Kathmandu, Nepal – This city was shaken by violent demonstrations at the beginning of the month, when the Nepalese – most of the young adults – raged against the government on a handful of questions, including corruption and nepotism. Dozens of people died of gunshots and other violence while government offices were burning.
But the immediate cause of demonstrations was what many Nepalese consider an attack on freedom of expression. Twenty-six social media sites had become dark after the government prohibited them for what it said was non-compliance with registration requirements. The ban was lifted in the days in demonstrations and Prime Minister KP Sharma Oli resigned, to be replaced by Sushila Karki.
While what is perceived as a general erosion of freedom of expression has triggered riots, journalists say that press freedom has always – and more and more – more and more attacked. They say that the authorities abute the laws to cancel their reports and protect powerful personalities from the exam.
In a case that has drawn broad attention in recent months, a Kathmandu district court in June issued an arrest warrant against journalist Dil Bhusan Pathak, who hosts the Youtube program “Tough Talk”. In a video on the channel, Pathak questions the alleged involvement of Jaiveer Singh Deuba, son of former Prime Minister Sher Bahadur Deuba, in the purchase of the Hilton hotel in Kathmandu, who was part of the burned buildings during the demonstrations this month.
Pathak was charged under the Nepal electronic transactions law with the propagation of hatred and jealousy thanks to its relationships. However, although the 2008 law regulates the content published on electronic media, the Nepal Press Council takes care of complaints against journalists.
On this basis, the High Court of Nepal ruled against the arrest of Pathak, saying that the case is the authority of the press council. But the police still tried to hold it.
Regular procedure ignored
Press Freedom’s surveillance dogs say it is only an example of how the Nepalese government has ignored cybercrime laws to regular and poorly used procedure to silence journalists who examine powerful people.
“There is a big difference between the law linked to the laws on cybercrime and the media,” explains Bhimarjun Acharaya, a constitutional expert. When a journalist comments as a journalist, media laws and not cybercrime laws should apply, he said.
Prithivi Subba Gurung, a former government spokesperson, denies allegations that the authorities abuse the law to target the media. “No journalist should be punished for writing news against the government or ministers,” said Subba.
But, he says, although it is the responsibility of journalists to inform the public, it is also the responsibility of the government to ensure that their work does not promote national division or does not harm social harmony. The role of the government, he says, is to create directives and not to control its content.
Balakrishna Adhikari, member of the press council, says that the case of Pathak is noted of the jurisdiction of the group; But once a case like this goes to the court, “the press council cannot intervene.” Although autonomy and dedicated to journalistic ethics, the press council is still structurally under the government.
“We must respect certain government orders,” he said.
In another case, recently making criticisms in early June, the Kathmandu district court ordered two online publications – Bizmandu and Nepal Khabar – to delete stories that they had published alleging that Santosh Narayan Shrestha, president of Securities Board, had asked for foot cuts before approving infrastructure projects. The court gave a provisional order to delete the news.
The Federation of Nepalese journalists, International Federation of Journalists and Nepalese press union, among others, has rejected, affirming that the order contradicts the constitutional provisions. Shortly after, the court rejected the case.
This should also have been managed by the press council, explains Taranath Dahal, president of Freedom Forum, a non -profit organization that monitors press freedom.
Decline of freedom
The World Press Freedom Ranking Nepal has decreased in recent years. This year, journalists Without Borders ranked Nepal 90 out of 180 in its press freedom index, down 74 in 2024.
Over the past three years, press freedom violations have increased, according to data from the Federation of Nepalese journalists. From May 2024 to April of this year, the Federation recorded 73 violations of press freedom, compared to 62 incidents a year earlier and 55 incidents before that.
In 2024, Freedom Forum recorded 35 cases of violations against the media by security officials, 26 by political executives and eight cases involving government employees. Until now in 2025, government officials are at the top of the list with 34 violations, followed by political actors with 18 and security officials with 14 violations.
However, Freedom Forum data show that the total number of violations has decreased compared to the higher levels recorded from 2017 to 2022.
Dahal, from Freedom Forum, says that local government officials, such as neighborhood presidents, are among the worst offenders. They often harass journalists by putting them pressure or intimidating them, he said.
Generally, the federal government is reluctant to apply press freedom laws, says Dahal. In fact, he said, government’s tolerance for any critical report “fell to zero”.
“Acceptable and naturalized”
Historically, journalists in Nepal have operated in a difficult environment. From 2002 to 2018, 38 journalists were killed in Nepal, according to a report by the Federation of Nepalese journalists.
In one of the most recent incidents, during the demonstrations in March, calling for the return of the monarchy, Suresh Rajak died in Kathmandu after demonstrators burned the building he was inside while reporting the demonstrations, according to a report of borderless journalists.
And during the last demonstrations this month, four journalists were among the injured by rubber bullets fired by the police, according to a statement from the International Federation of Journalists.
The government is often reluctant to investigate or pursue cases where journalists are killed or injured, explains Binod Dhungel, corresponding to Nepal for borders without borders.
“The idea that a journalist’s work is to be beaten, then writing the news becomes acceptable and naturalized,” he said. “It’s very difficult.”
Gurung, the former government spokesperson, said that journalists working on the front line could be involuntarily attacked. The government, he says, does not put the expected attacks against journalists.
Coordinated tactics
The concerns about the treatment of the government of the media arrive in Nepal which advances the bill on the media council. The bill, which the National Assembly adopted in February, is being examined by a committee of the House of Representatives. Media and civil society groups fear that the bill would weaken the press council already undermined and place it under the control of the more strict government.
To worsen their concerns, a change in July to the printing and publication law required online points of sale to register in the administration offices of the local district. This would have given the power of the local authorities on the online media, but the Ministry of Dissemination suspended the registration requirement after decline.
However, criticisms say that all these efforts are coordinated to reduce space for journalists in the country. The government simply wants to put any type of media under its control, says Dahal.
Nirmala Sharma, president of the Federation of Nepalese journalists, said that disinformation published on social networks also feeds public anger against the media. People often confuse everything that circulates on social networks with factual news, she says. However, she says that journalists must also make sure what they publish is correct.
“Journalists are targeted by state players and not state simply for reporting the news,” she said.