तिमिहरु सबैले हालै हाम्रा बिनम्र साथी सुशील नेपाललाई उहाँको पदबाट बर्खास्त गर्नु भएको खबर सुन्दा दुख लागेको छ | सुशीललाइ अमेरिकी प्रहरीबाट नै बाइज्जत रिहा गरिएको थियो भने तिमिहरुले कुन आधारमा उहाँलाइ पदबाट निस्कासन गरेको हो खुलस्त संग नेपाल लगाएत अमेरिकामा बस्ने नेपाली समुदाएको अगाडी राख्नु तिमिहरुको कर्तब्य हो | यस केस सामाजिक संजालमा भाइरल भएको कारण सबैको उत्सुकताको बिषय बनेको छ |

तिमिहरुको प्रोफाइल हेर्दा धेरै जस्तो पुरुषहरु नै छौ | आफु पुरुष भएर अर्को पुरुषले महिलालाइ पत्त्यौने कोशिश गर्यो भन्दैमा दोषी ठहर्याउनु नामर्द नै भयो | तिमिहरु मध्य कसैले कोहि राम्री महिला देख्दा यौन गर्न पाए हुन्थ्यो भन्ने कुरा मन मा कहिले पनि आएन? त्येस्तो महिलासंग कहिल्येइ जिस्केनौ? केहि होलाकी भनेर केहि कोशिश गरेनौ? त्यस्तो कुरा मनमा आएको भए तिमि पनि दोषी भएनौ? कहिल्येइ त्येस्तो कुरा मनमा न-आएको भए तिमि नामर्द रहेछौ | आएर पनि थाहा पाईकन सुशीललाइ दोषी ठहर गरेको भए झन् ठुलो नामर्द साबित हुनु पुग्यौ |

छिट्टो भन्दा छिट्टो सुशीललाइ बा-इज्जत आफ्नो पद मा पुनरस्थापना गरियोस |

Do you have a brain? I am not married but why bring family here? Do you want me to bring your mother and sister into this?

All she had to do was leave the hotel room if she was not comfortable. Hotels have lobbies where one can sit down and relax till she could check in.

How dumb do you have to be to stay in that room even if you were uncomfortable then a month later try to defame a person because she could did not like his approach.

Yes your family is family ani nicky karki ko chahi no family. How ey it is foor you say hai. Leave the room at night and go where? Whose responsibility is it to cater her when she was invited. Go watch that video again.

Listen nayapidi we are not talking about our families here. We are talking about someone who came out in public so we are free to make public opinions.

I think it was 5 in the morning. If she was uncomfortable with his advances all she had to do was leave. I think anyone with any common sense or fear for safety would have done that. He did not force her to stay in the room. She chose to stay in the room.

So what you are saying is, it was ok for sushil to invite her to sleep next to him with cushion in bwtween. It was ok for him ask a 20 yr old for a drink. And you cll me dumb?? Talk about irony.

As long as he simply made the offer there is nothing wrong with it.
As far as the drink is concerned, there does not seem to be consistent statement about it. The guy said in the interview that he never offered her a drink. Who do you believe? She said he offered it to her in public so if she can bring some witness to corroborate her story then I would say it was bad but then we do not know if he knew she was not 21 when he first offered it to her.

Think about it this way to get a perspective. If a gay guy offered you a ride to hotel and said you can relax on the other side of the bed separated by a pillow. Wouldn't you simply say no thanks and take the couch? As long as the guy does not do anything to you, what is the issue? Ok maybe he's attracted to you but as long as he does not do anything - there doesn't seem to be anything wrong with it.

In one hand we want to say we support women but we want to use a different measuring stick to judge people when women are involved. That is the old ancient mindset that still want to believe that women are weaker sex and they need your protection whether there is any danger or not. Sushil was not a danger.

Man shut up, you just don't make sense. Why are you bringing gay in this equation? Will you be ok if Sushil guy ask your daughter/sister/cousin whoever to sleep next to him with cushion in between.

Also, was it necessary for him to lie about picking Nicky up? Why did Sushil ask Nicky not to mention about him picky her up rather asked her to mention that Uber picked her up? Do you have a legit answer for this? Forget about everything.

