COMMUNIST PARTY OF NEPAL (MAOIST) CENTRAL COMMITTEE WHITE PAPER ON NATIONAL BETRAYAL राष्ट्रघातको श्व े तपत्र A Constitutional, Diplomatic, and Geopolitical Indictment of Prime Minister Balendra Shah’s Parliamentary Admission of May 31, 2026 Classification: Official Party Communiqué ( िवज्ञिप्त ) Document ID: CPN(M)/CC/2083/031 Issued By: Department of Publicity, Central Committee Date: 31 Jestha 2083 BS / May 31, 2026 AD “A government that admits to stealing its neighbor’s land from the floor of its own Parliament does not deserve the trust of its people. It deserves their judgement.” CPN (Maoist) Central Committee Document ID: CPN(M)/CC/2083/031 1. I. THE INCIDENT: WHAT THE PRIME MINISTER SAID On the afternoon of May 31, 2026, during the budget session of the House of Representatives, Prime Minister Balendra Shah, summoned to an unscheduled question-and-answer session after weeks of defying mandated parliamentary appearances, uttered words that no head of the Nepali state has ever spoken: “After becoming Prime Minister, I came to know that not only has India encroached on Nepal’s land, but Nepal has also encroached on India’s land in multiple places. Now both countries should study the facts and sit together as friends and resolve the issue.” With this single, reckless, historically illiterate sentence, delivered without briefing, without evidence, and without the consent of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, the Prime Minister of Nepal surrendered the sovereign legal position that this nation has held, defended, and constitutionally enshrined for over two centuries. The Communist Party of Nepal (Maoist) condemns this statement in the most absolute and unequivocal terms. It is not a diplomatic misstep. It is not a slip of the tongue. It is, on its face, a constitutional violation, a diplomatic catastrophe, and a gift to every foreign interest that has ever sought to diminish Nepal’s territorial sovereignty. This White Paper exposes the full dimensions of the Prime Minister’s failure. 2. II. THE CONSTITUTIONAL VIOLATION 2.1 A. The Territory Is Not Negotiable The borders of Nepal are not a matter of executive opinion. They are constitutionally codified, placed beyond the reach of any Prime Minister, any Parliament, and any amendment process. On June 13, 2020 , the House of Representatives of Nepal unanimously , with all 258 members present voting in favor, passed the Constitution of Nepal (Second Amendment 2077) Bill. The National Assembly ratified it on June 18, and President Bidhya Devi Bhandari authenticated it into law. This amendment altered Sched- ule 3 of the Constitution, replacing the old national emblem with a new one bearing the updated political and administrative map of Nepal. That map formally incorporates Limpiyadhura, Lipulekh, and Kalapani , ap- proximately 370 square kilometers of high-altitude Himalayan territory, as the sovereign, indivisible territory of Nepal. Schedule 3 is not a decorative annex. It is the constitutionally binding definition of the state’s physical existence. 2.2 B. The Oath That Was Broken Under Article 80 of the Constitution, the Prime Minister took an oath of office and secrecy before the President of Nepal. That oath binds him, at its irreducible core, to the following constitutional provisions: When Prime Minister Balendra Shah declared that “Nepal has also encroached India’s land in multiple places,” he legally implied that the Nepali state is occupying territory that belongs to the sovereign Republic of India. If this admission refers to any territory covered by Schedule 3, and the Prime Minister has offered no coordi- Official Party Communiqué ( िवज्ञिप्त ) 2 CPN (Maoist) Central Committee Document ID: CPN(M)/CC/2083/031 Constitutional Provision Mandate Article 1 The Constitution is the fundamental law of Nepal. Any act inconsistent with it is void. Article 2 Sovereignty and state authority are vested in the Nepalese people. Article 4 The territory of Nepal is defined as existing at the commencement of the Constitu- tion, plus any territory acquired thereafter. Article 5(1) Safeguarding the freedom, sovereignty, territorial integrity, nationality, inde- pendence, and dignity of Nepal is the basic element of national interest. Article 5(2) Any conduct contrary to the national interest is punishable by federal law. Article 274(1) No amendment or action shall be prejudicial to sovereignty, territorial integrity, independence, or sovereignty vested in the people. Article 274(2) Article 274(1) itself shall not be amended. This is the unamendable guarantee. nates, no maps, and no evidence to suggest otherwise, it constitutes a unilateral dilution of the constitutional definition of Nepal’s territory by its own chief executive. This is not diplomacy. This is constitutional sabotage. 