Submit your Article

I started thinking about this question after attending the town hall meeting organized on May 24 in honor of Agnès Callamard, the secretary-general of Amnesty International, during his visit to Nepal.

Callamard covered a wide spectrum of issues while answering questions from both the moderator, journalist Dil Bhusan Pathak and from the audience. It was an interesting talk as the Amnesty chief was able to link the inevitable focus on some of the most pressing human rights issues of Nepal with what’s going on globally.

One of the key takeaways was the role of youths. Perhaps encouraged by a large presence of young people in the hall, Callamard underscored the importance of youths playing a leading role to uphold and strengthen human rights.

At the same time, I do wonder if most of the young people do care about them. While I have been working and collaborating with a number of astounding young people who are eager and determined to change the status quo for better, I am not entirely convinced that a vast majority of them really feel that they have a stake in the debate.

Surely there are many pressing issues, of more tangible and practical nature that young people have to think about, especially if they come from vulnerable, and low-income families. Those who struggle the most have to think about more essential things like surviving gruesome urban centers that do offer almost endless opportunities for the better-off but can be nightmares for those who have no privileges nor status.

But what about those young people from middle-class families that do not live a life of luxuries but at the same time are doing quite ok? I believe that involving and engaging this vast “middle” that, according to many statistics, is dwindling because of out-migration to far places like Australia and Canada, is paramount.

Climate change has been so devastating that it has finally become an issue that can grab their attention. And after all, climate activism is a great way of upholding and seeking respect for human rights but what about other issues?

What about caste discrimination about which Amnesty International recently launched a report specifically focused on the deprivations and humiliations that citizens from the Dalit community have to face? What about other issues like freedom of expression, the fight against abuses committed by the state and other powerful entities?

I feel that many youths in Nepal are feeling a bit complacent about what’s going on. Perhaps it is fair enough. After all, as I have already highlighted, it is difficult to think about human rights when there are other issues to deal with. Others, perhaps, are just maximizing their shot at being successful. Amid problems and issues concerning the nation, there are a good number of young people who just try to make it big.

Fair enough, I would say.

Callamard, during her talk, spoke widely about the risks of a breakdown of the international, rules-based order. “If a neighboring country adopts a law against freedoms, there are high risks that such laws will be exported” she told the audience.

Somehow, Nepal has been shielded, insulated from many issues affecting the planet. The country fully internalized that there was a war raging in Ukraine, only when some of its youths were discovered to fight and die in the invading Russian Army.

These days, there has been an uproar about press freedom because the chairman of the biggest private publishing and TV house was jailed. But how much are the youths invested on this issue? With reading habits dropping abysmally, too few of them really know what’s going on. So, the fundamental question is not just asking if young people do care about human rights.

The right question is: How can young people be engaged and recommit to civic and public affairs? Not only those who can afford it in virtue of their family related privileges or those, the active minority, who have some sort of special interest to work at the service of the public good.

We need to engage and involve the silent middle. Schools, both public and private, should play a much bigger role. Resources to enable new programs about civic education and human rights are not a real problem. If alternative Fridays can be conceived, designed and implemented to offer students a more practical type of education, why not also think about “Civic” Thursdays? I am sure that local youth clubs, NGOs could do a lot in this area even with very scarce resources.

A challenge is to make civic education, not the one being already taught, I would say quite ineffectively, much more appealing and interesting. An idea: The major metropolitan governments of the country could launch a competition for schools and not-for-profit organizations and youth groups that, partnering together, would come up with innovative ways to do civic engagement.

We do not only have to find better ways to teach it but also create innovative learning pathways to make students experience and practice it. With civic engagement, I do mean focusing on issues like human rights, education for sustainable development and climate action and public policies as well. If you reflect on it, we need to embed the local curricula, formal and informal, in the classrooms and outside of them, with tons of ethical leadership.

Students, especially those less engaged and less prone to active actions, must be challenged in a positive way because they must understand that they also have a role to play, they have some stakes in the discussion.

Callamard highlighted that youths must get organized and protest but they must do it in a smart way, rather than risking their lives. She is right but I do not think we are nearly close enough to have a majority of youths even ready to play their part in the society.

Good governance is for them the most unappealing and boring thing that they can even conceptualize and imagine. They don’t really have a clue about it, why should they have it considering the state of national politics? Good governance is essential if Nepal wants to reach a higher league of nations.

