The author writes: "Every study undertaken by a reputable international research body of Nepal's judiciary system has pointed out that Nepal's judicial system, except the Supreme Court, is mired in corruption and is grossly inefficient and often unfair in delivering justice." Could the author please cite a single study -- "undertaken by a reputable international research body" -- making such a claim? As a reader, I'd be interested in the findings of such a study. ***** The author writes: "It is very unlikely that the judges could not have found any evidence of wrong doing in this case. Instead, it is very likely that the decision in Khadka's case was subject to the influence of the accused money and political muscle." This is a heavy charge. Is this simply an assumption or does the author have facts to prove that the case was "subject to the influence of the money and political muscle"? ****** The author writes: "The first step in fixing problems in our judiciary system would be for it to acknowledge that a major fundamental problem exists in the system." Even Supreme Court justices in Nepal have admitted publicly that there is a big corruption problem within the court system. The point is, even after such admissions, nothing happened. My observation: Nepalis don't like corruption when 'corruption' is presented as an abstract moral concept. But they appear to love or tolerate the corrupt amidst them, for the corrupt is likely to be their family members, relatives, neighbours, village folks, and other acquaintances. That is why, no matter how loudly Nepalis shout against corruption, they do nothing against the corrupt. ********* The author writes: "Our judicial system should set up a new independent council within their jurisdiction or revamp the existing one to monitor the probity of the courts and to investigate allegations of corruption and other misconduct by the judges." There exists a disciplinary commitee within the Nepal Bar Association. That committee rarely takes actions against anyone. That's because, in Nepal, a lawyer's friendships with other lawyers are more important to live and wok in Nepal than any other sense of professionalism, and no one wants to rat on their friends only to have them face disciplinary problems. Peer enforcement of professional standards is just not there in Nepal .. . yet. Who wants to make enemies within one's profession by taking actions against the bad guys? Just sharing. oohi ashu