Guilherme Canela is Chief of the Freedom of Expression and Safety of Journalists Section of UNESCO in Paris. He recently visited Nepal to discuss <a href="https://nepalitimes.com/editorial/internet-in-everything">freedom of expression in the digital media</a>. Nepali Times spoke to him about new challenges to free media. Excerpts: Nepali Times: Can you tell us about how the discussions with Nepal’s lawmakers went? Guilherme Canela: My visit, in partnership with the Inter-Parliamentary Union, was to have an open discussion with them about international standards on freedom of expression. It was very enriching to learn the key concerns of Members of Parliament regarding the current challenges Nepal faces regarding the existing legal framework regulating the media and digital ecosystem, vis a vis the immense changes in this environment related to the technological revolution we all are experiencing, and how these challenges can be addressed in alignment with the International Human Rights Law. There is a fine balance between freedom of expression and that same freedom being used to spread intolerance and hatred. What are the main conclusions of UNESCO’s own study on the governance of digital platforms?&nbsp; Digital platforms have become a new front in the pursuit of peace. They have had a transformative role in advancing human rights. They have democratised access to knowledge and culture, enabled new voices to be heard, and fostered global connections, but, as you say, at the same time they have become <a href="https://nepalitimes.com/banner/press-for-people">ecosystems of misinformation, disinformation, ideological polarisation, and incitement to violence, discrimination, and hate</a>.&nbsp; Such features have undermined democratic values and threatened human rights across the world. Our job, therefore, is too foster the huge positive side of this equation and to counter the negative externalities it generates. Thus, whereas the digital companies don’t operate with transparency, accountability and due diligence, many countries have embarked on regulatory processes without keeping a human rights approach as a main principle thereby risking the shrink of the civic space and leading to different kinds of restriction not aligned with International Human Rights Law. UNESCO aims to ensure that everyone’s <a href="https://nepalitimes.com/here-now/no-freedom-after-expression">freedom of expression</a>, access to information and diverse cultural content are guaranteed, while various stakeholders, including governments, deal with the problems of dis- and misinformation and hate speech online. These problems will be better addressed, in a way that aligns with international human rights law, through implementing the UNESCO Guidelines in a comprehensive and coherent manner. In a nutshell, UNESCO’s proposal, which was debated worldwide for almost 2 years, and received 10,000 comments coming from actors from 134 countries, suggests a governance system that can improve the processes currently used by the tech companies, aiming to expand freedom of expression, while dealing with the negative externalities. But when can we deem the risks so high that governments can justify restricting freedom of expression through digital platforms under international standards? The rapidly evolving digital era has seen the rise of the imposition of restrictive measures on freedom of expression and the press such as infringement on right to privacy, censorship, and the prevention of general access to the dissemination of information, both online and offline, including internet shutdowns. However, the justification for governments to restrict such freedoms on digital platforms arises when there are identifiable and/or substantial risks to public safety, national security, or individual rights which cannot be sufficiently mitigated through other means. Read also: <a href="https://nepalitimes.com/news/nepal-should-be-open-for-south-asia">Nepal should be open for South Asia</a> In order for any restriction to be legitimate it must fulfil the criteria set out in international standards on freedom of expression, such as the Articles 19 (3) and 20 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights or the Three-Part Test, which demands that any interference must be provided for by the law, pursue a legitimate aim, and be necessary and proportional to secure one of those aims.  <figure> <img src="https://publisher-publish.s3.eu-central-1.amazonaws.com/pb-nepalitimes/swp/asv65r/media/20240326090344_61e1f3e429a81b7cb025116ed038eadcd019e4a3dc0203af4e48abaa2c81fbe3.jpg" data-media-id="editor_4" data-image-id="20240326090344_61e1f3e429a81b7cb025116ed038eadcd019e4a3dc0203af4e48abaa2c81fbe3" data-rendition-name="original" width="853" height="1280" loading="lazy" alt="Guilherme Canela in Nepal "> <figcaption>Guilherme Canela(Photo: Sonia Awale)</figcaption> </figure>  In essence, any statutory restriction to freedom of expression must be subject to oversight and review mechanisms in order to uphold the principle of transparency, accountability and prevent abuse of power. While governments may be justified in <a href="https://nepalitimes.com/multimedia/gagging-the-press-in-installments">restricting freedom of expression</a> on digital platforms under certain circumstances, such restrictions must be carefully circumscribed to protect the fundamental rights of individuals and uphold the principles of democracy, pluralism, and open discourse in the digital age. Is there not a danger, then, that states can justify banning digital platforms using the excuse of maintaining “social harmony”? Measures applied by both companies and states should always be proportional to the harm that is intended to prevent. From companies, removal and blocking of content and account suspension should only be used as a last resort in the most serious cases. From the side of governments, <a href="https://nepalitimes.com/news/rattled-by-criticism-nepal-bans-tiktok">banning a digital platform</a> should be proportionate to the level of harm it causes and should be accompanied by transparent processes, due diligence, due process of law and consideration of alternative measures to mitigate risks while preserving the benefits of digital platforms for legitimate users. Additionally, regulatory actions should be based on evidence-based assessments and subject to judicial review to ensure they are fair, just, and consistent with principles of freedom of expression and the rule of law. <a href="https://nepalitimes.com/news/talking-about-tiktok">Banning digital platforms</a> can be considered proportionate in certain circumstances where their activities pose significant harm that outweighs the benefits they provide. Here are two scenarios where banning digital platforms might be considered proportionate. Systemic violation of international human rights standards: If a digital platform systemically violates international human rights standards despite warnings and sanctions. And second, Exploitative Practices: when platforms engage in exploitative practices such as facilitating illegal activities (such as child pornography) or enabling human trafficking. However, it is important to outline that our Guidelines do not call on the government to establish a department or organisation to moderate content. The Guidelines consider that digital platforms should not be held liable when they act in good faith and with due diligence, carry out voluntary investigations, or take other measures aimed at detecting, identifying, and removing or disabling access to content that is prohibited under article 20 of the ICCPR or that has been restricted in terms of article 19(3) of the ICCPR. How can journalists protect their freedoms when democracy itself is threatened? Journalists can protect their freedom by first keeping on doing their job and <a href="https://nepalitimes.com/editorial/censuring-censorship">hold all powers accountable</a>. But they cannot do it alone or in a vacuum, neither should they be left alone to deal with existential safety and viability challenges. As proclaimed by all UNESCO’s member states, journalism should be valued as a fundamental ‘public good’ with citizens putting their trust in it also through teaching and encouraging media and information literacy. It demands the State protect media viability, the rule of law institutions defending media freedom from all attacks, including by elected officials, and for politicians committing to respect the fundamentals of democracy, including the role of the press as a watchdog. There is an urgent need to further demonstrate to our societies the value of journalism (and all fundamental freedoms) not only to guarantee political and civil rights, but to guarantee all other rights. When someone is protesting to have better education or better health, ultimately what they want is to protect the rights of education and a healthy life, but they can’t do that if they don’t have freedom of expression in the first place and if watchdogs, like journalists, are being silenced. Your report also cites the critical need for digital platforms to protect electoral integrity. How can this be done?&nbsp; Firstly, in UNESCO Guidelines for the Governance of the Digital Platforms, we highlight the need for Digital platforms to recognise their role in supporting democratic institutions by preserving electoral integrity. Their acceptance of the role is not trivial as it implies an engagement regarding democracies. UNESCO also recommends establishing a comprehensive risk assessment process that focuses on the integrity of the electoral cycle leading up to and during major electoral events. These assessments should be conducted transparently and in consultation with all relevant stakeholders and should include a gender perspective to address the escalating online violence against women in electoral contexts. Proactive measures based on the identified risks are essential to prevent potential threats to the integrity of the electoral process. Read also: <a href="https://nepalitimes.com/editorial/dont-act-on-the-act">Don't act on the act</a>, Editorial Secondly, UNESCO urges digital platforms to ensure that users have access to a diverse range of information and ideas, in line with international human rights law. Attention should be given to automated tools to prevent any hindrances in accessing election-related content and diverse viewpoints. Additionally, digital platforms should review their products, policies, and practices related to political advertising to avoid arbitrary limitations on candidates' or parties' ability to disseminate their messages during the electoral cycle. The promotion of independent fact-checking, advertisement archives, and public alerts is highlighted as crucial measures to uphold electoral integrity in content dissemination.  <figure> <img src="https://publisher-publish.s3.eu-central-1.amazonaws.com/pb-nepalitimes/swp/asv65r/media/20240326090344_d2b0d4b66fb1632336f876e84b0e72004620937c79e36d9f94828bd8478ab937.jpg" data-media-id="editor_10" data-image-id="20240326090344_d2b0d4b66fb1632336f876e84b0e72004620937c79e36d9f94828bd8478ab937" data-rendition-name="original" width="730" height="1029" loading="lazy" alt="UNESCO guidelines for the governance of digital platforms"> </figure>  Finally, transparency is emphasised across various aspects, including the use and impact of automated tools, engagement with stakeholders and governance systems, and the identification of political advertisements. Digital platforms are responsible for disclosing funding details, applying equal content moderation rules, and tracking the monetisation of political posts. The retention of advertisements in a publicly accessible online library, along with information on funding and targeted demographics, contributes to an accountable and transparent digital environment during electoral cycles. If put in place by the platforms, these measures will collectively reinforce the commitment to preserving electoral integrity in the digital age. How can digital platforms be held more responsible when Big Tech is controlled from outside national jurisdictions whereas the impact of their content is domestic?&nbsp; The strategy for the implementation of the UNESCO Guidelines for the Governance of Digital Platforms aims to promote the enabling environment for freedom of expression and information and enhance the responsibility of digital platforms worldwide by Building a Network of Networks by fostering international collaboration and cooperation among regulatory authorities and civil society to develop common standards and regulations for digital platforms. This can help ensure that platforms adhere to responsible practices regardless of their location of ownership and may also reduce lawfare. Then there are Public-Private Partnerships to address regulatory challenges associated with digital platforms. Collaboration between governments, industry stakeholders, and civil society can facilitate the development of effective governance frameworks. Read also: <a href="https://nepalitimes.com/news/media-melee-in-the-age-of-ai">Media mêlée in the age of AI</a>, Kunda Dixit Promoting transparency and accountability of the governance system (independent regulatory authorities) and of the digital platforms policies and practices. Human rights due diligence and content moderation and curation based on international human rights standards must be upheld. The governance system itself must have independent oversight mechanisms to monitor the activities of digital platforms within national jurisdictions. We must also empower users by providing them with tools and resources to understand and manage their online experiences through media and information literacy. This includes features for content control, privacy protection, and mechanisms for reporting harmful content or behaviour. Lastly, there must be ethical guidelines for digital platforms that prioritise transparency, fairness, and respect for human rights. These guidelines can serve as a foundation for responsible platform governance.