But such type of governance does not happen just through top-down approaches. Real good governance means inclusive governance where citizens have a voice and agency. In practice, they are not just electing their representatives but they are part of the decision-making. Unfortunately, such a vision is still far, it is still a chimera.

Only by providing cutting-edge curricula and practical opportunities through service and volunteering experiences that elicit their enthusiasm, the vast majority of young people can commit and make the difference and bring that vision on the ground. Human rights do matter because without them Nepal would be a much worse place to live in.

They matter because they are the foundations of the nation’s democracy that, while imperfect, is still the bright and shining story. Youths can stand up and do their best to even improve the state of national affairs but they need some guidance. “Hope is something that we must all build”,  Callamard said in her final remarks. Yes, youths should be the nation’s “Hope Builders” whose contributions are simply indispensable. Can we help them?

The author is the co-founder of ENGAGE and of The Good Leadership

In today’s fast-paced world, mental stress has become an almost inevitable part of life. While occasional stress can be beneficial, pushing us to meet deadlines and complete important tasks, chronic stress can have severe repercussions on our health. This article explores the insidious link between mental stress and physical illness, focusing particularly on how prolonged work-related stress can lead to high blood pressure and other serious health issues.

Stress and physical health

Research has extensively documented the connection between mental stress and physical health problems. When we experience stress, our bodies respond by releasing stress hormones like cortisol and adrenaline. These hormones prepare the body for a ‘fight or flight’ response, increasing heart rate, blood pressure and glucose levels. While this response is useful in short bursts, chronic activation of this stress response can lead to various health issues, including hypertension, heart disease and a weakened immune system.

Stress and its effects

Cardiovascular system: Chronic stress causes prolonged elevation of blood pressure and heart rate. Over time, this can lead to hypertension, heart attacks and strokes. Studies have shown that people with high levels of job stress are at a significantly increased risk of developing cardiovascular diseases.

Immune system: Persistent stress weakens the immune system, making the body more susceptible to infections and diseases. The body’s ability to fight off antigens is reduced, and the immune system's response becomes slower.

Gastrointestinal system: Stress can also affect the gastrointestinal system, leading to conditions such as irritable bowel syndrome (IBS), ulcers and other digestive issues. The brain and gut are connected, and stress can disrupt the normal functioning of the digestive system.

Musculoskeletal system: Stress can lead to muscle tension, particularly in the neck, shoulders and the back. This tension can cause headaches and musculoskeletal pain, which, if left untreated, can develop into chronic pain conditions.

Endocrine system: The stress response affects the endocrine system, leading to imbalances in hormone levels. This can contribute to conditions such as diabetes, thyroid issues, and metabolic syndrome.

Personal experience

A few years ago, I found myself in a highly stressful work environment. I was constantly juggling multiple projects, meeting tight deadlines and managing work under immense pressure. Initially, I thrived on the adrenaline rush, but over time, the constant stress took a toll on my health.

I began to notice symptoms like frequent headaches, difficulty sleeping and a constant feeling of fatigue. Despite these signs, I ignored them, attributing them to the nature of my job. It wasn’t until a routine check-up that I discovered I had developed high blood pressure. My doctor explained that prolonged stress was likely the primary cause.

Stress and hypertension

Hypertension, or high blood pressure, is a condition where the force of the blood against the artery walls is too high. Chronic stress is a significant risk factor for hypertension. When under stress, the body produces hormones that increase heart rate and narrow blood vessels, which can lead to elevated blood pressure levels over time.

Coping with hypertension

Upon my diagnosis, my doctor recommended several lifestyle changes and medications to manage my high blood pressure. Here are some strategies that have helped me manage stress and improve my overall health:

Regular exercise: Physical activity is a powerful stress reducer. Exercise helps to lower blood pressure, improve mood, and reduce stress hormone levels. I started incorporating daily walks and Yog into my routine, which significantly improved my stress levels.

Healthy diet: A balanced diet rich in fruits, vegetables and whole grains can help control blood pressure. I reduced my intake of caffeine and sugar, which helped in managing my stress and blood pressure.

Mindfulness and relaxation: Practices like meditation, deep breathing exercises and progressive muscle relaxation can help reduce stress. I began practicing mindfulness meditation, which helped me stay calm and focused.

Time management: Learning to manage time effectively and setting realistic goals can reduce work-related stress. I started prioritizing tasks, delegating when necessary, and setting boundaries to ensure a healthier work-life balance.

Seeking professional help: Sometimes, professional help is necessary to manage stress effectively. I sought therapy, which provided me with tools and strategies to cope with stress in healthier ways.

