Nepal’s decision to block more than two dozen unregistered social media and OTT platforms—including Facebook, YouTube, Instagram, WhatsApp and X—has sparked a heated debate over digital sovereignty, accountability and freedom of expression. At the heart of the matter lies a fundamental principle: no company, however large, is above the laws of the country in which it operates. Nepal has every right to require global tech companies to comply with its regulations, appoint local representatives and operate within its legal framework. This is not a question of revenue or censorship; it is about accountability, transparency and respect for national sovereignty. The arrogance of tech giants—expecting their users to first accept their terms and conditions while disregarding Nepal’s legal requirements—is indefensible. In 2023, Nepal issued a directive requiring social media platforms to register and establish a local presence. Despite repeated notices and follow-ups, major platforms failed to comply. Frustrated by this non-compliance, the Ministry of Communication and Information Technology (MoCIT) issued a public notice on August 28—three days after a Supreme Court ruling reaffirmed the requirement—giving platforms a fresh seven-day window to register or face a ban. With the deadline expiring at midnight on Wednesday, September 3, the MoCIT said it had no choice but to enforce the directive.
Two-day Huawei Digital Nepal Conclave 2022
The SC’s directive rightly underscores the need for regulation in an era where online platforms can enable fraud, misinformation and harmful content. But regulation must not become a pretext for silencing critics or curbing civic space. A sovereign state demonstrates its strength not just by compelling compliance but by upholding the freedoms enshrined in its constitution, even when they are inconvenient. Even as the government asserts its sovereign authority, its handling of this issue exposes worrying blind spots. Blocking platforms overnight without adequate alternatives, communication or preparation risks undermining citizens’ constitutionally guaranteed right to free expression and access to information. Millions of Nepalis depend on these platforms for business, education, communication and democratic discourse. The Federation of Nepali Journalists is right to warn that abrupt shutdowns amount to depriving citizens of vital freedoms.
The government’s approach also risks backfiring. Driving users to VPNs and unregulated platforms could create cybersecurity vulnerabilities, inflate costs for service providers and deter much-needed digital investment. Worse, it may isolate Nepal from the global digital ecosystem without offering credible domestic alternatives. Both sides must therefore rethink their positions. Tech companies must shed their arrogance and respect Nepal’s legitimate authority by registering and setting up local mechanisms of accountability. The government, meanwhile, must enforce its rules with prudence, transparency and vision—ensuring that regulation strengthens, not weakens, democratic freedoms. Sovereignty in the digital age cannot be reduced to a battle of wills between governments and tech corporations. It must mean building a regulatory framework that protects citizens, encourages innovation and preserves the fundamental freedoms that are the bedrock of democracy. Nepal has asserted its authority—but unless it exercises it wisely, it risks weakening the very sovereignty it seeks to defend.
