A major dispute has erupted over the proposed cable car project at the famous Pathibhara Temple in Taplejung, Nepal. One faction strongly opposes its construction, citing religious, cultural, and environmental concerns, while the other insists that the cable car must be built to boost tourism and economic growth. To understand the situation, a human rights delegation comprising the scribe, visited Fungling and Pathibhara areas from 8 to 12 March 2025, gathering viewpoints from different stakeholders.
The origins of the dispute are deeply tied to the temple’s historical and cultural significance. According to local legend, in the 19th century, a herder named Manchan Gurung lost his sheep in a cave, only to have them miraculously returned by the goddess. Over time, the site became a religious pilgrimage destination, and the Pathibhara Conservation and Development Committee was established to manage temple offerings.
Limbu activists, who call themselves Yakthung, claim that Pathibhara was originally Mukkumlung, a sacred Limbu site. The name was in vogue from time immemorial, kept alive by the shamans during ritual chanting, but the state did not use it in official documents. This official suppression caused people from other communities to be unaware of the name, they say. After the successful people’s revolution in 2007 and the promulgation of the new constitution in 2015, Limbus started to agitate for the restoration of the name Mukkumlung.
The proposal for the cable car began with a feasibility study in 2015 and was initially approved during the tenure of former mayor Chhatrapati Pyakurel. When current mayor Amir Maden took office in 2022, he renewed the permit but required modifications to the Detailed Project Report (DPR), including lowering the top station by 750 meters and prohibiting the construction of hotels or lodges.
Opposition to the project emerged in 2017, led by ethnic identity activists who argued that altering the site would be detrimental to its cultural significance. Mayor Maden, however, claims that the opposition is politically motivated, targeting the 2028 elections and raising funds from Limbu communities abroad. Chief District Officer Netra Prasad Sharma corroborates this claim.
The conflict escalated through a series of violent clashes between protesters and security forces. The first major confrontation occurred on 9 November 2024, when a group attempted to lay the foundation stone for the cable car but was blocked by opposing activists, leading to injuries. On 31 December 2024, a second clash broke out when protesters, some armed with khukuris, confronted the police, resulting in the arrest of three individuals, including two minors.
A high-level committee under the coordination of a cabinet minister as demanded by the activists may be formed to mediate between the government, developers, and activists. A judicial review could also assess whether the government followed due process in approving the project.
Tensions heightened further on 26 January 2025 when the police received intelligence about protesters stockpiling weapons. Deputy Superintendent of Police Ravi Rawal said that raids uncovered three machetes, 155 wooden clubs, and slingshots, leading to a violent confrontation in which 12 police officers and nine Armed Police Force (APF) personnel were injured, and two protesters were shot with live bullets. Rawal claims that the police personnel took the injured protesters to hospital. Another major clash took place on 22 February 2025, when what began as a “peaceful march” turned into an attempt to storm the APF barracks and cut through barbed wire barriers. Former Deputy Prime Minister Rajendra Mahato’s visit exacerbated the tensions, and torch rallies endangered homes and businesses.
In response to the growing unrest, law enforcement agencies took strict action, arresting 18 protesters—only two of whom were from Taplejung, while the rest were from other districts. Authorities accused rioters of using social media to spread misinformation and incite violence, while human rights organizations expressed concerns about excessive police force. Rising ethnic tensions between Limbu activists and local authorities have prompted the deployment of only indigenous security personnel in protest zones to ease hostilities, DSP Rawal claimed.
Several detainees have shared testimonies about their arrests and alleged mistreatment. Nirmala Darnal (Diksha Chhetri) claimed she was violently arrested, beaten, and verbally abused by police while also being denied contact with her family. Sunita Telung, who participated in the peace march and torch rally, stated that police escalated the situation by attacking protesters with stones. Iksa Limbu and Nima Chemjong, who said they had only come to worship at Pathibhara, were caught in the protests and reported that police threw tear gas into their rooms, causing them to lose consciousness. Indira Sharma Dhaudali, a central member of the Nepal Janmukti Party and an active opponent of the cable car, claimed that she was arrested for her speech against the project. Some other male detainees also narrated the police brutality against them.
The broader debate surrounding the Pathibhara cable car centres on the balance between economic development and identity conservation. Mayor Amir Maden argues that the project will significantly boost tourism, with influx from Indian states including West Bengal, Sikkim, Bihar and Uttar Pradesh, increasing government revenue and creating thousands of jobs for locals. He also highlights that the current pilgrimage path is difficult to traverse, and a cable car would make the temple more accessible, especially for the elderly, children and people living with disabilities.
However, opponents fear cultural erasure, as the Limbu community sees the project as a commercial intrusion into a sacred space. They claim that going to the top via cable car is irreligious as it oversteps Kanchhithan and other sacred sites, which should be worshipped before reaching the top. The sacred thread-tying ritual starts from Kanchhithan, which the cable car journey violates.
Environmental activists warn of deforestation and the negative impact of increased commercialization. Indeed, cutting down the trees during the ongoing dispute appears objectionable especially because the area is a habitat of Red Panda, an endangered species, and the national flower rhododendron.
Others have raised concerns about corruption, alleging that government officials may have accepted bribes from developers. Especially, prominent businessman Chandra Dhakal who has funded Pathibhara Darshan Cable Car Pvt. Ltd, is notorious for influencing the government to award him with the cable car projects in various parts of the country, monopolizing trade in the project areas. Taplejung locals further allege that goons hired by cable car constructors are under the police protection and those goons have been terrorizing the local populace. Local contractor Indra Kedem does not deny that his people have attacked the “No Cable Car” activists.
To resolve the conflict, several potential solutions are available. Kamal Limbu, General Secretary of Federation of Nepalese Chamber of Commerce and Industries, Taplejung Chapter, said that the Department of Archaeology needs to determine whether Pathibhara qualifies as a “Mundhumi Site” (a sacred Limbu place); if so, special protection measures may be required. He also said that the cable car project needs to adopt the public private partnership (PPP) model and the government needs to address the concerns of the indigenous Limbu community under the International Convention of Indigenous Nationalities, also known as ILO 169.
Politically, a high-level committee under the coordination of a cabinet minister as demanded by the activists, not under a joint secretary as is the current situation, may be formed to mediate between the government, developers, and activists. A judicial review could also assess whether the government followed due process in approving the project. The project work could be paused till the Supreme Court of Nepal issues a verdict. Meanwhile, security forces need to prevent further violence while ensuring the rights of detainees are upheld, and human rights organizations have to continue to monitor the situation.
The Pathibhara cable car dispute highlights the ongoing tension between modernization and cultural preservation. While the local government views the project as an economic opportunity, many opponents believe it threatens indigenous heritage and the environment. With political and ethnic tensions on the rise, finding a peaceful and just resolution remains a significant challenge. But the government is obliged to resolve the situation through dialogues, rather than steamroll the opponents. It should maintain transparency by making environmental impact assessment report and detailed project report public.
The coming months will be crucial in determining whether modern infrastructure can coexist with centuries-old traditions through careful negotiation, legal clarity, and cultural sensitivity. Leaving the issue unresolved carries the risk of ethnic strife flaring up and causing long-term instability in the region.
[Photos of protest are from Facebook page of Rajendra Mahato.]
Comment