KATHMANDU: Opposition parties have raised serious concerns over Prime Minister Balendra Shah’s recent statement in Parliament that “Nepal has also encroached on Indian territory,” questioning both his intentions and the stance of the ruling Rastriya Swatantra Party (RSP).
The controversy stems from remarks made by the Prime Minister during a House of Representatives meeting on May 31. Ten days later, opposition lawmakers say Shah has neither clarified nor retracted his statement, nor has he appeared before Parliament to apologize.
Leaders from major opposition parties, including the CPN-UML, Nepali Congress, Nepali Communist Party and the Rastriya Prajatantra Party (RPP), have accused the government of failing to address a matter they consider directly linked to Nepal’s sovereignty and national integrity.
Speaking during discussions with RSP Chair Rabi Lamichhane, Nepali Congress parliamentary party leader Bhishmaraj Angdembe said the Prime Minister’s silence had deeply hurt public sentiment.
“Ten days have passed, yet the Prime Minister has neither corrected his statement nor apologized. This is not a minor issue. It concerns nationalism and the dignity of the country,” Angdembe said. He warned that continued refusal to clarify the remarks could raise questions about the government’s intentions.
CPN-UML Chief Whip Ain Mahar echoed similar concerns, saying the Prime Minister’s statement and subsequent developments had created grounds for suspicion.
“Where exactly has Nepal encroached on Indian territory? How can a Prime Minister make such a statement in Parliament and then refuse to apologize?” Mahar asked. He also pointed to the Prime Minister’s comments being widely reported in Indian media, subsequent visits to India by senior government leaders, and the lack of strong diplomatic engagement on border disputes as factors fueling concerns among opposition parties.
Mahar said the ruling party had yet to issue an official position on the matter and criticized the Ministry of Foreign Affairs’ response as insufficient.
“Nationality, sovereignty and territorial integrity are not issues on which we can compromise,” he said.
Nepali Communist Party Chief Whip Yubaraj Dulal also rejected the Prime Minister’s remarks, arguing that Nepal has not encroached on any neighboring country’s territory.
“Border disputes involving Lipulekh, Limpiyadhura and Kalapani remain unresolved. Instead of working to resolve those issues, the Prime Minister has claimed that Nepal has encroached on Indian land. The public will not accept such a statement,” Dulal said.
He urged the Prime Minister to apologize directly to the Nepali people, stressing that opposition parties would not compromise on issues related to national sovereignty.
RPP lawmaker Khushbu Oli similarly accused the government of appearing overly flexible toward India and demanded a clear explanation from the Prime Minister.
“Our forefathers made immense sacrifices to protect Nepal’s sovereignty. If the government has become soft on this issue, it should say so openly. The Prime Minister’s remarks are extremely serious and cannot be dismissed as a trivial matter,” she said.
Opposition leaders also questioned why the Prime Minister had not appeared before Parliament to address the controversy. They suggested that if Shah was unable to attend, he should at least provide a written statement to be read out by a minister.
Angdembe said a written clarification from the Prime Minister, delivered through the Foreign Minister or another cabinet member, would be acceptable to opposition parties.
RSP rejects allegations
Responding to opposition criticism, RSP Chair Rabi Lamichhane urged political parties not to mislead the public by questioning the ruling party’s commitment to nationalism.
Lamichhane said the RSP remains firmly committed to national unity, sovereignty and territorial integrity, and rejected suggestions that the party had adopted a soft stance toward India.
“Let us not create confusion among the Nepali people. We are fully committed to national unity and sovereignty. Border disputes between Nepal and India should be resolved through dialogue and diplomatic channels,” Lamichhane said.
He acknowledged that the Prime Minister’s statement had generated controversy but appealed to opposition parties not to continue obstructing parliamentary proceedings over the issue.
Lamichhane informed opposition leaders that Foreign Minister Khanal would respond to the matter on behalf of the government, arguing that the Constitution allows a designated representative to answer on the Prime Minister’s behalf.
However, opposition parties unanimously rejected the proposal, insisting that only a direct clarification from the Prime Minister, either in person or through a written statement, would be acceptable.
Despite renewed discussions, no agreement was reached. Opposition leaders maintained their demand for a formal apology or clarification from Prime Minister Shah, while the ruling party continued to push for the Foreign Minister’s response as a way forward.
Comment