrees across various universities, there remains no structured policy requiring journalists to possess formal academic training in the field. While it may not be essential for all reporters to hold a journalism degree—since expertise in specific beats, research, and training can compensate—editors, who oversee content integrity, must have a strong foundation in journalism. Editorial responsibilities extend beyond news selection; they encompass ethical decision-making, upholding media integrity, and ensuring editorial independence. 

Journalism training

Without proper training, editors risk becoming overly reliant on business interests, ultimately compromising journalistic standards. Strengthening journalism education and enforcing industry-relevant qualifications, particularly for editorial roles, would enhance the credibility of the media sector. A well-trained editorial team can safeguard journalistic ethics, maintain integrity, and resist external influences, ensuring that Nepal’s media continues to serve the public interest rather than corporate or political agendas.

Career pathways

One of the major shortcomings of journalism education in Nepal is the lack of follow-up on graduates’ career paths. Universities and colleges rarely track where their students end up, missing a crucial opportunity to assess the effectiveness of their programs. To address this, Nepal must introduce policies that balance theoretical education with hands-on training. Newsrooms operate under intense deadlines, ethical dilemmas, and editorial pressures—things that cannot be fully grasped in a classroom setting. Universities and colleges must establish production labs where students can experience real journalistic work. These labs should provide on-the-job training, where aspiring journalists learn news writing, reporting, editing, and multimedia production in an environment that simulates actual newsroom conditions. 

Hands-on experience

Colleges don’t necessarily need access to a traditional newsroom; they can introduce alternative methods such as publishing press releases, releasing podcasts, and starting blogs to provide students with content creation experience. If a student manages to secure at least 10 bylines during their four-year bachelor’s program, they would graduate with a strong portfolio, making them more prepared for the job market. Without structured, hands-on training, new graduates will continue to enter the field unprepared, leaving them vulnerable to external influences and compromising the integrity of Nepal’s media landscape. 

AI in journalism

AI can assist journalists in various ways—generating content, analyzing large data sets, transcribing interviews, and even detecting misinformation. When given well-structured commands, Artificial Intelligence (AI) can produce high-quality write-ups that save time and improve efficiency. Despite its advantages, complete reliance on AI without critical thinking can be detrimental to journalistic quality. AI-generated content that is left unedited and unverified can lead to misinformation. A journalist using AI is still responsible for the final output. AI should be seen as a supportive tool rather than a replacement for journalistic integrity. To navigate AI-driven journalism effectively, digital literacy is essential. Journalists must understand AI’s limitations, biases, and the importance of human oversight. AI is a powerful assistant, but it cannot replace the investigative instincts, ethical judgment, and storytelling skills of a human journalist.

Press freedom

Freedom of the press is the cornerstone of democracy, serving as a safeguard against any form of external pressure or manipulation. In the context of Nepal, the digital landscape has created opportunities for greater independence in media, allowing the press to function more freely. However, the situation remains complex. Many journalists in Nepal have left their positions, particularly in mainstream media outlets, due to insufficient wages and a lack of job security. In addition, the pervasive culture of impunity further complicates the issue. Nepal is often ranked as a high-risk country in the impunity index, which highlights the dangers journalists face in the line of duty. Despite the existence of legal provisions for punishing crimes against journalists, these measures often fail to provide real protection or accountability. We have encountered numerous cases where journalists face subtle attacks, including being followed, having their national services cut off, and being prevented from pursuing a future in the journalism sector. Constitutionally and legally, press freedom is protected in Nepal; however, investigative reporting is not safeguarded, and the watchdog role is not strengthened.

On March 9, Tribhuvan International Airport witnessed a historic gathering as thousands of supporters welcomed former King Gyanendra Shah upon his return from Pokhara. The crowd, estimated at 14,000 by police, escorted the former King to his private residence, Nirmal Niwas, in a show of solidarity for the monarchy. Organized by pro-monarchist parties like the Rastriya Prajatantra Party (led by Rajendra Lingden) and Rastriya Prajatantra Party Nepal (led by Kamal Thapa), alongside Hindu outfits and businessman Durga Prasai, the event marked one of the largest monarchist demonstrations in recent years. Despite a lack of coordination among organizers, the turnout has energized monarchist forces, who are now planning more protests to push for the restoration of a ceremonial monarchy.

