CPN-UML lawmakers questioned proposed Nepali ambassador to India Dr. Nischal Nath Pandey about his plans for addressing key issues in Nepal-India relations at a Parliamentary Hearing Committee meeting in Singha Durbar, Kathmandu, on Monday, October 12, 2026. Their questions focused on the Nepal-India border dispute, the future of the Eminent Persons Group (EPG) report and the growing trade deficit between the two countries.
Questions on border, EPG report and trade
The lawmakers asked Pandey what concrete steps he would take to resolve the border dispute. The question put the issue directly to the nominee as he outlined his proposed approach to serving as Nepal’s ambassador in India. The hearing summary did not specify which border areas were raised or describe a particular proposal from Pandey.
The EPG report was another central subject of the exchange. Lawmakers sought clarity on what would happen to the report, making its future one of the issues they wanted the proposed ambassador to address. The summary of the hearing does not provide further details about the report’s contents, its status or Pandey’s response to the questions.
UML lawmakers also asked about the growing trade deficit. Their questions sought a concrete plan on how the issue could be tackled in the context of Nepal’s relationship with India. No figures for the deficit or specific trade measures discussed at the meeting were included in the available account.
Taken together, the questions covered three distinct areas of bilateral engagement: a longstanding border dispute, the EPG report and the imbalance in trade. The lawmakers’ focus was on what Pandey would do about these matters if appointed, rather than only on the general responsibilities attached to the ambassadorial post.
Parliamentary hearing in Kathmandu
The committee meeting was held at Singha Durbar, the government complex in Kathmandu, on Monday. Pandey appeared before the Parliamentary Hearing Committee as the proposed ambassador to India. The hearing gave lawmakers an opportunity to question him about his plans for the post, with UML members raising the border, report and trade issues.
The available details of the meeting do not set out Pandey’s answers or indicate what position he took on any of the three subjects. They also do not report a committee decision following the questioning. The account therefore establishes the concerns raised by lawmakers, but does not provide enough information to assess what commitments, if any, Pandey made in response.
The questions placed attention on the specific issues lawmakers want the proposed envoy to address in relation to India. In particular, they asked for a clear approach to resolving the border dispute, an account of the EPG report’s future and a plan for dealing with the growing trade deficit. These were the central matters raised during Monday’s hearing in Singha Durbar.