original

674x448

610x380

500x500

400x266

400x240

400x203

301x200

1250x600

1084x550

Balancing free expression with fake news on social media

In late December, as police arrested a protester at Mandala into a police van with some force, a tv camera caught a voice from the crowd yelling at the van as it drove away: “Don’t kill him!”
This was not an exaggerated exclamation but one from genuine fear of harm because it followed the killing of two protesters outside a Korean labour recruitment office the previous day.&nbsp;
The Mandala is like Kathmandu’s Hyde Park, and has over the years been the epicentre for all victims of the state machinery who have been denied justice. But after fears that pro-monarchy rallies would escalate, the government designated this and other areas restricted.
Since the ban, police have also arrested health and justice activist Govinda KC as well as human rights activists demanding transparency into the Ncell share acquisition case.
Then on Tuesday, protesters from the National Student Union were arrested for demanding that the ban on assembly at the Mandala be repealed and Nepalis “be given back their civic space”. Interestingly, the student union is affiliated to the ruling Nepali Congress, the largest party in Parliament and a coalition partner to the Maoist Centre.
The other gathering place for mass rallies used to be Khula Manch, which Kathmandu’s Mayor Balen Shah had been trying to turn into a three storey underground parking. After public outrage, he backed down but is now trying to turn it into an astroturfed football ground. &nbsp;&nbsp;
The current coalition is squeezing the right to freedom of assembly and expression in installments. It throttled social media with a ban on TikTok last year. A slew of corruption scandals, impunity and lack of delivery has made the ruling coalition insecure, and its knee-jerk reaction has been to muzzle the messenger(s).
If only the coalition partners learnt from history that freedom of expression is a safety valve that lets the citizens let off steam. But that would be expecting too much wisdom from them. Clamping down can build up the pressure allowing civic outrage to take a dangerous and violent turn.
Even as Nepal’s leadership makes public spaces out of bounds, the opposition UML is preparing to take to the streets in a movement from February onwards to try to topple the fragile coalition.&nbsp;
C K Raut’s Janamat Party this week withdrew support for the Madhes Province government following a power struggle with Upendra Yadav of the JSP. The coalition at the centre is now shakier because Raut has been dissatisfied at his party not being given any National Assembly seats. Elections for 19 seats of the Upper House took place on Thursday.&nbsp;
But while Nepal’s leadership alienates itself further from its citizens at home, it has been tilting southwards on the geopolitical front. Nepal’s recent hydropower and investment agreements with India are emblematic of a significant shift in foreign policy. It seems Nepal’s traditional foreign policy of equidistance between India and China is askew.&nbsp;
Nepal and India signed a 25-year energy trade deal during Indian External Affairs Minister S Jaishankar’s visit to Nepal in early January for ‘Nepal’s electricity to get a market in India’. But it is clear to just about everyone in Nepal (except, it seems the government which is trying its best to keep everything hush-hush) that India’s intentions lie not so much in importing electricity from Nepal as getting free regulated water.&nbsp;
India also increased its assistance through High Impact Community Development Projects (HICDP) from Rs50 million to Rs200 million. Grants like this can help spur Nepal’s development, but there are loud misgivings that the funds will not be channeled through the Finance Ministry, as it should, but via the Indian Embassy. It will be entirely up to India to choose who and what to fund, which actually is against the Constitution and federal policy on international cooperation.&nbsp;
Unlike India-baiters in Nepal, we are not blaming New Delhi for flexing its muscle. Any large country will do the same to secure its long-term national interest. The blame lies in Nepal’s feckless leadership that is shamelessly kowtowing and selling our national interest down the river.&nbsp;
Prime Minister Pushpa Kamal Dahal seems either unaware or indifferent to the long-term consequences of the decisions he has acquiesced to – so focused is he on keeping his coalition intact so that he can remain in the Prime Minister’s seat beyond the term limit he agreed with the NC’s Sher Bahadur Deuba.&nbsp;
Nepal’s foreign policy must not be seasonal, or be determined by domestic political survival considerations. It must not be beholden to the whims of who is leading the country at a particular period of time.&nbsp;
Shristi Karki