The rally was not just a show of support for the former King but also a reflection of growing dissatisfaction with the current political system. Many participants expressed frustration with the failure of political parties to address issues like corruption, unemployment, and poor governance. The monarchist movement, though fragmented, has gained momentum in recent years, with significant demonstrations in 2021 and 2023 drawing considerable attention from both domestic political parties and the international community. However, these protests have lacked a unified structure or leadership, with deep divisions among various groups hindering the emergence of a cohesive movement.

Interestingly, the protests have inadvertently united Nepal’s major political parties, who are now preparing counter-demonstrations to defend the republican system. Prime Minister KP Sharma Oli has warned against any attempts to undermine the constitutional setup, while CPN (Maoist Center) Chairperson Pushpa Kamal Dahal is leading efforts to counter the royalist movement. Dahal has canceled all party programs to focus on organizing a Kathmandu-centric movement to protect the current republican system. The largest party, Nepali Congress, however, has not taken the protests seriously, with some members arguing that the growing support for monarchy reflects public dissatisfaction with the failure of political parties to deliver on their promises.

Meanwhile, Kulman Ghising, the managing director of Nepal Electricity Authority (NEA), continues to dominate headlines. Despite facing scrutiny from the Energy Ministry and political pressure, Ghising remains a beloved figure for his role in ending Nepal’s chronic load-shedding crisis. This week, Energy Minister Deepak Khadka credited India for resolving the power crisis, downplaying Ghising’s contributions. However, Nepali Congress General Secretary Gagan Kumar Thapa defended Ghising, emphasizing his impending retirement and the public’s overwhelming support for him. With Ghising’s popularity intact, the government appears hesitant to take any drastic action against him.

Ghising’s tenure at NEA has been marked by significant achievements, including the reduction of load-shedding hours and the improvement of the country’s power distribution system. His efforts have earned him widespread acclaim, but they have also made him a target for political maneuvering. During the recent elections, the CPN (Maoist Center) used Ghising’s achievements as a campaign tool, further complicating his position. Despite the challenges, Ghising’s legacy as a transformative leader in Nepal’s energy sector remains secure.

In another significant development, the cancellation of dozens of USAID-funded projects has sent shockwaves through Nepal’s development sectors, including health, education, agriculture, and democracy. The government is scrambling to address the gap, but political leadership remains silent on the issue. While India and China may step in to fill the void, their support is unlikely to fully compensate for the loss of US aid. With the UK also cutting foreign aid and Europe prioritizing defense spending, Nepal faces an uphill battle to secure alternative resources. As the US shifts its focus to the Indo-Pacific region, Nepal may soon initiate talks to revive critical projects.

The cancellation of USAID projects has raised concerns about the future of Nepal’s development initiatives. Many of these projects were aimed at improving healthcare, education, and agricultural productivity, and their sudden termination has left a significant void. Government officials have started consultations on how to address the gap, but the lack of a clear strategy has left many stakeholders worried. The situation is further complicated by the geopolitical dynamics in the region, with India and China viewing the US presence in Nepal with suspicion.

On the domestic front, Prime Minister KP Sharma Oli, often criticized for neglecting provincial structures, is now engaging directly with provincial assemblies. This week, he addressed assemblies in Lumbini, Far-West, and Karnali, signaling a renewed commitment to federalism. Whether this marks a genuine shift in policy or a political maneuver remains to be seen. Oli’s engagement with provincial structures comes at a time when there is growing discontent with the central government’s handling of federalism. Many provincial leaders have accused the central government of undermining their authority and failing to allocate adequate resources.

Oli’s outreach to provincial assemblies is seen as an attempt to address these concerns and strengthen the federal structure. However, critics argue that his efforts are too little, too late, and that more concrete actions are needed to ensure the success of federalism in Nepal. The coming weeks will be crucial in determining whether Oli’s engagement with provincial structures will lead to meaningful change or remain a symbolic gesture.

