In Nepal, more than 50 percent of the population has access to the internet, and the number of social media users has reached approximately 14.3 million. Internet services, which were limited to urban areas until the last decade, are now easily available in semi-urban and rural areas. Internet speed has also increased compared to before.

With the increase in the number of users, the continuous development of technology and the latest applications, its misuse and the problems created by it have also increased.

If we look at the statistics of the Cyber ​​Bureau of Nepal Police, the number of complaints of ‘online crime’ is increasing every year. In the last four months alone, more than 2,000 complaints of ‘online sexual violence’ have been received. When victims have no other options left, they go to the police as a last resort. Therefore, the number of victims is much larger than this. However, even this representative number is enough to shock us. It shows the trend of online violence against women. Looking at this trend, it is likely that in the next five years, crimes committed online in Nepal and their complaints will exceed those committed offline or in the physical world.

Technology-facilitated violence or online sexual violence is violence committed using technology or digital media, or especially the internet or smart devices, which is often targeted based on a person’s gender, sexuality, sexual identity or sexual orientation. One aspect of this is online sexual violence, which mainly includes acts of a sexual nature and related to sexual contexts committed using digital content on digital platforms.

The main aspect of technology-facilitated sexual violence is that technology, the digital platform itself, is used as a weapon or a platform to commit such crimes. For example, ‘deepfake’. This technology has been found to be used as a weapon of online sexual violence.

Online sexual violence has a negative impact on basic human rights including civil liberties, the right to live a dignified life, freedom of expression, the right to information, and the right to organize. It also affects their mental health, sense of security, participation in public life, and social identity. Online violence, threats, propaganda, or character assassination campaigns have led to women in particular being isolated, ‘expelled’ from online, or subjected to self-censorship.

In Nepal, we currently have only one specialized law, the Electronic Transactions Act 2063, to regulate the online space. This act was made to provide legitimacy to transactions on electronic platforms. This law was not made to regulate online crimes or cybercrime or content.

As the use of the internet increases, this law has been used for all purposes. Although separate laws on information technology, social media and cybercrime have been tried to be made to address the inadequacy of this law, the evolution of technology, and its use and misuse, they have remained in the form of bills for a long time.

The online space is, after all, a reflection of the offline space. Be it caste-based discrimination or violence against women, whatever problems there are in the offline space, they are also visible online. We have a lot of gender violence offline and it has recently expanded to the digital space.

In addition, the current socio-economic structure of Nepali society also seems to have played a role in increasing the incidents of violence against women online. For example, women human rights defenders have reported that the wives of people who have gone abroad for employment are seen as ‘potential victims’ and are approached and groomed online on the basis of this. Therefore, this problem should be viewed from the legal as well as the social dimension.

Gender-based violence online should also be viewed from the perspective of power structures. When looking at the ‘power dynamics’ in both offline and online spaces, men’s access and influence are more visible online as well as offline. Just as men dominate resources, power and opportunities in society, the same trend is present in the technology and online sectors. Most of the people who create technology or online tools are men. Men dominate in regulating technology and making laws, and men also dominate in implementing and interpreting those laws.

Although online is said to be a reflection of offline, in some cases its nature requires different types of laws for both. Offline laws that traditionally address gender-based violence do not adequately cover the complex dimensions of gender-based violence (gender-based violence online or through technology) that occur through digital means. Online violence is often perpetrated through pseudonyms, from outside national or even foreign jurisdictions, spreads quickly, and can have a serious psychosocial impact on victims because such content can remain online for a long time. 

Similarly, technology-based crimes such as doxxing, non-consensual transmission of intimate material, cyberstalking, modified or ‘deepfake’ content cannot be covered by old offline legal provisions. To effectively prevent and take action against online violence, digital evidence collection, platform liability, transnational cooperation, and a specific legal framework for a safe online environment are necessary. For this reason, offline gender violence laws alone are not enough. A separate, specialized legal system is indispensable to clearly define, regulate, and combat gender violence through technology.

In addition, we have not been able to incorporate the latest technological developments in policy and law, and in some cases, the laws we have have not been effectively used or updated. For example, the Electronic Transactions Act has been amended only once so far. The phrase ‘teasing, harassing, insulting women...’ added to Section 47 was added in 2072 BS. 

Along with this, provisions related to privacy, photo morphing, taking photos without permission, online abuse, etc. are scattered in laws such as the Personal Privacy Act, the National Criminal Code, and others. But there is no research or data available on how effectively these legal provisions have been used, how many complaints have been filed, and how many cases have been successfully prosecuted. 

Similarly, while our existing laws do not recognize technologies such as AI, ‘deepfake’, or ‘voice cloning,’ our evidence law has not been able to comprehensively cover or address the definition, admissibility, collection, storage, and presentation of such evidence in court, etc. This has also created a situation of impunity in incidents committed using such technology, while on the other hand, laws have not been able to be formulated to help make digital platforms accessible and safe.

Another serious question is whether all law enforcement agencies, including the police, public prosecutors, and courts, have the necessary technical capacity, expertise, and resources to effectively investigate, prosecute, and adjudicate cases of online sexual violence. There does not appear to be sufficient capacity to understand new forms of technologically-enabled sexual violence, to preserve digital evidence, to verify and analyze it, and to ensure cross-border coordination.

There are limited opportunities for staff involved in investigation and prosecution, as well as judges, to develop the necessary skills on the technical, psychosocial, and legal complexities of online violence. Since online violence has not only physical but also long-term psychosocial impacts, the lack of fact-based studies, research materials, and systematic reports on this issue has further complicated policymaking and the judicial process.

Another issue that we will not address in this discussion is the accountability of platforms. What is the role of platforms in all these incidents? How can we collaborate with them to reduce online violence? Police officials say that a major challenge in investigating online sexual violence in Nepal is the lack of information or data available from major social media platforms.