Nepal has lifted a sweeping ban on major social networks, just two days after it was imposed, backpedalling amind protests by youth over the restrictions that turned deadly. The decision was reversed after nationwide protests, with at least 19 people killed and more than 100 injured, local media reported.
The government had blocked 26 platforms, including Facebook, Instagram, YouTube and X, after foreign tech companies refused to follow a new requirement to register operations in Nepal and appoint a local point of contact. The swift about-face illustrates both the political risk of suddenly imposed internet controls and the central role of social media in the lives of a young, digitally connected population.
A Spacious Block and A Whipping Reversal
The ban followed an administrative order requiring global platforms to register locally within seven days and to accept legal notices through an in-country representative. Most players, however, had failed to comply within the deadline and telecom operators were warned they would have to block access. Some services, including TikTok and Viber, owned by the Rakuten Group, were reportedly unaffected because they had already registered.
Prime Minister KP Sharma Oli cast the unrest as a problem partly stoked by “infiltration by certain elements” and said the government was not against intentions expressed by the country’s new generation. The message was an attempt at a pragmatic retreat, not a policy reversal on the scrum around platform accountability, a shoot-to-the-moon Hail Mary meant to lower the temperature without ditching the regulatory push.
Public pressure and rights fears
In Kathmandu and provincial centers, some of them elderly men and women and student activists, the protesters called for the restoration of access to social media, saying it was necessary for communications, news and livelihoods. Human rights organizations cautioned that blanket restrictions violated basic freedoms and would only escalate tensions and not defuse them.
The United Nation’s rights office urged the authorities to protect freedom of expression and peaceful assembly. Amnesty International raised similar concerns, calling for proportionate and legal responses to public demonstrations. Freedom House has repeatedly classified Nepal’s internet environment as “Partly Free,” and experts warned that shutdown-style policies could further damage the country’s openness scores.
A high-wager gamble on platform regulation
Nepal’s requirement for registration is part of the wider trend to bring global platforms under national jurisdiction – from legal notice acceptance to expedited cooperation on takedowns and even potential taxation. A social media bill is pending that would go even further, punishing content that threatens national sovereignty or the public interest with prison and huge fines — a standard the International Federation of Journalists has denounced as too vague and vulnerable to abuse.
Constitutional experts in Kathmandu say that Nepal’s constitution guarantees freedom of expression, but gives the authorities the right to impose restrictions on various grounds, including national security. The problem is proportionality: Rules have to be clear, justified and subject to judicial scrutiny. In general, the right to block Sudden protean use of nationwide blocks _ especially when used as compliance lever _ rarely passes that test, rights lawyers say, and can silence legitimate speech along with harmful content.
What will be different now for tech companies and users
The reversal immediately restores access, but it does not resolve the impasse at the center of the dispute. Unregistered companies still face pressure to appoint local representatives and explain how they will process government requests. The Nepal Telecommunications Authority, which oversees providers, said it would revise technical directives that do not specifically call for blanket blocks, but would still allow for legal requests and transparency reporting.
For many users, particularly small businesses, creators and civil society groups, the incident was a reminder of just how precarious digital access can be. The internet economy in Nepal is very mobile-first; subscription-level indications from the regulator suggest the country has more or less saturated its base in terms of connectivity, although usage is heavily driven by shared devices or multiple SIMs. When platforms are shut down, sales pipelines, community organizing and diaspora links are disrupted within hours.
A regional warning sign
It is in South Asia, that information controls become really hot during unrest. The KeepItOn coalition at Access Now has documented multiple bans on platforms and shutdowns across the region, and independent observers have found that such measures rarely extinguish demonstrations but can drive public sentiment further into opposition. Nepal’s swift reversal is in keeping with that pattern: digital shutdowns are blunt instruments with weighty social and economic costs.
“Now the government has a tricky balancing act to perform: how to get the cooperation of global platforms when the request is lawful, like terrorism or child exploitation,” she added, “but not so when the information is harmful and objectionable without violating fundamental rights.” Positive measures could include transparent notice-and-appeal processes, independent oversight of takedown demands and regular reports on transparency from both the state and platforms. Without those guardrails, Nepal may be headed to repeat flashpoints — and another expensive collision between regulation and digital life.