In the realm of diplomacy, Foreign Minister Arzu Rana Deuba is currently in India, where she is participating in the prestigious Raisina Dialogue. Alongside her diplomatic engagements, Deuba is expected to meet Indian External Affairs Minister S Jaishankar and extend an invitation to Prime Minister Narendra Modi for the upcoming Sagarmatha Dialogue in Kathmandu. The Oli government is keen to strengthen ties with India, but an official invitation for PM Oli to visit India is still pending. As both nations explore the possibility of high-level visits, Nepal’s diplomatic efforts remain in the spotlight.

The Sagarmatha Dialogue, scheduled for May 16-18, is expected to bring together top leaders from across the region to discuss issues of mutual interest. The event is seen as an opportunity for Nepal to showcase its diplomatic prowess and strengthen its ties with neighboring countries. However, the success of the dialogue will depend on the participation of key leaders, including Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi.

Russian President Vladimir Putin said he agreed with the idea of a ceasefire in Ukraine, but that "questions" remained about the nature of a truce as he set out a number of tough conditions, BBC reported.

The Russian president was responding to a plan for a 30-day ceasefire, which Ukraine agreed to earlier this week after talks with the US.

Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky described Putin's response to the plan as "manipulative" and called for more sanctions on Russia.

Meanwhile, the US placed further sanctions on Russian oil, gas and banking sectors.

Speaking at a news conference in Moscow on Thursday, Putin said of the ceasefire proposal: "The idea is right - and we support it - but there are questions that we need to discuss."

A ceasefire should lead to "an enduring peace and remove the root causes of this crisis", Putin said.

"We need to negotiate with our American colleagues and partners," he said. "Maybe I'll have a call with Donald Trump."

Putin added: "It will be good for the Ukrainian side to achieve a 30-day ceasefire.

"We are in favour of it, but there are nuances."

One of the areas of contention is Russia's Kursk region, Putin said, where Ukraine launched a military incursion last year and captured some territory, according to BBC.

He claimed Russia was fully back in control of Kursk, and said Ukrainian troops there "have been isolated".

"They are trying to leave, but we are in control. Their equipment has been abandoned."

"There are two options for Ukrainians in Kursk - surrender or die."

Outlining some of his questions over how a ceasefire would work, Putin asked: "How will those 30 days be used? For Ukraine to mobilise? Rearm? Train people? Or none of that? Then a question – how will that be controlled?"

"Who will give the order to end the fighting? At what cost? Who decides who has broken any possible ceasefire, over 2,000km? All those questions need meticulous work from both sides. Who polices it?"

Putin "doesn't say no directly", Zelensky said in his nightly video address, but "in practice, he's preparing a rejection".

"Putin, of course, is afraid to tell President Trump directly that he wants to continue this war, wants to kill Ukrainians."

The Russian leader had set so many pre-conditions "that nothing will work out at all", Zelensky said.

After Putin's remarks and Zelensky's response, there is now a clear divide between both sides' positions.

Ukraine wants a two-stage process: a quick ceasefire and then talks about a longer-term settlement.

Russia believes you cannot separate the two processes and all the issues should be decided in a single deal. Both sides seem content to argue their differences.

Ukraine believes it can put pressure on Russia, painting it as a reluctant peacemaker, playing for time. Russia, equally, believes it has a chance now to raise its fundamental concerns, about Nato expansion and Ukraine's sovereignty.

But this presents a problem for Donald Trump. He has made it clear he wants a quick result, ending the fighting in days.

And right now, Putin does not appear to want to play ball.

Speaking at the White House following Putin's remarks, Trump said he would "love" to meet the Russian leader and that he hoped Russia would "do the right thing" and agree to the proposed 30-day truce, BBC reported.

"We'd like to see a ceasefire from Russia," he said.

Speaking earlier at a meeting in the Oval Office with Nato Secretary General Mark Rutte, Trump told reporters he had already discussed specifics with Ukraine.