"Shut up"? wow really? Is that the best comeback you have? Someone recommended in offline conversation to post my opinions in sajha to have a matured discussion but it's unfortunate that you have to resort to ordering people to shut up because you don't have the logic or reasoning to have a mature argument.

The gay analogy was just to give you a perspective of how your perception changes depending on which sex you are dealing with. It shows that you do not believe that women and men are equal since you have different measuring stick for men and women.

I did not grow up with that kind of sexist mentality so for me it is pretty common knowledge that different sex are attracted to each other and one may at any time make a proposal to show his or her attraction. That does not make them guilty of any heinous crime for which they should be shunned by society.

You don't really have to think about your daughter or sister to get mad about this. Even you may have been attracted to someone who was someone else's daughter or sister. Should they get mad at you for being attracted to their daughter or sister?

I think there’s a fundamental level of calibration that needs to be done for majority of people from Nepal and India.

Just yesterday, a court in India ruled that faint protest is not enough to declare it a rape. Clearly “NO” didn’t mean a “no.”
Similarly many think what the NASEA guy did is ok as long as he didn’t force himself.

What you need to understand is that a guy in a position of representing an organization or a professional setting cannot make such offer. Period.
The guy wasn’t meeting her as a friend (even if he was it could be considered a harassment). She was not comfortable with the advancement, why ask such questions?

Now I haven’t read his interviews or gone through the entirety of the story. I am only debating this in the context that the OP wrote. Asking those kinds of question is not normal, it’s a harassment. If you don’t understand this concept, you might get in trouble.

"What you need to understand is that a guy in a position of representing an organization or a professional setting cannot make such offer. Period. "

I don't think that is written in the NASEA charter or anywhere that an official from the organization cannot suggest someone to lie down in bed to take a rest separated by a pillow if they needed to rest.

He simply suggested her to rest there but she opted to take the couch. I don't think he violated any rule of law or any other law besides possibly sharia law.

As in my analogy if a gay person offers you to lie in bed separated by pillow if you are tired, then would that constitute harassment?

@Balbhadra bro,
NASeA ko charter ma raicha hai bro le khojeko kuro: NASeA Bylaws, Article V , para 1 , sub para

Samjhauna khojnu mero kartabya. Nasamjhine bhaye mero kehi bahnnu chhaina

If the guy is innocent, he is basically doomed. The defamation has tolled its peak. If the girl is actually a victim, she has definitely not got justice.
I have not watched the video, neither have I watched the interview. It seems to me that this all could have been avoided if the organization that the guy was affiliated with , had proper plan and transparency. If an organization brings an artist to perform, they should have proper plan in place like atleast having the room reserved, confirmation should be provided to all parties etc.

Despite , being at that position, that guy was not supposed to approach the girl the way he did ( assuming all that surfaced here is true). But the girl always had choice to deny every thing though. For me , it is not harassment. Everyone here has their own opinion, but for me, I do not think it can be categorized as sexual abuse , just a wrong way of approaching specially being at that position of organization. What I mean is , it would be totally fine if he had asked the girl to sleep with him after meeting her at bar. However, the girl had always an way out , there was no pressure for her to sleep with him .
So I don't think she is abused.
The guy is already kicked out of the organization, also came to know he had to change even his facebook name, and lots of threats came to him and his family which I don't think was necessary. As there are laws to punish anyone if they are found to be guilty. The girl got her voice heard by the public , so nowonwards, other can think carefully before making trip to unknown places without proper plan.

Instead of cursing and blaming each other , I would prefer to see civilized conversations, logical arguments and hear opinion from different perspective from variety of people among us .
And thanks to Kiddo and Balbhandra for the decent arguments.

हैन हौ पासा हरु ! मैले अझ बुझ्न नै सकिन कुरा !

