Nepal Election Monitoring| Issue 8

With the approaching election and heightened campaigning, upholding the election code of conduct has become increasingly tricky!
________________With only six days remaining until Nepal’s House of Representatives election on March 5, political campaigning has intensified dramatically, with parties and candidates employing increasingly aggressive and digitally sophisticated strategies. In this crucial moment, the responsibility of the Election Commission of Nepal (ECN) to ensure strict enforcement of the Election Code of Conduct has become more urgent than ever. According to the Commission, 254 complaints were received at the central level through email, in-person registration, and media sources. Clarifications were sought in 88 cases, and responses were received in 57 cases involving four political parties, 33 candidates, and 51 government or educational institutions, employees, and individuals. After review, the Commission imposed fines of NPR 25,000 each on three candidates or parties and formally warned two candidates. It also directed the Ministry of Forest and Environment and the Ministry of Education, Science, and Technology to initiate departmental action against a government office chief and a school teacher for engaging in political activities and improper social media conduct in violation of the Code. While these actions show that monitoring mechanisms are active, the scale and repetition of violations raise legitimate concerns about whether current penalties are strong enough to deter misconduct.At the district level, 1,076 complaints were registered, with 99 percent reportedly resolved. Lumbini Province recorded the highest number of complaints, while Sudurpaschim recorded the lowest. Notably, 91 percent of complaints were submitted through telephone, SMS, and other informal channels, with only 9 percent filed in writing. Common violations included oversized banners and flags, misuse of social media, noise pollution through campaign events, involvement of teachers and civil servants in campaigning, display of party flags in public spaces and vehicles, and the use of unauthorized vehicles. Meanwhile, under the Election Information Communication and Coordination Center, the Information Integrity Promotion Unit identified 612 instances of harmful or toxic information. Of these, 545 cases were referred to Nepal Police under the Electronic Transactions Act, 121 to the Central Code Monitoring Committee under the Election Code of Conduct, 74 to the Press Council, and one to the Advertisement Board. So far, only a portion of these referrals has resulted in action. A study by the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) further revealed that 54 percent of harmful election-related content involved AI-generated deepfake images and videos, underscoring the growing threat of technologically advanced manipulation in Nepal’s democratic process. In addition to enforcement actions, the Commission has recommended stricter measures during the campaign silence period, including a ban on alcohol sales seven days prior to voting, restrictions on vehicle movement on polling day, and temporary closure of international border points 72 hours before voting. A Joint Election Operation Center has also been activated to coordinate security among relevant agencies. While these logistical and security arrangements are important, the integrity of the election depends equally on transparent, consistent, and proportionate enforcement of the Code of Conduct.

Serious concerns remain regarding transparency and due process: authorities have not disclosed the specific content flagged, the individuals implicated, or the legal reasoning behind their decisions, and there is no accessible redress mechanism for those affected. Delayed action and minimal sanctions undermine deterrence at this critical stage of the electoral cycle, allowing violations to persist unchecked.

With polling day imminent, the Election Commission of Nepal must act decisively. Timely enforcement, proportionate sanctions, transparent regulation of political advertising, and clear public disclosure of decisions are not optional; they are essential to safeguard both democratic integrity and the digital rights of Nepali voters. The credibility of this election will not be measured solely by orderly polling, but by whether the campaign environment itself is fair, accountable, and free from manipulation. Repeat offenders and those exploiting digital platforms to mislead voters must face swift and visible consequences. Political parties and candidates must also recognize that victories built on misinformation, intimidation, or manipulation erode democracy itself. This is a defining moment for Nepal’s electoral process: firm, consistent, and courageous enforcement today will determine public trust tomorrow. The Election Code of Conduct must be applied without fear, without favor, and without delay; anything less risks undermining the very foundation of Nepal’s democracy.