2.3 C. The Precedent of Parliamentary Accountability The Nepali Parliament has an established practice of holding leaders to account for reckless language. In 2019, Speaker Krishna Bahadur Mahara ordered the expunging of the word “nimchharo” (feeble) used by Prime Minister KP Sharma Oli. On May 13, 2026, Speaker Dol Prasad Aryal himself ordered the expunging of remarks by RSP lawmaker Ganesh Parajuli that violated Rule 121(D), specifically the terms “bharautelaru” (hired stooges) and an expression implying indecency. If a single derogatory word can be stricken from the parliamentary record, how does a full-blown admission of state-level territorial encroachment, an act that constitutionally amounts to treason against the territorial integrity of the nation, remain on the record? We demand the immediate and unconditional expunging of the Prime Minister’s remarks from the official par- liamentary record. 3. III. THE DIPLOMATIC CATASTROPHE 3.1 A. The Expert Consensus: Nepal Has Never Encroached The Prime Minister’s claim was not merely wrong. It was comprehensively, unanimously, and devastatingly repudiated by every living expert who has served Nepal’s diplomatic and geographic institutions. Nilambar Acharya , former Ambassador of Nepal to India, stated: The Prime Minister has “no information regarding Indian territories being encroached by Nepal.” He confirmed that while 97 percent of the border has been resolved through the Joint Technical Committee, the remaining unresolved sectors involve zero state-sponsored encroachment by Nepal. He called the remarks “immature and misleading” and demanded a correction and apology. Deep Kumar Upadhyay , former Ambassador of Nepal to India, confirmed: Official Party Communiqué ( िवज्ञिप्त ) 3 CPN (Maoist) Central Committee Document ID: CPN(M)/CC/2083/031 “India has also not raised this issue on record. So far we have conducted studies, but this issue has never surfaced. I don’t know in which context the Prime Minister spoke about such a serious matter.” There is no documentation. There is no bilateral record. There is no Indian diplomatic note. There is nothing. Buddhi Narayan Shrestha , Nepal’s preeminent geographer and border expert, dismissed the claims as factually incorrect: “Nepal has never encroached Indian territories or extended its occupation in the border area.” He explained that what the Prime Minister ignorantly called “encroachment” is merely cross-holding occu- pation , localized farming overlaps caused by natural geographic and riverine shifts. This is a technical phe- nomenon, not a sovereign act. Three of Nepal’s most authoritative voices on the border, a former ambassador, a second former ambassador, and the nation’s leading geographic expert, have independently and publicly stated that the Prime Minister’s admission has no basis in fact, no basis in record, and no basis in reality. 3.2 B. The Asymmetry of Diplomatic Accusation A comprehensive review of the archives of India’s Ministry of External Affairs (MEA) and Nepal’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MoFA) reveals a stark asymmetry: Actor Record Nepal’s MoFA Has repeatedly issued formal diplomatic notes protesting Indian state activities in disputed areas. Most recently, on May 3, 2026 , MoFA issued a formal statement reiterating that “Limpiyadhura, Lipulekh and Kalapani, situated east of the Mahakali River, have been inte- gral parts of Nepal’s territory since the Sugauli Treaty of 1816.” India’s MEA Has never issued a formal diplomatic note accusing the state, government, or military of Nepal of encroaching upon or occupying Indian territory. India’s MEA Spokesperson Rand- hir Jaiswal stated in May 2026 that Nepal’s claims are “neither justified nor based on histor- ical facts and evidence” and constitute an “untenable unilateral artificial enlargement” , but India’s complaint is about Nepal’s cartographic claims, not about any physical occupation of Indian soil by the Nepali state. Let us state this with crystalline clarity: The Republic of India itself has never accused the Government of Nepal of encroaching Indian territory. The Prime Minister of Nepal is now the sole source of this accusation against his own country. 