यहाँ को दोसी या को न दोसी छ भन्ने कुरा भन्दा पहिला के त्यो निक्की नानि ले भनेको सबै कुरा सत प्रतीसत सहि छ भन्ने आधार के छ हौ ! एउटा केटि ले एस्तो एस्तो भयो भन्ने बित्तिकै, के उसको बोलि लाइ राम बाणी ठान्ने अनि सत्य त्यी हो भन्ने judgement मा पुग्ने कि, प्रमाण हरु को आधार मा judgement मा पुग्ने ?

अब यहाँ कुरा आउछ हाम्रो साथि हरु बाट अनि आएको पनि छ, यदि तेरो आमा बहिनि दिदि लाइ कसैले निक्की ले भने जस्तै कुनै अर्को सुशील ले गरेको भए के त भन्ने कुरा पनि आएका छन् ! मैले सुरु देखि नै भन्दै आएको, यदि सुशील ले त्यस्तो नै गरेको प्रमाण छ भने, त्यसको चाक् मा कोर्रा हान्नु पर्छ, तर हान्नु भन्दा पहिला प्रमाण पनि हुनु पर्छ कि उसले आरोप लगाए अनुसार को कुरा गरेको हो भनेर !
मेरो बहिनि आमा या छोरी को कुरा नै भएन, यहाँ प्रमाण को कुरा हुन्छ हौ !मेरो छोरी यहाँ बहिनि यहाँ आमा हो अनि उनि हरुले भनेको सबै सत्य हो भनेर मा त्यसमा पछि लाग्दिन ! तपाई हरु लाग्नु हुन्छ भने पनि ठिकै छ, त्यो तपाई हरु को बिचार हो ! जो सुकै होस्, चाहे मेरो आमा अनि छोरी नै किन न होस्, पहिला प्रमाण चाहिन्छ !
फेरी निक्की नानि को कुरा सुन्दा उनि ५ बजे बिहान त्यो ठाउँ मा ओर्लेको थिइन् प्लेन बाट, पक्का रूम पुग्दा ५.३० त बजेको थियो होला ! उनि लाइ त्यस्तो खतरा महसुस हुने बित्तिकै त्यो रूम छोड्न सक्थिन ! त्यस्तै बियर को प्रस्ताब राखेको कुरा मा त दुइ कुरा देखियो, सुसिल ले हैन भन्यो, निक्की ले हो भनिन ! अब कसको कुरा पत्याउने अनि बिस्वास गर्ने !

के निक्की केटि भएको ले उसले भनेको चै सत्य मान्ने ! अनि सुसिल केटा भएको ले उसले भनेको असत्य मान्ने ! यदि हामि यसरि नै महिला अनि पुरुष लाइ हेर्ने दृस्टीकोण बनौछौ भने त यो त झन् पो महिला माथि असमानता को सोच ले हेरेको भएन त !

Kiddo,

yo samjhine nasamjhine kura hoina. aafno tarka opinion pesh garne ho. kasaiko opinion sanga chitta bujhena bhane logical way ma argue garne ho. Aba aru kunai tarka chaina bhane thikai chha ni.

nepalilaure, it seems like they have a clause of good behavior but it does not exactly fit the scenario in this case.

"A member may be suspended or expelled from membership for disorderly conduct in an Association event, malfeasance in office, conviction in a court of law for felony, misdemeanor, and other acts inimical to the image of the Association, but such power to suspend or expel shall be vested in the Board, which shall hear all the allegations about the alleged errant member.
A member subject to suspension or expulsion may present his case before the Board, may not be represented by counsel, and has the right to confront his accusers."

I doubt that he was allowed to confront his accuser. Therefore their action is not according to their own bylaws.

Panima paadeko and tito satya, thank you for your thoughtful analysis. Generally I find people speaking from emotions without thinking about the big picture. Generally the world tends to favor the woman in most cases like this because women have been victimized for a very long time and it does make sense to favor women when the situation calls for it such as men using excessive force or violence - neither of which are present in this scenario. At the same time women want to be treated equally as men so we need to look at it without wearing the sexist hat.

