Nepal's Press Freedom Under Siege: The Shrestha Case and the Pathak Arrest

Industry ExpressWednesday, Jun 18, 2025 4:25 am ET
2min read
In the heart of Kathmandu, a storm is brewing that threatens to engulf Nepal's fragile press freedom. The Kathmandu District Court's interim order on June 10, directing online news portals Nepal Khabar and Bizmandu to delete articles allegedly defaming Santosh Narayan Shrestha, chairperson of the Securities Board of Nepal (SEBON), has sent shockwaves through the media landscape. The reports, which alleged that Shrestha demanded commissions in exchange for approving infrastructure projects, have been met with swift legal action, raising serious questions about the state of investigative journalism in Nepal.

The court's decision, which stated that the articles had caused "irreparable damage" to Shrestha's reputation, has been widely condemned by media rights groups. The Federation of Nepalese Journalists (FNJ) and the Nepal Press Union (NPU) have both expressed their objections, emphasizing that the order contradicts both Nepal's constitutional provisions and international principles on media freedom. The FNJ, in particular, has warned that unless the order is reconsidered, the judiciary could face further legal challenges.

The same day, the Kathmandu District Court issued an arrest warrant for senior journalist Dil Bhusan Pathak under Section 47 of the Electronic Transactions Act. The warrant followed a complaint from Nepal Police’s Cyber Bureau regarding a video published on his YouTube , in which Pathak reported that Jaiveer Deuba, the son of Nepal’s Congress President and Foreign Minister, had purchased the Hilton Hotel in Kathmandu, allegedly leveraging political influence for personal gain.

The arrest warrant, which was challenged by the Patan High Court on June 16, has been criticized as a blatant overreach. Pathak, who was not home at the time of the attempted arrest, has questioned the decision to bypass the press council and prosecute under criminal law. The NPU has described the warrant as "highly objectionable," urging the concerned authorities to immediately withdraw it.

The International Federation of Journalists (IFJ) has also weighed in, calling the Kathmandu District Court's actions a stark contradiction of democratic principles and the constitutionally enshrined right to press freedom in Nepal. The IFJ has called on the authorities to drop all cases against Nepal Khabar, Bizmandu, and Dil Bhusan Pathak, and to ensure that the right to independent and critical reporting is safeguarded.

The Shrestha case and the Pathak arrest are not isolated incidents. They are part of a broader trend of judicial and governmental interference with press freedom in Nepal. In recent years, the country has seen a series of legal actions against journalists, including the sentencing of Nabin Dhungana and Yubraj Kandel to three months in prison for contempt of court. These actions have raised concerns about the potential for censorship and the suppression of investigative journalism.

The Shrestha case, in particular, highlights the dangers of using legal mechanisms to suppress critical reporting. The allegations against Shrestha, which include demands for commissions in exchange for approving infrastructure projects, are serious and warrant thorough investigation. However, the use of legal action to silence those who report on these allegations is a dangerous precedent. It suggests that powerful individuals and institutions are willing to use the courts to protect their reputations, even at the expense of press freedom.

The Pathak arrest, meanwhile, raises questions about the use of criminal law to prosecute journalists. The Electronic Transactions Act, under which Pathak was charged, is often used to stifle free speech and press freedom. The fact that the warrant was issued despite a short-term interim order from the Patan High Court directing authorities not to arrest Pathak further complicates the legal landscape for journalists.

The Shrestha case and the Pathak arrest are a wake-up call for Nepal. They highlight the need for greater judicial restraint and respect for press freedom. The courts must show greater restraint in such situations, and the government must ensure that journalists are able to report freely and without fear of legal repercussions. The future of press freedom in Nepal depends on it.

The Shrestha case and the Pathak arrest are a stark reminder of the challenges facing investigative journalism in Nepal. They highlight the need for greater protection of press freedom and for the courts to show greater restraint in such situations. The future of investigative journalism in Nepal depends on it.