4. IV. THE FALSE EQUIVALENCE: THE CORE INTELLECTUAL FRAUD 4.1 A. Two Entirely Different Phenomena The Prime Minister’s statement commits the most dangerous form of diplomatic fraud: false equivalence. He conflated two fundamentally different phenomena, equating the systemic, militarized occupation of Nepali land by the Indian state apparatus with the natural, localized farming overlaps of impoverished border communities. This section dismantles that fraud. Official Party Communiqué ( िवज्ञिप्त ) 4 CPN (Maoist) Central Committee Document ID: CPN(M)/CC/2083/031 Phenomenon 1: State-Sponsored Geopolitical Encroachment (India → Nepal) India’s presence in the Kalapani-Lipulekh-Limpiyadhura tri-junction is a deliberate, permanent, militarized state action. • The 1816 Treaty of Sugauli (signed December 2, 1815; ratified March 4, 1816) established the Mahakali (Kali) River as Nepal’s western boundary. Nepal claims the river originates from the Limpiyadhura springs; India claims a smaller stream near Kalapani. • India established a State Police post in Kalapani in 1956. The Indo-Tibetan Border Police (ITBP) took over and has maintained permanent paramilitary deployment since 1979. • In May 2020 , India inaugurated a strategic road to Lipulekh Pass for the Kailash Mansarovar Yatra, an 80-kilometer highway constructed by the Border Roads Organisation on territory Nepal constitutionally claims as its own. • India exercises continuous administrative governance, cartographic incorporation, and military infras- tructure development in the region. This is not ambiguity. This is occupation. This is the deliberate exercise of state power to hold, administer, and militarize another nation’s sovereign territory. Phenomenon 2: Riverine Fluidity and Cross-Holding Civilian Occupation The border anomalies in the Terai plains are an entirely different phenomenon, driven by hydrology, not geopolitics. The Susta Dispute (Gandak/Narayani River, Nawalparasi): The Treaty of Sugauli fixed the international boundary at the mid-stream of the Gandak River. But Himalayan rivers are unstable, they carry immense sed- iment loads and shift course during monsoonal flooding. After floods in 1845, 1954, 1972, 1980, and 1989, the Gandak progressively changed course. Susta, originally on the right bank (the Nepali side), was gradu- ally surrounded by Indian territory as the river shifted. Over 265 Nepali households remain on what is now geographically the Indian side of the active river channel. Under international law, the principles of accretion (gradual sediment deposit, boundary shifts with the river) and avulsion (sudden channel change, boundary stays at the original riverbed) produce competing legal claims. This is a matter for technical survey teams, not military responses. The Mechipari Dispute (Mechi River, Jhapa): Between 1818 and 1873, the Mechi River changed course, leaving segments of officially registered Nepali land physically east of the active channel. Today, some 300 families live in Dolobasti/Bhangbari, farming land that is Nepali by registration but Indian by current river geography. Missing Boundary Pillars: The 1,850-kilometer open border was historically demarcated by masonry pillars. Over two centuries, thousands have been washed away by floods, damaged, or lost in agricultural fields. The Das Gaja , the ten-yard-wide, mutually agreed-upon No-Man’s-Land, has effectively vanished in many areas, leaving farmers from both countries cultivating land across an invisible border out of sheer proximity and sur- vival. 