At home and abroad

<figure><img src="https://superdesk-pro-c.s3.amazonaws.com/sd-nepalitimes/20221109141112/636ba7959c7e80680e073790jpeg.jpg" alt="" width="640" height="426"/><figcaption>Photo: Jan Møller Hansen</figcaption></figure>Sometimes it can feel as though Nepal goes through endless cycles that bring us back every time to the place where we started. Maybe we just need more years to look back and see the progress.But up close, we seem to stand still. The present moment is like that. Consider these needs that remain urgent, yet have been forgotten:- The need for independent commissioners to deal with the demand of conflict victims for transitional justice, and the permanent need of society for the rule of law- The need for independent police accountability mechanism to deal with the way democratic rights are sometimes repressed, especially during this Covid-19 crisisBoth pre-requisites continue to be urgent if this country is ever <a href="https://www.nepalitimes.com/here-now/just-not-justice/" data-saferedirecturl="https://www.google.com/url?q=https://www.nepalitimes.com/here-now/just-not-justice/&amp;source=gmail&amp;ust=1598491315641000&amp;usg=AFQjCNGtLWBs7Xus1L_zPT0WtkitV5kdIA">to deal with impunity</a> and the daily humiliations of injustice that go unanswered. But we have been diverted time and again by petty politics.It is now two-and-half years since the elections that led to the creation of the Nepal Communist Party. Many saw this as a decisive moment, a time when we left behind our turbulent past and unified Nepal to bring prosperity.Some saw an opportunity at last for a ‘peace dividend’. In the international community, many considered it as a harbinger of stability, which would allow them to finally fully implement development programs free from the disruption of war and political intrigue.Very few were alert to the risks to human rights. It was almost as though political commentators and the diplomatic community shared the view that the political stability they thought was assured for the foreseeable future would automatically lead to a sudden respect for rights.These days, the pandemic is occupying people’s thoughts. Nepal faces grave risk as the disease spreads, and there is an urgent need for appropriate and effective countermeasures. But even before this massive unforeseen shock to our society, political stability and respect for human rights was looking less and less certain. In the past few months the uncertainty is even greater.One of the costs of ‘stability’ has been<a href="https://www.nepalitimes.com/latest/rights-groups-laud-nepal-supreme-court-ruling/" data-saferedirecturl="https://www.google.com/url?q=https://www.nepalitimes.com/latest/rights-groups-laud-nepal-supreme-court-ruling/&amp;source=gmail&amp;ust=1598491315641000&amp;usg=AFQjCNGRsGP_JdoKTy2P5hcxFIywbmrKKQ"> transitional justice</a>. Remedy for victims of the conflict was put on hold after 2006, and especially two years ago, before the pandemic appeared on the scene. The promised truth commission has failed to deliver. Many of us had hoped that the <a href="https://www.nepalitimes.com/opinion/justice-in-transition/" data-saferedirecturl="https://www.google.com/url?q=https://www.nepalitimes.com/opinion/justice-in-transition/&amp;source=gmail&amp;ust=1598491315641000&amp;usg=AFQjCNGglmiYgU0GqwUo5BNdPUdaNVZGvQ">truth telling process</a> would be the foundation for institutional reforms in the justice system that had been put off year after year since the <a href="http://archive.nepalitimes.com/blogs/thebrief/page/36/" data-saferedirecturl="https://www.google.com/url?q=http://archive.nepalitimes.com/blogs/thebrief/page/36/&amp;source=gmail&amp;ust=1598491315641000&amp;usg=AFQjCNFhkaxpPA84enmCgy6J2kws8NXaTQ">Comprehensive Peace Accord (CPA)</a> of 2006.The marginalised in our society are denied access to justice, notably minorities such as Dalits and women victims of violence. Legitimate public protest is still met with harsh and excessive use of force by the police. Convictions in the courts still largely depend on confessions under torture and cruel treatment rather than proper, non-coercive investigation -- still a rare skill in Nepal to the shame of all of those involved in efforts to improve public security for all.Political, social and economic instability have gone hand in hand with violation of basic rights. They are mutually supporting dynamics.Since 2006, more and more Nepalis have come to rely on remittances from family members working overseas for their economic survival. This safety valve is now in doubt because of the economic downturn caused by the global pandemic.The idea that political stability and prosperity would put an end to human rights violations was always a pipe dream. A society with such entrenched discrimination is always going to find consensus difficult, and end up resorting to violence and coercion to maintain the status quo, or to resolve inevitable disputes.We can all agree that Nepal faces a difficult short and medium-term future. All human rights defenders now need to consider some key fundamentals:- Political infighting in the leadership can easily generate protests and counter-protests where human rights violations are common- The power struggle can impact political harmony at provincial and local levels which can lead to a higher risk of conflict- The health and economic crises risk endangering social stability. Medical staff are already at the frontlines of disputes and must get full support from the state and civil society to help them carry out their tasks, which are a matter of life and death not only for their patients but for the whole country.All this is also happening in a wider context of rising geopolitical tension between our two neighbours. On top of all the crises at home, we are now also living in a region which feels a lot less stable than it did a year ago.If we are to come out of this crisis stronger, some lessons will need to be learnt, and fast.Human rights defenders need to find better ways to work together and to set common agenda and activities which address the priority problems that our society is facing, including pervasive discrimination. Such injustice is real and corrosive, and most Nepalis suffer some form or other of discrimination every single day, wherever they live and whatever their occupation. Discrimination is like a ball and chain on the ankle of the country which slows our progress.This should also be a moment of reflection for our international friends who in the past have given such valuable support for the <a href="https://www.nepalitimes.com/latest/nepals-transition-to-peace-needs-justice/" data-saferedirecturl="https://www.google.com/url?q=https://www.nepalitimes.com/latest/nepals-transition-to-peace-needs-justice/&amp;source=gmail&amp;ust=1598491315641000&amp;usg=AFQjCNHHjkC_zEjI8bw-PwG570G1FgPMsw">peace process and the defence of human rights</a>. As the <a href="https://www.nhrcnepal.org/" data-saferedirecturl="https://www.google.com/url?q=https://www.nhrcnepal.org/&amp;source=gmail&amp;ust=1598491315641000&amp;usg=AFQjCNEOabp5mzf2S4-IxxXBLGjQcf5pBw">National Human Rights Commission</a> (NHRC) international conference of 2018 indicated clearly, little or no progress has been made since the CPA on impunity -- the biggest obstacle in establishing genuine rule of law with equitable access to justice. Law and order cannot be maintained by harsh policing and ever more draconian legal restrictions on privacy and personal rights.We need to learn from the crisis which is upon us after two years of false promises of stability and social peace. We are no nearer to our common goal of rule of law than we were 14 years ago.Probably the most important step we can take once public health conditions allow, is to ensure that a genuine transitional justice process is finally implemented to mark the end of arbitrary governance and <a href="https://www.nepalitimes.com/latest/amnesty-on-nepal-impunity/" data-saferedirecturl="https://www.google.com/url?q=https://www.nepalitimes.com/latest/amnesty-on-nepal-impunity/&amp;source=gmail&amp;ust=1598491315641000&amp;usg=AFQjCNGXUvh7Qv8HPrhYFlIzKg-vT4i2GQ">the end to impunity</a>.Our international partners have to give top attention to the fact that without rule of law, it will be hard to achieve economic development and investment. Respect for human rights is the foundation of Nepal’s economic progress and social harmony. We need our partners to be actively, constantly and transparently <a href="https://www.nepalitimes.com/latest/nepal-runs-out-of-excuses-to-address-war-crimes/" data-saferedirecturl="https://www.google.com/url?q=https://www.nepalitimes.com/latest/nepal-runs-out-of-excuses-to-address-war-crimes/&amp;source=gmail&amp;ust=1598491315641000&amp;usg=AFQjCNEeJv7d9e9j38e65VAtjAYQeCs-Mg">promoting transitional justice</a>, human rights and rule of law.The international community must make it clear to our leadership, with one voice, that they believe investing in Nepal is not an attractive prospect if a repressive and discriminatory justice system damages stability. The prospect of political stability does not remove the need for active promotion of human rights. The opposite is the case.One good starting point would be for human rights defenders and the international community to strongly urge a proper selection process, with civil society participation, for the new NHRC later this year.The same is true for the <a href="https://www.nepalitimes.com/editorial/rocky-transition-to-justice/" data-saferedirecturl="https://www.google.com/url?q=https://www.nepalitimes.com/editorial/rocky-transition-to-justice/&amp;source=gmail&amp;ust=1598491315641000&amp;usg=AFQjCNGjI50aSrYxicT7JYce-kNXMFQmzA">transitional justice commissions</a> and the constitutional commissions. The crisis of political stability must lead to a reflection on the errors of the past two years and teach us that without active promotion of human rights there is unlikely to be much progress in any sector in Nepal.With rule of law and justice, there will be progress. Without justice and respect for human rights, there will be nothing.Mohna Ansari is Commissioner, National Human Rights Commission of Nepal.

