Four Major Educational Consultancy Bodies Issue Joint Appeal Against Regulatory Coercion and Arbitrary Inquiries

EDUCAST, Four major educational consultancy umbrella organizations in Nepal—the Free Educational Consultancy Organization Nepal (FECON), Association of Australian Education Representatives in Nepal (AAERI Nepal), Nepal Educational Consultancy Service Association (NECSA), and National Educational Consultancy Association (NECA)—have issued a joint press release drawing serious attention to the prevailing challenges, legal ambiguities, and arbitrary regulatory systems within the educational consultancy sector. Emphasizing that this sector has played a pivotal role for over three decades in connecting thousands of Nepali students with international education, career development, language studies, and global opportunities, they strongly demanded that the sector should be regulated through transparent, practical, and law-bound policies rather than through fear, coercion, or arbitrary control.

Highlighting specific structural grievances, Mr. Umesh Kushwar, President of the Free Educational Consultancy Organization Nepal (FECON), expressed deep concern over the government’s prolonged ambiguity and mismanagement regarding the registration and renewal processes for consultancy firms. He stated that from 2018 to 2023, these firms were entirely barred from registering or renewing their licenses. Although the renewal process was partially opened in 2023, the process for registering new institutions has remained completely halted to date. Mr. Kushwar urged the concerned authorities to immediately issue public notices to bring unregistered firms into the legal framework and streamline the renewal process efficiently.

Similarly, Mr. Dwijaraj Sharma Siwakoti, President of AAERI Nepal, strongly emphasized that investigations, regulatory oversight, and legal actions conducted by government agencies must be fair, transparent, and legally sound. He pointed out that when investigating any individual or institution, state mechanisms must fully respect and adhere to established principles of justice, such as the Rule of Law, the Principles of Natural Justice, and international criminal law standards, specifically the doctrine of ‘Innocent Until Proven Guilty.’ He warned that arresting or detaining professionals over minor administrative or procedural errors demoralizes honest entrepreneurs, cultivates a negative perception of the sector, and prompts the brain drain of skilled professionals.

Mr. Bhupendra Sitoula, President of the National Educational Consultancy Association (NECA), clarified that the educational consultancy business is essentially a service-oriented domain with no direct financial handling or transaction involving students’ tuition fees, meaning that imposing cash deposits or guarantees on these firms lacks justification. He proposed that instead of monetary deposits, the government should prioritize professional competency and accountability by granting operational licenses exclusively to individuals who have completed standardized counseling training or certifications. Furthermore, he demanded that government bodies organize orientation and training programs to eliminate the operational confusion caused by inconsistencies between federal and provincial laws.

Mr. Santosh Khanal, President of the Nepal Educational Consultancy Service Association (NECSA), called upon the government to take concrete and student-centric protective measures. He introduced a progressive proposal suggesting that a dedicated ‘Student Insurance and Rescue Fund’ be established. He stated that this fund could be financed through the 3% education tax paid by departing students along with a specified contribution collected from consultancy firms for every student who successfully obtains a visa. According to Mr. Khanal, such a fund would prove crucial in rescuing, facilitating, and providing immediate humanitarian support to Nepali students facing unexpected hardships or emergencies abroad.

In conclusion, all four organizations invoked Section 13 of the Educational Consultancy and Language Teaching Directives, 2016, reminding authorities that the legal jurisdiction to monitor and inspect consultancy institutions rests solely with the Ministry of Education, Science, and Technology or its designated bodies. They asserted that unauthorized interventions and raids by the Ministry of Home Affairs or other non-specialized bodies violate legal provisions and generate unnecessary panic, insecurity, and negative publicity. The associations jointly demanded that every clause of the upcoming regulations currently drafted by the government must be finalized only after comprehensive consultations with the respective professional associations, reaffirming their unyielding commitment to maintaining a responsible, lawful, and student-friendly educational counseling ecosystem.