Supreme Court scraps government ban on private media receiving official ads

Nepal's Supreme Court has overturned a government decision that exclusively allocated official advertisements and public notices to state-owned media. The ruling, issued by a division bench on Tuesday, quashes the April 1, 2026, directive that barred private media from publishing or broadcasting government advertisements. This decision came after advocate Ananta Raj Luitel filed a writ petition on behalf of the Media Society Nepal, arguing that private media outlets also possess the right to receive such advertisements.

Justice Sharanga Subedi and Nripa Dhwoj Niroula prepared the full text of the ruling, which is expected to be made public within two days. Luitel, the authorized petitioner, stated that the Supreme Court's verdict has restored justice for all media organizations, correcting what he termed an unconstitutional government decision. He expressed hope that this would prompt the government to reconsider similar actions in the future.

During hearings on July 6 and 7, lawyers representing the Media Society Nepal argued that the government's move was an attempt to financially weaken the private media sector. They contended that the Advertisement Act and Regulations support the proportional distribution of advertisements as a right for media outlets. The lawyers asserted that the government cannot arbitrarily exclude certain media organizations and that the executive branch lacks the authority to override the Advertisement Board's functions. Furthermore, they argued that the Office of the Prime Minister and Council of Ministers should not interfere with the advertising authority of provincial and local governments.

The government's defense, presented by Attorney General Narayan Datta Kandel and Deputy Attorney General Uddhav Prasad Pudasaini, claimed the decision aimed to prevent financial leakages and corruption. Government lawyers indicated that a policy to empower private media would be introduced soon. The Media Society Nepal, however, maintained that the government's action was unconstitutional and detrimental to the media landscape.

“

Although it took time, the Supreme Court has corrected the government's wrong decision. This should make the government think repeatedly before taking similar unconstitutional actions in the future.