NASeA Executive board unlawfully expelled Sushil Nepal from NASeA membership

Dear members of NASeA Community,
This decision of the executive board is invalid, and it does not apply to the elected officer. NASeA bylaws says that only the General Assembly has the authority to remove an elected officer, NOT THE EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE. This is clearly mentioned in the article IV number 17.
http://naseaonline.info/wp-content/uploads/2010/09/NASeA-Bylaws-9-5-2010.pdf

According to the NASeA bylaws article IV number 17 "A Board Officer may be removed for other reasons by a two-thirds vote of the General Body meeting." Article V referencing general member, which was cited for forceful removal of Sushil Nepal. Article V does not apply to an elected official.

Sushil Nepal is an elected official of NASeA so only the general assembly has the authority to decide to remove him. Unless the General Assembly removes him, Sushil Nepal is still valid Executive Vice President of NASeA.

Yes, a general member can be removed by the executive committee by simple majority. This is mentioned in article V. But Sushil Nepal is also elected officer and the bylaws says such officers can only be removed by General assembly.

Majority of former presidents also sent a note to the President Madhav Dhakal ji clarifying the bylaws, but he never shared with the other board members.

The invalid motion to expel Sushil Nepal from his membership in NASeA executive board meeting was against the bylaws. This invalid motion was tabled, and VOTED without bringing in discussion among the board members regardless of protest.

Six members of the executive committee did not take part in this 'Vote' and protested against this invalid motion as it did not follow the Bylaws procedure. They are Krishna Devkota, Dr. Suman Silwal, Pammi Parajuli, Manish Shakya, Mohan Bista, Dr. Arun Shrestha, and Sushil Nepal himself. On the top that, Dr. Thakur Karki was not present in the meeting since he is in Nepal.

Therefore, accordingly to bylaws, Sushil Nepal is still valid elected executive vice-president of NASeA until and unless General Assembly removes him.

In September 3rd 2017 NASeA board was elected to serve the NASeA community with best of our abilities and took the oath to upheld the NASeA bylaws, but not to mutilate and disgrace it.

Thank you


Krishna Raj Devkota
Executive Member, NASeA

Just taking side of a girl, assuming girl always speaks truth, and proving a guy guilty without any proof, that is the probelm of the society.

"Guys are alwasy guilty until proven innocent and girls are always innocent until proven guilty". Just don't blindly support girl only depending on her sexual orientation, go after facts. If he has been proved innocent, there is no point on taking action against him.

And bringing the context of the family is purely illogical here. "What if this was your mom or daughter"? Really!!!

Get above this mentality and try to look at the facts, not the statement of a girl.

With this mentality, no guy will ever get justice.

I don't think it was wise judgement for Nicky to come out in public accusing someone of sexual harassment based on verbal comments. Like lot of people have argued she always had a choice to say NO (which she did) , and if she was uncomfortable rather leave the room . I know.. it was late but being an artist its about the self respect and making better judgement at the right moment. If it were me I would counter sue her for making false accusations, hampering social/personal life.. that way everyone gets Justice. AMEN !!

Lot of people are saying since Sushil was an elected official he should not have asked her to sleep next to her, i guess for you folks it would have been okay if he was non elected person doing that right which just makes you guys hypocrites.
let me clear my position, as i have said there is no crime therefore this is a non issue. i don't know either of these people but that chick needs to move on and learn from this experience.

@Chaurey , lots of actions can be ethically correct based on the place and context. If he was representing the organization, then he had duty to fulfill for that organization . So he should be dealing like he is representing one. Anyone who has different opinion are not hypocrites.
When you get naked in bathroom , it is fine ,but if you get naked at your workplace, that is wrong. What I mean is , his position certainly does impact on determining his act as ethical or not. A soldier killing an enemy in war zone can be okay , but killing someone in the middle of street is not . Context matters.

Nobody is guilty in the eyes of laws until proven so. It sounds like the law enforcement came, inquired and left giving a clean cheat to Sushil. This girl had the choice of sitting in the lobby as many here have argued but she chose not to and that brings the question of her own intentions. She just defamed an innocent guy. I just hope that this Sushil guy does not let it go without a million dollar defamation lawsuit and she will get her ass whipped big time. It is just a ridiculous and preposterous to demean, defame and ruin somebody utilizing a social media with a little star power solely based on imaginatory allegations.