Conclusion

The link between mental stress and physical illness is well-documented by research. Chronic stress, particularly work-related stress, can lead to serious health issues like high blood pressure. My personal experience with stress-induced hypertension underscores the importance of recognizing and managing stress effectively.

Ignoring the signs of chronic stress can lead to severe health consequences. It is crucial to adopt healthy lifestyle changes, practice stress management techniques and seek professional help when necessary. By taking proactive steps to manage stress, we can protect our physical health and improve our overall well-being.

Remember, your health is invaluable, and taking care of your mental well-being is as important as taking care of your physical health.

Nepal and other small nations, despite their negligible contributions to carbon emissions, bear the brunt of climate change impacts disproportionately. This inequity underscores a harsh reality: While larger, more industrialized nations emit the lion’s share of greenhouse gasses, it is the smaller, less developed countries that suffer the most severe consequences. 

In Nepal, the effects are palpable—from melting glaciers to increasingly erratic monsoon patterns and heightened vulnerability to natural disasters. This disparity highlights the urgent need for global solidarity and concerted action to address climate change, ensuring that all nations, regardless of their size or level of development, are supported in mitigating and adapting to its effects.

The assertion that war contributes to carbon emissions highlights a sobering reality: While conflicts may be waged by powerful nations, their repercussions extend far beyond, affecting even peace-loving countries like Nepal. Despite not being directly involved in conflicts, Nepal, like many other nations, has to grapple with the environmental fallout of warfare, such as increased emissions from military activities and the destruction of natural habitats.

Given this context, there’s a compelling argument for developed nations to step up and support countries like Nepal in combating the climate crisis. Climate finance, in particular, emerges as a crucial mechanism through which developed nations can fulfill their responsibility to assist vulnerable countries in mitigating and adapting to climate change impacts. Concrete data on the extent of glacial melting or changes in monsoon patterns could enhance the clarity and make the argument in favor of climate finance more powerful.

The recent devastating floods in countries like the US, the UAE, Oman and China serve as poignant reminders of the urgent need to prioritize climate change. These catastrophic events underscore the increasingly severe impacts of climate change on communities and economies worldwide.

Nepal recently convened the ‘International Dialogue on Mountains, People, and Climate,’ a crucial platform where stakeholders voiced their apprehensions regarding the escalating adverse effects of climate change on the Himalayas. Urgent action to mitigate these impacts was fervently advocated for, drawing the attention of the international community to this pressing issue. For instance, Bangladesh’s Minister for Environment, Forest, and Climate Change, Saber Hossain Chowdhury, expressed grave concerns about the existential threat due to snow-melting in the Nepal Himalayas due to climate change.

Emphasizing the criticality of swift and decisive action, the minister underscored the necessity of adopting timely measures and maintaining heightened vigilance to mitigate the looming impact of climate change. He stressed the imperative of minimizing climate change’s adverse effects and bolstering adaptation efforts to fortify climate resilience, not just for Bangladesh but for all vulnerable regions across the globe.

During COP28 also, Nepal successfully globalized its agenda, amplifying its voice on the international stage. The visit of United Nations’ Secretary-General António Guterres to Nepal further bolstered this effort, providing a crucial platform to elevate Nepali concerns to the global forefront. His visit not only signaled solidarity with Nepal’s cause but also helped to galvanize international support and attention toward addressing the unique challenges faced by mountainous regions.

In this context, engaging ambassadors and diplomats stationed in Nepal to advocate for global attention to Nepal’s environmental concerns is indeed a strategic move with potential far-reaching benefits. These diplomatic figures can leverage their positions to draw attention to Nepal’s pressing environmental issues and rally support from the international community.

Diplomats like Dean R Thompson, the US’ Ambassador to Nepal, whose personal appreciation for Nepal’s natural beauty is evident, can serve as influential advocates for environmental conservation efforts. Their advocacy can help elevate Nepal’s environmental priorities on the global stage and encourage collaborative initiatives to address pressing challenges.

Furthermore, the involvement of neighboring giants like China and India is crucial, given their direct stake in Nepal’s environmental well-being. As Nepal shares critical ecological resources and biodiversity hotspots with its neighbors, cooperation among these nations is essential for effective environmental management and conservation.

Recognizing the inseparable link between the environment and human health is paramount. The impacts of the climate crisis are becoming increasingly apparent, affecting not only the natural world but also humanity and livelihoods.