4.2 B. The Comparative Framework Official Party Communiqué ( िवज्ञिप्त ) 5 CPN (Maoist) Central Committee Document ID: CPN(M)/CC/2083/031 Feature State-Sponsored Encroachment (India) Riverine Cross-Holding (Both Sides) Primary Actors Sovereign state apparatus: military, paramili- tary (ITBP), federal ministries Local agrarian communities, private farmers Mechanism Permanent military deployment, strategic highway construction, cartographic incorpora- tion Hydrological shifts (accretion/avulsion), ero- sion of boundary pillars Key Sectors Kalapani, Lipulekh, Limpiyadhura Susta (Gandak River), Mechipari (Mechi River) Legal Status Formal, continuous challenge to international treaty boundaries Local boundary maintenance, land registration overlap Resolution Path High-level bilateral diplomatic negotiation, or international arbitration Joint technical surveys, GPS-based pillar rein- stallation 4.3 C. Why This Equivalence Is Dangerous By labeling natural riverine shifts and localized civilian cultivation as “encroachment by Nepal,” the Prime Minister committed three acts of diplomatic self-harm: 1. He equalized state and non-state action. He falsely equated the cross-border farming of impoverished, often illiterate border villagers with the deliberate, militarized, state-sanctioned occupation of a foreign government. This is intellectually dishonest and strategically catastrophic. 2. He weaponized the parliamentary record against Nepal. India’s MEA can now cite the Nepali Prime Minister’s official admission, entered into the parliamentary record of his own nation, to argue that both nations are “equally guilty” of border violations. In a single sentence, the PM neutralized Nepal’s moral and legal asymmetry under the Sugauli Treaty. 3. He sabotaged decades of expert consensus. The Joint Technical Boundary Committee has long recognized that the Susta and Mechi issues are riverine disputes resolvable through technical mapping, not hostile land grabs. By framing these technical anomalies as “Nepali encroachment,” the head of government self-sabotaged his own state’s sovereign negotiating position. 5. V. THE PROCEDURAL DISGRACE The manner in which these statements entered the parliamentary record is itself a scandal. Rule 56 of the House of Representatives Rules of Procedure requires that questions for the Prime Minister be submitted in writing to the Speaker at least three days in advance. This rule exists precisely to prevent unvetted, uninformed, and constitutionally damaging statements from being entered into the permanent record of the state. Speaker Dol Prasad Aryal bypassed this rule entirely, claiming the three-day advance notice was not mandatory when the Prime Minister voluntarily appeared. CPN-UML Chief Whip Ain Bahadur Mahar lodged a formal objection, citing Rule 56 as the binding standard. The Speaker’s discretionary override is not merely procedural irregularity, it is the mechanism by which the most damaging diplomatic admission in Nepal’s modern parliamentary history was permitted to occur. The Rastriya Swatantra Party, which holds 182 out of 275 seats after the March 5, 2026 general election, has used Official Party Communiqué ( िवज्ञिप्त ) 6 CPN (Maoist) Central Committee Document ID: CPN(M)/CC/2083/031 its supermajority not to strengthen democratic institutions, but to bypass them. This is not governance. It is one-party rule masquerading as parliamentary democracy. 6. VI. THE CONTEXT: A PATTERN OF EXECUTIVE NEGLIGENCE The May 31 catastrophe did not occur in a vacuum. It is the culmination of a pattern of executive contempt for parliamentary oversight: • The Prime Minister repeatedly absented himself from mandated question periods , provoking sustained obstruction from the Nepali Congress and CPN-UML. • On May 27, 2026 , Shram Sanskriti Party leader Harka Raj Rai boycotted the House in protest of the PM’s absence, demanding his summoning under Rule 15(2) or his expulsion under Rule 31(1) • Chief Whip of the Nepali Congress Basana Thapa demanded empirical proof of the alleged encroach- ment: “Where exactly has Nepal encroached? We must be informed about this.” No proof was provided. None exists. A Prime Minister who does not attend Parliament, and who, when he finally appears, delivers unvetted, consti- tutionally damaging statements about his own nation’s territorial conduct, is not leading a government. He is dismantling one. 7. VII. THE STRATEGIC GIFT TO INDIA Let there be no ambiguity about what the Prime Minister has done in the arena of international relations: 1. He has conceded Nepal’s legal asymmetry. Nepal’s strongest diplomatic argument has always been one of asymmetry: India occupies Nepal’s constitutionally defined territory with military force; Nepal has done nothing of the kind. The PM has now destroyed this asymmetry with his own words. 