Nepal must reboot human rights, rule of law

This year’s World Press Freedom Day on 3 May falls during COVID-19 lockdowns in many of our countries. Restriction on movement means journalists all over the world are facing obstacles in getting interviews and data, and verifying stories before publishing.In addition, the global pandemic has been used by many governments to control not just the people’s movement but also their right to information. Journalists have been intimidated or attacked, and photojournalists and videographers on the frontlines often risk getting infected while documenting stories.<a style="font-size: 15px; letter-spacing: 0.01em;" href="https://www.nepalitimes.com/editorial/lockdown-crackdown/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Lockdown Crackdown</a>, EditorialTwo recent webinars conducted by Global Investigative Journalism Network (GIJN) and Finance Uncovered (FU) showed that recent government moves to restrict the press in Nepal are not unique – they are happening in many countries around the world.There have been efforts by authorities to criminalise journalism, and this is putting journalists reporting on the pandemic at risk, noted Courtney Radsch of the Center to Protect Journalists at the GIJN webinar. In Nepal, too, there have been <a href="https://www.nepalitimes.com/editorial/lockdown-crackdown/" data-saferedirecturl="https://www.google.com/url?q=https://www.nepalitimes.com/editorial/lockdown-crackdown/&amp;source=gmail&amp;ust=1588303395047000&amp;usg=AFQjCNE0w7-uF8_CXAUiqOy9AfnGn8Y2Rg">attempts by various government agencies to censor information. </a><figure><img src="https://superdesk-pro-c.s3.amazonaws.com/sd-nepalitimes/20221109121124/636b8dd29c7e80680e06b36cjpeg.jpg" alt="" width="746" height="560"/><figcaption>Photo: MIN RATNA BAJRACHARYA</figcaption></figure>Last month, the portal <a href="http://www.kathmandupress.com/" data-saferedirecturl="https://www.google.com/url?q=http://www.kathmandupress.com/&amp;source=gmail&amp;ust=1588303395047000&amp;usg=AFQjCNHevp5RQMt3kOoZW-Z80WS2OffnTg">Kathmandu Press posted a story</a> about alleged corruption during the purchase of medical equipment involving people in high places. This story was deleted from the site by a software company maintaining the portal’s homepage which had links to individuals in the Prime Minister’s Office involved in the deal.On 27 April, Radio Nepal aired a live interview of former prime minister Baburam Bhattarai that was sharply critical of Prime Minister K P Oli. The government asked the head of the state-owned radio station and its news editor for an explanation, and got the interview deleted from Radio Nepal’s site.On 18 April, Press Council Nepal (PCN) sent a letter to Nepal Telecommunication Authority to shut down certain web-based portals and ban them from publishing false news. In all these recent cases, the government appears to be using the cover of the COVID-19 crisis and the excuse of protecting privacy and shielding the public from fake news and character assassination to crackdown on the free press.“Many supposedly democratic countries like the United States, India and Nepal are censoring the press and making it very difficult for press freedom to prevail while covering COVID 19,” said <a href="https://www.nepalitimes.com/latest/in-locked-down-nepal-print-is-still-king/" data-saferedirecturl="https://www.google.com/url?q=https://www.nepalitimes.com/latest/in-locked-down-nepal-print-is-still-king/&amp;source=gmail&amp;ust=1588303395047000&amp;usg=AFQjCNGhb3EiYv_dsV9Zmyy4FohVmEadqA">Kosmos Biswokarma editor of Kathmandu Press</a>. Tampering with the website without permission raised grave questions of freedom of press in this country, he added.The mission of journalism is to use the citizens’ right to freedom of expression to keep them informed. Journalists go to great lengths, and put themselves at considerable risk, to gather and investigate factual information to alert the public and authorities about wrong-doing and malpractice.However, citizens today get their information not just from the mass media but also from the Internet. The dissemination of fake news, rumours, defamation, violation of privacy on social media is not journalism. Governments should make that distinction.The authorities should not mistake misinformation for journalism, and not use objectionable social media content for blanket suppression of journalistic information. There has to be a mechanism to track such content and take action against perpetrators. It is the Press Council Nepal’s job to trace these sources, and not issue directives to ban portals. In fact it is not the PCN’s job to close down the media at all.During emergencies like the COVID-19 pandemic, due diligence rules are relaxed and there is a lack of transparency in big deals. Because it is the journalist’s job to speak truth to power, this often gets them into trouble, as happened in Nepal with the coverage of the <a href="https://www.nepalitimes.com/latest/nepal-to-test-covid-19-test-kits-from-china/" data-saferedirecturl="https://www.google.com/url?q=https://www.nepalitimes.com/latest/nepal-to-test-covid-19-test-kits-from-china/&amp;source=gmail&amp;ust=1588303395048000&amp;usg=AFQjCNHDyxZuQKhAZpSJr9rwB_DeXQd1Bw">Omni Business Corporate International</a> in the direct purchase of test kits and medical equipment from China at inflated cost.Shiva Gaunle of the Centre for Investigative Journalism Nepal (CIJ-N) says the biggest problem journalists are facing during the present crisis is getting data and verifying them. “It is not just the lockdown and restrictions on mobility, news items are taken off home pages or shut down, how can Nepal claim to have right to information and rule of law?” he asks.Journalism is not a crime, and fake news is not journalism. Governments should be able to separate the two, especially during emergencies like this global pandemic.Namrata Sharma is the former chair of the Centre for Investigative Journalism NepalTwitter: NamrataSharmaPnamrata1964@yahoo.com

Journalism is not a crime...