As the effects of climate change intensify, with rising temperatures, extreme weather events, and environmental degradation, the health and resilience of both the environment and the people are at stake. Addressing the climate crisis is therefore not only an environmental imperative but also a critical public health priority.

By working together to save Nepal’s natural treasures, we can help ensure a healthier and more sustainable future for all Nepalis and the planet as a whole.

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

Of late, a very intense and interesting discourse is taking place in Nepal among the intellectuals, academicians and politicians over the present electoral system in general and the proportional representation (PR) system in particular. Some intellectuals and politicians associated with big political parties are arguing against the present PR system by portraying it as a ‘main cause’ of frequent changes in government. They are trying to spread the message that the first-past-the-post (FPTP) system is the only way to ensure stable governance in the country. But their line of argument is scientifically and democratically unjustified, incorrect and against the concept of inclusive democracy, something which our Constitution has upheld.

The context: Before the introduction of a mixed electoral system, Nepal was practicing the FPTP system. After decades-long practice, the country opted for a mixed electoral system to minimize the demerits of the FPTP system, mainly in view of the role of money, muscles and caste factors in the elections. Inclusivity or mainstreaming of marginalized communities, groups and regions, a mandate of the 12-point understanding signed between the then Seven-Party Alliance and the Maoist rebels in 2005, the Comprehensive Peace Accord (CPA) signed in 2006, the Interim Constitution and TOR documents of the ‘revolution’, was another factor behind a switch to the mixed system.

Discourse during statute-drafting: As a member of the then Constituent Assembly (CA) and one of the active members of the Constitution Drafting Committee, let me recall that there was a hot debate and interactive discussion on the electoral system, and a general agreement in the end that continuing with the FPTP system as the sole electoral system was neither possible nor appropriate. So, the main focus and stress was on the ratio of FPTP and the PR system, though some members sought the FPTP system while some others sought the PR system and not a mix of both. Initially, the PR percentage was 60, which was reduced to 40 percent in the present Constitution.

Positions of political parties: Back then, the Nepali Congress and the CPN-UML were for giving more weightage to the FPTP system, whereas the Maoists and Madhes-based parties were for giving more weightage to the PR system. With different arguments and counter-arguments coming, it was a very hot, hard and sometimes unfriendly conversation.

A compromise formula: The present mixed system is a compromise between two schools of thoughts, a marriage between modernity and traditionality, that is, a marriage between inclusive and participatory democracy, and formal democracy (representing a handful of people). Back then, the electoral system was one of the core issues of contention and it was resolved at the last moment of Constitution promulgation.

Causes of instability: The politicians rooting for the elimination of the PR system are trying to convince the people that the PR system is the main cause behind a frequent change of guard. But does this logic hold water? In fact, it’s a false statement and a false premise as the history of governance in Nepal shows along with the history of other countries with similar experiences. 

Let’s look at the contemporary history of Nepal to shed more light on this topic. 

In the general elections held after the restoration of multiparty democracy with constitutional monarchy in 1990 under the FPTP system, the Nepali Congress won a resounding mandate to form a government. But his government collapsed in July 1994, barely three years after its formation as it failed to get a vote in the Parliament regarding the budget, pushing the country into midterm elections. 

History repeated itself as the KP Sharma Oli-led majority government, installed on the basis of the mixed electoral system and supposed to rule for a full five years, collapsed toward the end of July, 2016, hardly nine months after its formation, following the breakup of the coalition.

These examples show that the electoral system has not much to do with the stability of a government or a lack thereof. Rather, stability or instability is a political issue, not necessarily a function of the electoral system. It has more to do with factors like the political leadership of the day, government’s performance and good governance and far less to do with the electoral system. 

The perils and the way forward: Calls for doing away with the mixed system are coming from some short-sighted leaders of big political parties. The ongoing debate over the electoral system is welcome, but the prescription for doing away with the PR system is extremely bad.

Doing away with the PR system, especially with regard to the elections for the House of Representatives, may be counterproductive and may cause political conflict and instability because it is an emotive issue connected with inclusivity and mainstreaming in a multicultural, multiracial, multilingual and multi-geographic country whether class, race, region and gender-related oppression and discrimination persist, among others. An inclusive state is the demand of the time and so is an  inclusive Parliament. Therefore, the PR system must continue. However, it is very important to eliminate the role of money and favoritism in the selection of candidates under the PR system, for which serious discussions are necessary. 

Views are personal. The author can be reached at [email protected]