Nepal is once again confronting an uncomfortable reality: allegations of corruption that refuse to fade, especially when large public contracts intersect with Chinese technology firms. 

The latest controversy surrounding Nepal Telecom’s proposed billing system procurement has reopened old wounds about transparency, political influence and the growing opacity of state-backed deals. 

What should have been a routine technology upgrade has instead become another symbol of institutional weakness and mistrust.

A sector already under suspicion

Corruption allegations are not new to Nepal’s public sector, but cases linked to infrastructure and technology projects involving Chinese companies have increasingly drawn public scrutiny. 

From roads and hydropower to airports and digital systems, questions have repeatedly surfaced about how contracts are awarded, who benefits from them and whether competitive processes genuinely exist.

The Nepal Telecom episode fits neatly into this troubling pattern. As a state-owned enterprise with a dominant role in the country’s communications backbone, NT occupies a sensitive position. 

Any hint of impropriety in its procurement decisions inevitably carries political and economic consequences far beyond the company itself.

A high-stakes technology upgrade

At the centre of the storm is a proposed “Convergent Real-Time Billing and Customer Support” system, an ambitious project intended to unify billing across Nepal Telecom’s diverse services. 

Mobile telephony, fibre broadband, leased lines and wireless services were all meant to be brought under a single digital architecture.

Such systems are complex, costly and deeply embedded in a telecom operator’s operations. Once installed, they lock the company into long-term relationships with vendors for upgrades, maintenance and data management. 

With an estimated price tag of NPR 5 billion, the billing system represents one of Nepal Telecom’s most expensive technology investments in recent years, making scrutiny inevitable.

AsiaInfo, Huawei and the Chinese footprint

The project has been linked to AsiaInfo Linkage Technologies (China) Inc., also known as AsiaInfoYunghang Software (Beijing) Ltd, a firm with a significant footprint in telecom billing systems across Asia. 

While the involvement of foreign expertise is not unusual, the broader context matters. Chinese firms already play a major role in Nepal’s telecom infrastructure, often backed by financing, diplomatic engagement and strategic interests.

Huawei’s presence looms particularly large. The company already manages Nepal Telecom’s core network, a critical component of the country’s communications infrastructure. 

This existing dependence has heightened concerns that new projects are being funnelled toward the same vendor, reducing competition and increasing long-term reliance on a single foreign supplier.

A tender that raised more questions than answers

When Nepal Telecom invited bids on March 18, only two Chinese companies entered the fray. From the outset, the limited competition raised eyebrows. 

The situation worsened when Huawei alone cleared the technical evaluation, triggering accusations that the tender specifications were tailored to fit one company’s strengths.

Whale Cloud, another Chinese firm with experience in telecom software, was disqualified at the technical stage. 

The absence of detailed, publicly available explanations for this rejection has fuelled suspicions of an uneven process. In public procurement, perception matters as much as procedure, and the lack of transparency has proven damaging.

Over-dependence as a structural risk

The possibility of Huawei expanding its footprint from core network management into billing systems has alarmed industry observers. Such concentration of control in the hands of a single foreign vendor raises questions about data security, pricing power and operational autonomy.

For a state-owned telecom operator, this level of dependence is not merely a technical issue. It intersects with national security, regulatory oversight and financial sustainability. Critics argue that the tender process should have been designed to diversify vendors, not deepen reliance on one.

A sudden political pause

The controversy deepened when the opening of Huawei’s financial bid, scheduled for September 24, 2025, was abruptly postponed. 

The delay followed closely on the heels of JagadishKharel’s appointment as Minister of Communications and Information Technology just two days earlier.

The official justification of “special circumstances” offered little clarity. Instead, it intensified speculation about political interference, internal disagreements and pressure from competing interests. 

In Nepal’s political landscape, such pauses are often read as signs of behind-the-scenes manoeuvring rather than procedural caution.

A pattern of opaque governance

The Nepal Telecom billing deal has become a microcosm of broader governance concerns. Repeated allegations involving Chinese-linked projects suggest systemic weaknesses in oversight mechanisms. 

Tender documents that are difficult to scrutinise, evaluation processes shielded from public view and sudden administrative decisions all contribute to an environment where suspicion thrives.

For many observers, the issue is no longer about one billing system. It is about whether Nepal’s institutions are capable of managing large, politically sensitive contracts without succumbing to external influence or internal pressure.

Public trust on eroding ground

Each new controversy chips away at public confidence. Citizens see large sums of public money committed to projects whose benefits are unclear and whose processes appear compromised. The result is growing cynicism about whether accountability exists at all in state-owned enterprises.

In the case of Nepal Telecom, the stalled billing project has left the company in limbo. Operational needs remain unmet, while reputational damage continues to mount. The longer the uncertainty persists, the more it reinforces perceptions of mismanagement.

A familiar ending in sight

Nepal has witnessed similar episodes before: ambitious projects announced with fanfare, tenders mired in controversy, delays justified by vague explanations and allegations that fade without resolution. 

The Nepal Telecom billing deal appears to be following this well-worn path.

Rather than a story of digital transformation, it has become another chapter in Nepal’s ongoing struggle with corruption allegations and opaque governance.