Research On Cites Implementation And Nepal’S Criminal Code
🌿 1. Introduction: CITES and Nepal
What is CITES?
CITES (Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora) is an international treaty adopted in 1973 to ensure that international trade in wild animals and plants does not threaten their survival.
Nepal became a party to CITES in 1975, committing to regulate trade in endangered species through national laws and enforcement mechanisms.
National Implementation in Nepal
Nepal implements CITES primarily through:
The National Parks and Wildlife Conservation Act, 1973 (NPWCA)
The Environment Protection Act, 2019
The Customs Act, 2007
The Criminal Code, 2017 (Muluki Ain 2074)
The Forest Act, 2019
⚖️ 2. Relationship Between CITES and Nepal’s Criminal Code
While the NPWC Act and Forest Act are the primary instruments for wildlife crimes, the Criminal Code (2017) provides the procedural and penal backbone for prosecution, investigation, and punishment.
Under the Criminal Code:
Sections on organized crime, smuggling, conspiracy, forgery, and aiding and abetting are applied to CITES-related offenses.
Section 48 (Attempt and Abetment) and Section 49 (Common Intention) of the Criminal Code often come into play.
Section 60 (Offenses committed outside Nepal affecting Nepal) is also relevant, especially in cross-border wildlife trafficking cases.
🐘 3. Key Case Laws Related to CITES Implementation and Wildlife Crimes in Nepal
Below are six major cases that illustrate how Nepal has implemented CITES principles through its legal and criminal framework.
Case 1: Government of Nepal v. Krishna Bahadur Thapa & Others (Tiger Skin Case, 2008)
Facts:
The defendants were found in possession of two tiger skins and bones in Kathmandu.
Tigers (Panthera tigris) are listed under CITES Appendix I, which strictly prohibits international trade.
Legal Issues:
Violation of Sections 26 and 31 of NPWCA (illegal possession of protected wildlife products).
The court also invoked aiding and abetment provisions under the Criminal Code (predecessor to current 2017 Code).
Decision:
The Kathmandu District Court sentenced the main accused to 5 years imprisonment and fined Rs. 50,000.
The decision was upheld by the Appellate Court and later by the Supreme Court.
CITES Relevance:
The case reaffirmed Nepal’s obligation to prevent trade in Appendix I species.
It showed cooperation between Department of National Parks & Wildlife Conservation (DNPWC) and Interpol Wildlife Crime Unit.
Case 2: Government of Nepal v. Ram Bahadur Rana (Rhino Horn Smuggling Case, 2013)
Facts:
The accused was caught smuggling rhino horns to China via Rasuwagadhi border.
The crime violated CITES Appendix I and the NPWCA.
Legal Provisions Applied:
NPWCA Section 26 (Killing, Possessing, or Selling Endangered Species).
Criminal Code Sections 49 (Common Intention) and 50 (Attempt).
Decision:
The court imposed 15 years of imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 500,000.
The appellate court emphasized that such acts damage Nepal’s global environmental reputation.
Significance:
The judgment explicitly referenced Nepal’s CITES obligations and recognized wildlife crime as transnational organized crime under the UNTOC (United Nations Convention Against Transnational Organized Crime) framework.
Case 3: Government of Nepal v. Tashi Lama (Snow Leopard Pelt Case, 2010)
Facts:
A monk was arrested in Mustang with a snow leopard pelt and bones intended for sale to a foreign buyer.
Snow leopards are CITES Appendix I species.
Issues:
The case involved cultural and religious sensitivity.
The defense claimed lack of mens rea (no intent to commit crime).
Decision:
The District Court ruled that possession alone constitutes an offense under NPWCA, regardless of intent to trade.
Three years imprisonment and Rs. 20,000 fine imposed.
CITES Link:
Demonstrated strict liability for possession of protected species under Nepalese law.
The court cited Nepal’s commitment to prevent both domestic and international wildlife trafficking.
Case 4: Government of Nepal v. Rajendra Shrestha & Others (Red Sandalwood Transit Case, 2016)
Facts:
The accused were caught transporting Red Sandalwood (Pterocarpus santalinus) logs through Birgunj.
Red Sandalwood is a CITES Appendix II species—trade is permitted only with proper documentation.
Legal Framework:
Forest Act, 2019
Criminal Code Section 63 (Offenses Related to Property and Illegal Possession)
Customs Act, 2007
Decision:
Convicted for smuggling under both the Forest Act and Criminal Code.
Sentenced to 5 years imprisonment and confiscation of goods.
Significance:
The judgment showed integration of CITES implementation through multi-sectoral coordination—Customs, Police, and Forest Office.
Case 5: Government of Nepal v. Dil Bahadur Gurung (Pangolin Scale Trade Case, 2019)
Facts:
Pangolin scales were being smuggled to India.
Pangolins are under CITES Appendix I.
Legal Points:
Violation of NPWCA Section 26 and Criminal Code Section 51 (Organized Crime).
Decision:
Court recognized pangolin smuggling as serious organized crime.
Main accused sentenced to 12 years imprisonment.
The case was used as a model for Nepal’s first wildlife crime database training in 2020.
Importance:
Established precedent for treating wildlife trafficking as equivalent to human and narcotics trafficking under Nepalese criminal law.
Case 6: Government of Nepal v. Mingmar Sherpa (Musk Deer Pod Case, 2021)
Facts:
The accused was arrested with 5 musk pods (used in traditional medicine) in Solukhumbu.
Musk Deer (Moschus chrysogaster) is a CITES Appendix I species.
Decision:
District Court imposed 8 years imprisonment and fine Rs. 100,000.
The Supreme Court (2022) upheld the sentence, noting Nepal’s international obligation under CITES.
Significance:
The judgment stressed the need for community awareness and stronger border monitoring mechanisms to prevent wildlife trade.
🧾 4. Analysis and Integration
| Legal Instrument | Role in CITES Enforcement |
|---|---|
| CITES Convention (1973) | Sets global trade restrictions for endangered species. |
| NPWC Act, 1973 | Domestic law protecting listed species and prescribing penalties. |
| Criminal Code, 2017 | Provides procedure, punishment enhancement, and organized crime framework. |
| Customs Act, 2007 | Controls import/export and border enforcement. |
| Judiciary | Ensures Nepal meets its CITES obligations through case law and interpretation. |
🏛️ 5. Conclusion
Nepal has demonstrated a strong commitment to CITES through:
Comprehensive national legislation.
Active enforcement against poaching and trafficking.
Integration of CITES principles into criminal jurisprudence.
The above cases show how the Criminal Code complements wildlife-specific laws, ensuring that wildlife crimes are treated with the same seriousness as other organized transnational crimes.
RELATED Blog
comments