<figure><img src="https://superdesk-pro-c.s3.amazonaws.com/sd-nepalitimes/20221109101116/636b6ffa9c7e80680e060052jpeg.jpg" alt="" width="1100" height="1269"/><figcaption>Illustration: DIWAKAR CHHETRI</figcaption></figure>Prime Minister K P Oli spent 14 years in jail for opposing the Panchayat absolute monarchy. He was one of the main drivers of the democratisation of the UML party, always speaking out in support of human rights, press freedom and pluralism.Whether it was to oppose Maoist violence during the conflict, or its anti-democratic behaviour after 2006, Oli was the outspoken one in the party. During constitution drafting, his was the loudest voice against ethnicity-based federalism, and later against the Indian blockade. The people rewarded him for his stance by giving the unified party a majority in 2017.Read also: <a style="background-color: #ffffff; font-size: 15px; letter-spacing: 0.01em;" href="https://www.nepalitimes.com/?p=38680&amp;preview_nonce=5c160a3237&amp;preview=true" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Rule by law,</a> Editorial<a href="https://www.nepalitimes.com/here-now/spooking-nepalis-by-snooping-on-them/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Spooking Nepalis by snooping on them</a>, Mukesh PokhrelBut once in power, Oli has lead the charge to curtail democracy, muzzle the media and to constrict open society. After he became prime minister, he moved  the anti-money laundering office, the Revenue Investigation Department and National Investigation Bureau under the PMO.His administration has taken one step after another to introduce bills that go against everything he has stood for: the <a href="https://www.nepalitimes.com/banner/culture-revolution/">Guthi Bill</a>, <a href="https://www.nepalitimes.com/banner/long-shadows/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Media Council Bill</a>, <a href="https://www.nepalitimes.com/editorial/nepals-human-rights-act/">Human Rights</a> Bill, among others. But after <a href="https://www.nepalitimes.com/editorial/own-worst-enemy/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">strong protests</a> on the streets and media, the government was forced to withdraw those bills.However, the controversial <a href="https://www.nepalitimes.com/here-now/spooking-nepalis-by-snooping-on-them/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Special Services Bill</a> will allow investigation agencies to eavesdrop on citizens and tap phones without court order. This not only goes against the fundamental right of every citizen for privacy, but such surveillance is prone to misuse.Read also:<a href="https://www.nepalitimes.com/here-now/zip-up/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Zip up</a>, Rameshwar Bohora<a href="https://www.nepalitimes.com/editorial/a-creeping-coup/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">A creeping coup</a>, EditorialThe other Information Technology Bill tries to curtail the citizens’ right to free expression by legislating stiff penalties for posts on Facebook or YouTube, and has been voted by a parliamentary committee. (<a href="https://www.nepalitimes.com/editorial/rule-by-law/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">See editorial</a>)  This bill is against the Constitution, and the way it has been voted on without taking into account amendments and changes suggested by stakeholders, is undemocratic as well.Both bills are delayed because the winter session itself has had to be pushed back by the deadlock over the choice of the new speaker to replace <a href="https://www.nepalitimes.com/banner/the-rise-and-fall-of-comrade-mahara/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Krishna Bahadur Mahara</a>. Parliament is a casualty in the <a href="https://www.nepalitimes.com/here-now/which-way-nepali-politics-in-2020/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">power struggle at the top of the ruling NCP</a> between Oli and his co-chair Pushpa Kamal Dahal, which is also affecting ratification of the <a href="https://www.nepalitimes.com/editorial/a-millennium-challenge/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Millennium Challenge Corporation</a> (MCC) project and other legislation.Oli’s attempts to ram though the laws shows that he is increasingly on the defensive, and wants to strengthen his grip on power. Asks one NCP Central Committee member: “Oli is being criticised more from within his own party more than from the opposition. So who is he trying to defend himself from?”