"We've been discussing with Ukraine land and pieces of land that would be kept and lost, and all of the other elements of a final agreement," Trump said.

 "A lot of the details of a final agreement have actually been discussed."

 On the subject of Ukraine joining the Nato military alliance, Trump said "everybody knows what the answer to that is".

The fresh sanctions on Russian oil and gas came as the Trump administration further restricted access to US payment systems, making it harder for other countries to buy Russian oil.

Meanwhile, Putin met US special envoy Steve Witkoff behind closed doors in Moscow.

Earlier in the day, Kremlin aide Yuri Ushakov rejected the ceasefire proposal put forward by the US.

On Wednesday, the Kremlin released a video it said showed Putin visiting Russia's Kursk region, symbolically dressed in military fatigues. Russia later said it recaptured the key town of Sudzha.

Russia launched a full-scale invasion in February 2022, and now controls about 20% of Ukrainian territory.

More than 95,000 people fighting for Russia's military have died in the war.

Ukraine last updated its casualty figures in December 2024, when President Volodymyr Zelensky acknowledged 43,000 Ukrainian deaths among soldiers and officers. Western analysts believe this figure to be underestimated.

How effective, innovative and imaginative is our diplomacy, in this day and age of a rapidly changing world?

Let us do a fact check on the basis of a key test case. 

On 07 Oct 2023, Hamas launched an attack on Gaza Strip, killing more than 1100 people, including 10 Nepali students, and capturing 250, including a young Nepali student from Kanchanpur, Bipin Joshi, who was studying agriculture in Israel along with his friends.

It will be wrong to say that the government has been doing nothing to secure the release of the youth, bring him home and bring cheers to his family and the country. It has been making frantic efforts that have failed to yield a result.

Let’s revisit some of those efforts.    

On 24 Sept 2024, for instance, Minister for Foreign Affairs Arzu Rana Deuba, addressing the Ministerial Meeting of the Non-Aligned Movement during the 79th United Nations General Assembly, urged the global community to take initiatives for the safe release of Joshi.

On 08 Jan 2025, Minister Deuba requested the Israeli government, through Ambassador Shmulik Arie Bass, to secure the release of Joshi.

On Jan 15, in the wake of reports that Hamas was releasing some hostages, Minister Deuba called up Qatar’s Minister of State at the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Mohammed bin Abdulaziz bin Saleh al-Khulaifi, who serves as Qatar’s chief negotiator and mediator in peace talks with Hamas, and appealed for special intervention to secure Joshi’s release.

During a meeting with Qatar’s Minister of State for Foreign Affairs Sultan bin Saad bin Sultan Al Muraikhi in Doha on Feb 16. Minister Deuba sought the latter’s good offices in securing Joshi’s release.

Adding to these efforts, Prime Minister KP Sharma Oli recently called upon Abdel Fattah Al-Sisi,  the president of Egypt, which played a key role in mediating the Israel-Hamas ceasefire, renewing Nepal’s request for Egypt’s assistance in securing the release of Joshi.

Nepal has been playing a key role in the UN peacekeeping missions around the world for about 70 years and its involvement in securing peace in the Mideast is as long. It has served twice in the UN Security Council as an elected non-permanent member, in 1969-70 and in 1988-1989. In 2018-20, Nepal served as a member of the United Nations Human Rights Council. Nepal was the first country in South Asia to recognize Israel after its birth as a state on 14 May 1948. The country has excellent relations with Qatar, which is a popular employment destination for Nepali workers. And the enduring ties between Nepal and Egypt, a key NAM member, go a long time back.

Despite these positives and efforts from our side, the release of Joshi has not materialized even as freedom comes calling for many of the hostages.

This debacle reminds one of Henry Kissinger’s famous quote: Behind the slogans lay an intellectual vacuum.

And a razor-sharp Chanakya goes: In diplomacy, the tongue is mightier than the sword. 

In the words of Chanakya, diplomacy is the art of winning the war without bloodshed.

Delays in securing the release of Joshi perhaps call for learning lessons from past failures and adopting a subtler, quieter approach, keeping in mind that this is an acid test for our “art of the impossible”.