2. He has created a citable legal precedent. In international arbitration and bilateral negotiations, the of- ficial parliamentary admissions of a head of government carry extraordinary evidentiary weight. India’s diplomatic corps now possesses a direct quote from Nepal’s own PM admitting to state-level encroachment. 3. He has signaled negotiating weakness. A government that publicly admits to encroaching on its neigh- bor’s territory before any negotiation has even begun has already conceded the moral high ground. This is not diplomacy. This is preemptive surrender. 4. He has validated India’s “both-sides” narrative. The Indian MEA has long sought to reframe the Kalapani dispute as a “bilateral difference” rather than an occupation. The PM’s statement that “both countries should sit together as friends” reinforces precisely this framing, reducing a sovereign territorial violation to a neighborly disagreement. 8. VIII. THE PARTY’S POSITION The Communist Party of Nepal (Maoist) declares: Official Party Communiqué ( िवज्ञिप्त ) 7 CPN (Maoist) Central Committee Document ID: CPN(M)/CC/2083/031 1. Nepal has never encroached on Indian territory. This is the unanimous position of Nepal’s diplomatic establishment, its geographic experts, and its historical record. No document, no bilateral minute, no Indian diplomatic note, and no evidence of any kind supports the Prime Minister’s claim. 2. The Kalapani-Lipulekh-Limpiyadhura tri-junction is sovereign Nepali territory. This position is con- stitutionally enshrined, unanimously ratified by Parliament, authenticated by the President, and is protected by the unamendable provisions of Article 274. 3. The PM’s statement is a violation of Article 5 of the Constitution. By acting contrary to the national interest, by providing diplomatic ammunition to a foreign power occupying Nepali territory, the Prime Minister has engaged in conduct that Article 5(2) explicitly declares punishable by federal law. 4. We demand the immediate expunging of the PM’s remarks from the parliamentary record. The record of the House of Representatives cannot be permitted to contain an official admission of state-level encroachment that no evidence, no expert, and no historical record supports. 5. We demand a formal clarification from the Prime Minister’s Office and the Ministry of Foreign Affairs distinguishing localized, civilian, riverine-induced cross-border farming from state-sponsored territorial en- croachment. 6. We call upon all patriotic forces , regardless of party affiliation, to hold this government accountable for its reckless, uninformed, and constitutionally dangerous handling of the nation’s most sacred trust: its sovereign territory. 9. IX. CONCLUSION: THE SOVEREIGNTY OF THE PEOPLE Nepal’s sovereignty does not reside in the Prime Minister’s office. It does not rest on his opinions, his recent discoveries, or his desire to be friendly with foreign powers. Under Article 2 of the Constitution, sovereignty is vested in the Nepalese people , and the people did not authorize this surrender. The 258 lawmakers who unanimously passed the Second Amendment in 2020 did not vote for ambiguity. They voted for clarity. They voted for sovereignty. They voted for the constitutional truth that Limpiyadhura, Lip- ulekh, and Kalapani are Nepal. The Prime Minister has placed himself against that truth. He has placed himself against the Constitution. He has placed himself against the people. History does not forgive those who surrender their nation’s territory from the floor of their own Parliament. जनताको सावर्भौमसत्ता अमर रहोस ् ! Long Live the Sovereignty of the People! रािष्ट्रय एकता र भ ू िम अखण्डता अमर रहोस ् ! Long Live National Unity and Territorial Integrity! Issued by: Central Committee Official Party Communiqué ( िवज्ञिप्त ) 8 CPN (Maoist) Central Committee Document ID: CPN(M)/CC/2083/031 Communist Party of Nepal (Maoist) नेपाल कम्युिनस्ट पाटर्ी (माओवादी) Kathmandu, Nepal Official Party Communiqué ( िवज्ञिप्त ) 9