No freedom after expression

<figure><img src="https://superdesk-pro-c.s3.amazonaws.com/sd-nepalitimes/20221109101116/636b6ffd9c7e80680e060053jpeg.jpg" alt="" width="1000" height="1058"/><figcaption>Illustration: SUBHAS RAI</figcaption></figure>Nepal’s ruling unified Marxist-Leninist-Maoists have in the past year <a href="https://www.nepalitimes.com/banner/gagging-the-press-in-installments/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">incrementally constricted freedom of expression</a>, thinking no one will notice if they do it bit by bit.It <a href="https://www.nepalitimes.com/here-now/zip-up/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">has not gone unnoticed</a>. There is an uproar in social media and <a href="https://www.nepalitimes.com/latest/ifj-asks-nepal-to-revoke-media-gag/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">journalists have been speaking out</a>, but the government is using its numerical might in Parliament <a href="https://www.nepalitimes.com/banner/suppressed/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">to pass bills that blatantly flout</a> constitutional guarantees of basic individual freedoms.Read also: <a href="https://www.nepalitimes.com/?p=38663&amp;preview_nonce=77341ce79f&amp;preview=true" target="_blank" rel="noopener">No freedom after expression</a>, Kiran nepal2019 saw <a href="https://www.nepalitimes.com/opinion/creeping-control-over-the-press-in-nepal/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">censorship in installments</a>, and it started with a revision of <a href="https://www.nepalitimes.com/banner/strongman-rule/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">the Penal Code</a> that criminalised ridicule, satire, <a href="https://www.nepalitimes.com/from-the-nepali-press/press-freedom-must-be-defended-by-its-maximum-application/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">photoshopped images of politicians</a>, and even banned reporters publishing personal information of public figures. <a href="https://www.nepalitimes.com/latest/nepal-undermining-free-expression-hrw/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">The Media Council Bill</a>, a brainchild of Information Minister Gokul Banskota, sought to criminalise free speech on vague grounds.The latest attack is the Information Technology Bill which was passed by a Parliament committee this week, and is sure to be voted through when the winter session begins. It has hefty fines and jail terms for any content deemed ‘offensive or demeaning’ -- infringement of Clause 83 is a fine of Rs1 million and/or jail term of up to five years, and any content that violates Clause 94 (ridicule and hate speech) carries a fine of Rs1.5 million and/or 5 years in jail. Strangely, the punishment for social media infractions are in fact much heavier than physical assault, libel or defamation in the legacy media.Read also:<a href="https://www.nepalitimes.com/here-now/spooking-nepalis-by-snooping-on-them/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Spooking Nepalis by snooping on them</a>, Mukesh Pokhrel<a href="https://www.nepalitimes.com/editorial/censuring-censorship/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Censuring censorship</a>, Editorial'It is wrong for this bill that is supposed to regulate Information Technology to be misused to address issues for which there are existing laws,' wrote Kantipur in a strong editorial on Wednesday. 'Since the definition of defamation is so broad, this law will have a dampening effect on free expression, and foster self-censorship.'Indeed, what constitutes objectionable content is intentionally so broadly defined that anyone can be hauled in for any online post at any time. There is even a new directive against satire painted in the backs of trucks. The government has not even waited for this Act to be passed to arbitrarily put people behind bars for Facebook posts, <a href="https://www.nepalitimes.com/opinion/nepal-has-press-freedom-but-no-freedom-after-press/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">YouTube satire</a>, or beat up someone for posting a video that painted an unflattering image of the Tourism Minister.For formality’s sake, the bill was put to debate in the parliamentary committee, and the opposition Nepali Congress did push several amendments, none of which were accepted by NCP lawmakers. Now, the arithmetic of the full House means that the IT Act is sure to become law. Fundamental rights of citizens, guaranteed by the 2015 Constitution, are going to be severely curtailed.Read also:<a href="https://www.nepalitimes.com/opinion/creeping-control-over-the-press-in-nepal/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Creeping control over the press in Nepal</a>, Ajay Pradhan<a href="https://www.nepalitimes.com/banner/gagging-the-press-in-installments/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Gagging the press in installments</a>, Sewa Bhattarai“It is the government that will decide what you can say and what you cannot,” says NC MP Gagan Thapa in an online video. “Just because a government has a majority, it does not mean it can violate the basic principle of the Constitution.”But Thapa is a voice in the wilderness, none of the other opposition politicians have bothered to speak up in defence of freedom of expression even when the attack is so systematic. Under the new law, internet service providers will be liable for content of users, and global platforms like Facebook, Twitter and TikTok would be required to register in Nepal.Other provisions of the IT bill would <a href="https://www.nepalitimes.com/here-now/spooking-nepalis-by-snooping-on-them/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">allow the state to snoop on anyone’s data</a>, tap phones and intercept emails. Politicians want their privacy protected from media, but do not respect the individual’s right to privacy.The ruling NCP seems to have decided that it can pressure the press by withholding advertising, making media moguls beholden to it for business, and tightening regulation.For example, the NCP-affiliated Press Organisation surprised many by being inaugurated this week at the prime minister’s residence, where journalists took oaths to follow the party line on socialism. At least they did not swear by communism.Read also: <a href="https://www.nepalitimes.com/here-now/zip-up/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Zip up</a>, Rameshwar Bohora<a href="https://www.nepalitimes.com/editorial/a-creeping-coup/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">A creeping coup</a>, EditorialThe state sees the free-wheeling nature of the Internet and its impact on public opinion as more of a threat. Hence the attempt to restrict critical content on social media <a href="https://www.nepalitimes.com/editorial/the-message-is-the-medium/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">as its reach grows</a>. More than 90% of Nepalis now <a href="https://www.nepalitimes.com/editorial/new-news/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">have mobile phones</a>, half of them are smart phones, and this proportion is growing. The Internet has become synonymous with Facebook as almost everyone with a smartphone has an account on that platform.Why is Nepal’s kakistocracy in such a tearing hurry to pass this bill when much more urgent legislation on federalism and other laws languish in Parliament? Journalists and citizens may not be arrested right away, but clearly the intention is detention. This is not rule of law, but a draconian rule by law.<h2>10 years ago this week</h2>Ten years ago Nepali Times marked the end of a year and a decade of war, and tried to be hopeful about the future. As feared, the 2010-2019 was a lost decade. Excerpt from a publisher’s note on the front page of issue<a href="http://archive.nepalitimes.com/issue/483" target="_blank" rel="noopener"> #483 </a>of 1-6 January 2010:Back in 2000, we had no idea just how dramatic the decade ahead was going to be. The first (nearly) 500 issues of this newspaper coincided with a period of great transformation. Guerrillas went from the bullet to the ballot and emerged as the single largest party, and the most inclusive assembly in our country's history was elected. Nepal became a model for non-violent political change: a case study that proved revolutions don't necessarily have to be bloody. Imagine how much more progress we would have made if there had been a stable political climate and a more accountable government committed to basic needs. Let's hope that in the next decade we will live in less interesting times.<img src="https://superdesk-pro-c.s3.amazonaws.com/sd-nepalitimes/20221109101116/636b6fff9c7e80680e060054jpeg.jpg" alt="" width="332" height="500">That our coverage will be less obsessed with the political quarrel of the day, and celebrate the ability of individual Nepalis to overcome adversity. We hope that by 2020 we will have made up for lost time.

Rule by law

<figure><img src="https://superdesk-pro-c.s3.amazonaws.com/sd-nepalitimes/2022110813110/636a45739c7e80680e04d386jpeg.jpg" alt="" width="4032" height="3024"/><figcaption>Protests against the proposed Guthi Bill in Lalitpur on Thursday. Photos: Sanu Raj Maharjan</figcaption></figure>Foreigners are often puzzled why Nepalis never take to the streets despite the chronic failure of the government to provide basic services. It is true, Nepalis are a tolerant lot. But this week, something snapped.Citizens have been gathering on the streets, braving water cannons and tear gas to oppose a bill in Parliament that would dismantle the centuries-old tradition of guthi community trusts to manage religious sites and festivals.Coming soon after the Media Council Bill, and detention by police of a YouTuber for posting a satirical review of a bad movie, the slew of recent street protests reflects growing disillusionment with and defiance of a powerful Nepal Communist Party (NCP) government that is perceived to be corrupt to the core and uncaring of the public interest.Read also: <a href="https://www.nepalitimes.com/banner/scripted-arrest/">Scripted arrest</a>, Masta KC<a href="https://www.nepalitimes.com/opinion/nepal-has-press-freedom-but-no-freedom-after-press/">Nepal has press freedom, but no freedom after press</a>, Shashank Shrsethahttps://youtu.be/uf2W5I3r9hoIn the past months, citizens of Chapagaon, Baudhha and Thali have spontaneously risen up to blockade roads, demanding that they be repaired. Journalists took to the streets last month to protest provisions in the draft Media Council Bill that could lay hefty fines on journalists found to be violating officials guidelines.But the most organised protests so far have been against the Guthi Bill, and clips of Police attacking demonstrators with batons, kicks and water cannons have gone viral on the very media that the government seems intent on controlling.Read also: <a href="https://www.nepalitimes.com/banner/suppressed/">Suppressed</a>, Om Astha Rai<a href="https://www.nepalitimes.com/banner/gagging-the-press-in-installments/">Gagging the press in installments,</a> Sewa Bhattarai<figure><img src="https://superdesk-pro-c.s3.amazonaws.com/sd-nepalitimes/2022110813110/636a45779c7e80680e04d387jpeg.jpg" alt="" width="1333" height="2000"><figcaption> </figcaption></figure>There are more than 2,000 guthi all over Nepal, and they collectively own nearly 150,000 hectares of prime real estate. The management of such entities is traditionally passed down from one generation to the next.The Guthi Bill would create a central government authority to manage community trusts all over the country. It would have more executive powers than Guthi Sansthan, the current body that oversees trusts. Guthi members and heritage conservationists say the government is working with the land mafia to take over Guthi property.“The government doesn’t understand how the guthi system works,” said activist Alok Tuladhar, “it just want to usurp the land. The government’s intention is total control, not just the guthi but also free speech and other rights enshrined in the Constitution.”The protests that began on 9 June have snowballed with more groups and activists joining in. In Parliament, the opposition Nepali Congress halted proceedings on Tuesday, calling for the bill to be scrapped.<img src="https://superdesk-pro-c.s3.amazonaws.com/sd-nepalitimes/2022110813110/636a457a9c7e80680e04d388jpeg.jpg" alt="" width="2129" height="1419">Minister for Land Management and Cooperatives Padma Kumari Aryal defended the Bill in Parliament, saying it was intended to bring uniformity to guthi administration in order to protect heritage and culture. She says many trusts do not keep proper accounts and are not answerable to anyone.Minister for Home Affairs Ram Bahadur Thapa said the government accepted moral responsibility for the street violence, and promised to investigate. But protests escalated Thursday with a large demonstration in Patan’s Mangal Bazar (pictured above).Read also: <a href="https://www.nepalitimes.com/banner/long-shadows/">Long Shadows</a>, Sewa Bhattarai<a href="https://www.nepalitimes.com/opinion/creeping-control-over-the-press-in-nepal/">Creeping control over the press in Nepal</a>, Ajay Pradhan

Culture Revolution

<figure><img src="https://superdesk-pro-c.s3.amazonaws.com/sd-nepalitimes/2022110813110/636a45439c7e80680e04d377jpeg.jpg" alt="" width="2052" height="1368"/><figcaption>Protesters walked from Pulchowk to Maitighar on Wednesday to silently demonstrate against the arrest of Pranesh Gautam, who was jailed this week for reviewing the movie Bir Bikram 2. Photos: MONIKA DEUPALA</figcaption></figure>The Kathmandu District Court has ordered that YouTuber Pranesh Gautam, who was arrested for his review of the movie Bir Bikram 2, be kept in custody for one more day. Gautam was arrested on 7 June and is charged with violating the Electronics Transaction Act.Gautam uploaded his satirical review of the movie on YouTube channel Meme Nepal. He compared the film to the Hindi movie Sholay, criticised the acting of the film’s stars, and called the direction weak.Read also: <a href="https://www.nepalitimes.com/opinion/nepal-has-press-freedom-but-no-freedom-after-press/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Nepal has press, but no freedom after press</a>, Shashank ShresthaThe director-producer of the movie, Milan Chams, filed a police complaint against Gautam two weeks ago, claiming the video negatively impacted the movie's sales and the director and actors' reputation. The police arrested Gautam, and filed a case under the Electronic Transaction Act.Cyber law expert and advocate Baburam Aryal calls this an extreme misuse of power. "This shows that the police administration is not adhering to the law," he says. "This is an example of how the administration can misuse power. Such an action by the police is a travesty in a democratic society. Such acts decrease the creative potential of a society and push the country towards dictatorship."Read also:<a style="background-color: #ffffff; font-size: 15px; letter-spacing: 0.01em;" href="https://www.nepalitimes.com/here-now/zip-up/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Zip up</a>, Rameshwor Bohora<a style="background-color: #ffffff; font-size: 15px; letter-spacing: 0.01em;" href="https://www.nepalitimes.com/banner/long-shadows/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Long shadows</a>, Sewa Bhattarai<img src="https://superdesk-pro-c.s3.amazonaws.com/sd-nepalitimes/2022110813110/636a45469c7e80680e04d378jpeg.jpg" alt="" width="2106" height="1404"><img src="https://superdesk-pro-c.s3.amazonaws.com/sd-nepalitimes/2022110813110/636a454a9c7e80680e04d379jpeg.jpg" alt="" width="2129" height="1419"><img src="https://superdesk-pro-c.s3.amazonaws.com/sd-nepalitimes/2022110813110/636a454d9c7e80680e04d37ajpeg.jpg" alt="" width="2052" height="1368"><img src="https://superdesk-pro-c.s3.amazonaws.com/sd-nepalitimes/2022110813110/636a45519c7e80680e04d37bjpeg.jpg" alt="" width="2106" height="1404">Nepali Congress MP Gagan Thapa called it wrong to file a case against a comedy video. "Absurdist humour is taken as normal all over the world," he tweeted. "It is unfortunate that Pranesh Gautam was charged with cyber crime for a satire video, and it is against freedom of speech. Criticism is the main pillar of democracy, let us protect it."Nepal's Constitution guarantees freedom of expression as a fundamental right. Other laws address misuse of speech through slander and libel, so there should be no reason to resort to using the Electronic Transaction Act.Read also:<a style="background-color: #ffffff; font-size: 15px; letter-spacing: 0.01em;" href="https://www.nepalitimes.com/banner/gagging-the-press-in-installments/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Gagging the press in installments</a>, Sewa Bhattarai<a style="background-color: #ffffff; font-size: 15px; letter-spacing: 0.01em;" href="https://www.nepalitimes.com/opinion/creeping-control-over-the-press-in-nepal/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Creeping control over the press in Nepal</a>, Ajay PradhanCitizens are free to react to subjects of public interest and to comment on other people's creative outputs. Being arrested on the basis of such comments is nothing more than a way for the police to intimidate critics. Advocate Aryal claims that since a movie is a 'product,' it is not considered slander to review it, since only negative comments made on a personal level can be libellous.However, the Producers' Association accuses Gautam of undermining the movie industry. A group of people from the industry, including producer Akash Adhikari, actor Bhuwan KC and media-person Naresh Bhattarai, visited the Metropolitan Crime Department in Teku to support Chams.Read also:<a style="background-color: #ffffff; font-size: 15px; letter-spacing: 0.01em;" href="https://www.nepalitimes.com/banner/suppressed/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Suppressed</a>, Om Astha Rai<a style="background-color: #ffffff; font-size: 15px; letter-spacing: 0.01em;" href="https://www.nepalitimes.com/banner/strongman-rule/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Strongman rule</a>, Om Astha RaiChams had promised to withdraw the case if Meme Nepal is shut down, but is now demanding Rs10 million to withdraw the case.Bir Bikram 2 was released on 17 May, and Gautam reviewed the movie five days later. After complaints from the movie producers, Meme Nepal removed the video from YouTube.

Scripted arrest

<figure><img src="https://superdesk-pro-c.s3.amazonaws.com/sd-nepalitimes/2022110813110/636a45319c7e80680e04d372jpeg.jpg" alt="" width="1276" height="732"/><figcaption>Pranesh Gautam of meme Nepal</figcaption></figure>Earlier this month, vlogger Pranesh Gautam uploaded a tongue-in-cheek review of the movie, Bir Bikram 2 which matched his stand-up sensibilities. It was loud, brash, irreverent.On the basis a complaint from the film’s producer director Milan Chams, police arrested Gautam on Friday and he has been languishing in a jail cell for the past four days. His crime: trying to be funny on the Internet.Read also:<a style="background-color: #ffffff; font-size: 15px; letter-spacing: 0.01em;" href="https://www.nepalitimes.com/banner/scripted-arrest/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Scripted arrest</a>, Masta KCThe video review followed the regular trope of any satire on YouTube – Nostalgia critic, Kanan Gill, Angry Joe show – nitpicky, brazen and with absurdist humour, all hallmarks of success for a video review. Pranesh Gautam must have hoped that the review would get him his publishing channel Meme Nepal, the elusive virality content creators seek. It got him in jail.Gautam forgot one critical part of the equation: You can no longer speak your mind in Nepal. Maybe you can, as long as you do not offend or disagree with anyone. What are the limits of satire? No one knows.Read also: <a style="background-color: #ffffff; font-size: 15px; letter-spacing: 0.01em;" href="https://www.nepalitimes.com/banner/gagging-the-press-in-installments/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Gagging the press in installments</a>, Sewa Bhattarai<a style="background-color: #ffffff; font-size: 15px; letter-spacing: 0.01em;" href="https://www.nepalitimes.com/opinion/creeping-control-over-the-press-in-nepal/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Creeping control over the press in Nepal</a>, Ajay PradhanWhat Milan Chams is doing is emblematic of how little our society understands right to free expression. He is trying to undermine a right that is fair and constitutional just because he did not like the messaging.Free speech is a two way street, it protects both the ‘good’ and the ‘bad’. To ensure the right things are said we must also provide the stage for the bad. Subjective censorship is a slippery slope. Once we begin silencing opinion just because we do not agree with it, there is no end to it.Read also:<a style="background-color: #ffffff; font-size: 15px; letter-spacing: 0.01em;" href="https://www.nepalitimes.com/here-now/zip-up/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Zip up</a>, Rameshwor Bohora<a style="background-color: #ffffff; font-size: 15px; letter-spacing: 0.01em;" href="https://www.nepalitimes.com/banner/long-shadows/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Long shadows</a>, Sewa BhattaraiObviously, hate speech, obscenity, incitement to violence, and the whole legal list of things not protected by free speech do exist. But at its core, we all have the freedom to express ourselves, no matter how poorly or eloquently. It is a freedom that sees the best and worst of it exercised on the Internet, and there has been an increasingly worrying trend to limit speech under this administration.The proposed IT Bill, amendments to the Penal Code and the new Media Council Bill all show a creeping and steady infringement on freedom of expression in Nepal. There is an attempt to stifle dissent and alternative opinion with jail time and fines under the guise of discipline and ‘sensitivity’.A report by Freedom Forum found 104 incidents of violations in 2018 alone with multiple journalists and editors being booked under the Electronic Transactions Act – a law created for monitoring online banking transactions. Currently, the IT bill allows the government to sentence the accused to 5 years in jail and up to Rs150,000 fine for ‘improper’ social media posts. What constitutes ‘improper’ is so broad, anyone can be hauled in.Read also: <a style="background-color: #ffffff; font-size: 15px; letter-spacing: 0.01em;" href="https://www.nepalitimes.com/banner/suppressed/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Suppressed</a>, Om Astha Rai<a style="background-color: #ffffff; font-size: 15px; letter-spacing: 0.01em;" href="https://www.nepalitimes.com/banner/strongman-rule/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Strongman rule</a>, Om Astha RaiPranesh Gautam’s review was booked as a ‘cybercrime’ and under the Electronic Transactions Act. While there is a laundry list of grievances, Milan Cham’s team has publicly stated that it seeks to “teach a lesson to such miscreants”. It even demanded that the Meme Nepal brand be scrapped before any negotiation could occur.This was hardly a cybercrime, more likely it was a Orwellian Thought Crime. And how about Chams’ supporters openly abusing Meme Nepal and Gautam by saying ‘M**ji harulai thikka paryo’. Should these Internet posts not be subjected to the same scrutiny?No one sets out to make a bad movie. As a content-maker myself, I get it. To find a little known, part-time comedian ripping your movie to shreds when it is so early in its release can be maddening and heartbreaking. But what is also true is that artists must have thick skins, not everyone will like what we make, and audiences can be pretty ruthless.If Gautam’s review in Meme Nepal did pan Bir Bikram 2 and it threatened Nepal’s entire film industry as has been claimed, it just exposes just how weak must be an industry that an absurdist review can wreck it.How we react to Gautam’s unlawful incarceration matters because of the precedent it sets. To allow this case to be ruled in favour of Chams’ team would basically send a message that in Nepal you can express your views as long as someone does not disagree.The review was not perfect, but that is not reason to silence the reviewer. The explicit language and the over-the-top display was not my cup of tea, but was Pranesh Gatuam entitled to make it? Absolutely.The Human Rights Measurement Initiative recently released a report showing declining Freedom of Opinion and Expression in Nepal (3.9 out of 10) and called it ‘very concerning’. Pranesh was arrested the very same day.Shashank Shrestha is a content creator and co-founder of Kathaharu and KookyDunk.

Nepal has press freedom, but no freedom after press

<figure><img src="https://superdesk-pro-c.s3.amazonaws.com/sd-nepalitimes/20221108121140/636a40789c7e80680e04a622jpeg.jpg" alt="" width="1500" height="1125"/><figcaption>Photo: MIN RATNA BAJRACHARYA</figcaption></figure>The International Federation of Journalists (IFJ) and its affiliate Nepal Press Union (NPU) have strongly condemned new provisions to the Media Council Act that will further tighten the <a href="https://www.nepalitimes.com/opinion/creeping-control-over-the-press-in-nepal/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">state's creeping control over the media</a>. Nepal’s Ministry of Communication and Information Technology registered the Bill to Amend and Integrate the Media Council Act that would have far-reaching implications for the national media.Media protection groups have called on the government to consult media stakeholders and revise the changes. The new provisions risk turning the free press into a mouthpiece of the government, and has been made with an aim to <a href="https://www.nepalitimes.com/from-the-nepali-press/press-freedom-must-be-defended-by-its-maximum-application/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">censor the media</a>, not promote ethical journalism, they said.The move is seen as the latest attempt to <a href="https://www.nepalitimes.com/banner/gagging-the-press-in-installments/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">gag the press in installments</a>, and under it media houses can be fined up to Rs1 million for publishing content in violation of media code of ethics. Under section 18, any media outlet, publishers, editors and/or journalists can be penalised up to Rs1 million for publishing content found to tarnish the dignity or reputation of an individual. The bill also allows for any individual to file a complaint against journalists even if they are not personally affected by the content.If passed, the bill proposes a structure for keeping the Media Council under the government's purview and restrict the freedom of expression and jeopardise independence of watchdog media in Nepal.‘The harsh provisions proposed in this bill will have wide reaching implications for press freedom in Nepal. The media cannot operate in an environment of fear and intimidation, which would be created by many of these proposed changes,’ said the IFJ in its press release. "We call on the Nepali government to conduct consultations with media stakeholders and revise the provisions immediately.”The new provision is latest in a slew of recent moves by the Nepal Communist Party <a href="https://www.nepalitimes.com/here-now/zip-up/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">aimed at muzzling the media</a> and comes close on the heels of Reporters Without Borders' annual Press Freedom Index which saw <a href="https://www.nepalitimes.com/banner/long-shadows/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Nepal drop six spots to 106</a> this year.First there was the <a href="https://www.nepalitimes.com/banner/strongman-rule/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Civil and Penal Codes</a> that criminalised photography and cartoons that ridiculed politicians. Then the <a href="https://www.nepalitimes.com/banner/suppressed/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Privacy Bill</a> put official documents out of journalists' reach. Journalists have been arrested for violating the codes and citizens have been threatened for their social media posts condemning the government's attempt to restrict freedom of expression.

freedom-of-expression