हिल्टन पुनर्बीमा विवादको छानबिन प्रतिवेदन अख्तियारमा, कारबाही टार्न प्राधिकरणलाई कठिनHilton Reinsurance Probe Report Reaches Anti-Graft Body, Action Against Firms Still Uncertain
अन्तर्राष्ट्रिय होटल चेन हिल्टनसँग जोडिएको पुनर्बीमा विवादबारे नेपाल बीमा प्राधिकरणले तयार पारेको छानबिन प्रतिवेदन अन्ततः अख्तियार दुरुपयोग अनुसन्धान आयोगमा पुगेको छ । ठूलो आर्थिक चलखेल र संस्थागत कमजोरीको आशंकाबीच तयार पारिएको उक्त प्रतिवेदन अर्थ मन्त्रालयमार्फत आयोगमा पठाइएको हो ।
हिल्टन होटलको हुलदंगा तथा आतंकवाद जोखिमको पुनर्बीमामा अनियमितता भएको भन्दै अख्तियारमा उजुरी परेपछि यो प्रक्रिया अघि बढेको हो । उजुरीमा नेपाल बीमा प्राधिकरणले तोकेको व्यवस्था बाइपास गरी क्षति भइसकेपछि ब्याकडेटमा पुनर्बीमा पोलिसी जारी गरेर अर्बौँ रुपैयाँ बराबरको दाबी पास गराउने प्रयास भएको आरोप लगाइएको थियो । सोही उजुरीका आधारमा अख्तियारले गत कात्तिक ११ गते अर्थ मन्त्रालयमार्फत नेपाल बीमा प्राधिकरणलाई पुनर्बीमाको सम्पूर्ण प्रक्रिया छानबिन गर्न निर्देशन दिएको थियो ।
प्राधिकरणले छानबिन पूरा गरी गत मंसिरमा मन्त्रालयमा प्रतिवेदन बुझाए पनि प्रतिवेदन अस्पष्ट रहेको भन्दै मन्त्रालयले फिर्ता पठाएको थियो । मन्त्रालय स्रोतका अनुसार प्रतिवेदनमा ‘कारबाही गरिने’ भनिए पनि कुन कम्पनीले के कसुर गरेको हो र कुन कानुनी दफा आकर्षित हुन्छ भन्ने कुरा स्पष्ट नभएकाले प्रतिवेदन अस्वीकार गरिएको हो ।
मन्त्रालयको कडा निर्देशनपछि प्राधिकरणले प्रतिवेदनको ढाँचा परिमार्जन गर्दै कम्पनीगत कसुर, नियम उल्लंघनको स्वरूप, आकर्षित हुने कानुनी दफा र सम्भावित कारबाहीसहितको विस्तृत विवरण तयार गरी मन्त्रालयमार्फत अख्तियारमा पठाएको स्रोतले जनाएको छ ।
कारबाहीको निर्णयमा प्राधिकरण असहज
हिल्टन पुनर्बीमा प्रकरणमा प्रत्यक्ष रूपमा जोडिएका चार कम्पनीलाई कारबाही गर्ने विषयमा नेपाल बीमा प्राधिकरण स्वयं असहज अवस्थामा देखिएको छ । छानबिन प्रतिवेदनले नियम उल्लंघन पुष्टि गरे पनि प्राधिकरणको सञ्चालक समितिले हालसम्म ठोस निर्णय लिन सकेको छैन ।
प्राधिकरणले मन्त्रालयमा बुझाएको प्रतिवेदनमा ओरियण्टल इन्स्योरेन्स, नेपाल पुनर्बीमा कम्पनी, हिमालयन रि इन्स्योरेन्स र एलियण्ट पुनर्बीमा ब्रोकरलाई कारबाहीको दायरामा ल्याउने उल्लेख छ । तर, बोर्डमा दुई पटक छलफल भए पनि निर्णय हुन नसकेको स्रोतको भनाइ छ ।
राज्य स्वामित्वको नेपाल पुनर्बीमा कम्पनी स्वयं विवादमा जोडिएकाले निर्णय प्रक्रिया झनै जटिल बनेको प्राधिकरण स्रोत बताउँछ । यद्यपि, प्राधिकरणको छानबिनले चारै कम्पनीले पुनर्बीमा प्रक्रियामा नियम विपरीत काम गरेको निष्कर्ष निकालेको छ ।
बीमा ऐनका कडा प्रावधान
बीमा ऐन २०७९ को दफा १३८ अनुसार प्राधिकरणको निर्देशन विपरीत बीमा कारोबार गरेमा वा झुट्टा विवरण तयार गरेमा पहिलो पटक दुई लाख रुपैयाँसम्म जरिवाना गर्न सकिने व्यवस्था छ । दोहोरिएमा जरिवाना क्रमशः २५ लाख र ५० लाख रुपैयाँसम्म पुग्ने प्रावधान छ । त्यस्तै, दफा १३४ ले चेतावनीदेखि इजाजतपत्र खारेजीसम्मका अधिकार प्राधिकरणलाई दिएको छ ।
के हो हिल्टन पुनर्बीमा प्रकरण?
गत भदौ २३ र २४ गते ‘जेनजी’ प्रदर्शनका क्रममा शंकर समूहको लगानी रहेको हिल्टन होटलमा ठूलो क्षति पुगेको थियो । क्षतिपछि अर्बौँ रुपैयाँ बराबरको बीमा दाबी पर्ने अवस्था बनेको थियो । तर, क्षति भइसकेपछि हुलदंगा तथा आतंकवाद जोखिमको पुनर्बीमा ब्याकडेटमा गराएर ठूलो दाबी पास गराउने प्रयास भएको आशंकामा प्राधिकरण र अख्तियारमा उजुरी परेको थियो ।
छानबिनमा हिल्टन होटलको करिब पाँच अर्ब रुपैयाँ बराबरको बीमा ओरियण्टल इन्स्योरेन्समा गरिएको पुष्टि भएको छ । तर, अनिवार्य रूपमा नेपाल पुनर्बीमा कम्पनीको पुलमार्फत हुनुपर्ने पुनर्बीमा प्रक्रिया पालना नभएको देखिएको छ । प्राधिकरणको निष्कर्ष अनुसार पुनर्बीमाको सम्पूर्ण प्रक्रियामा चारै कम्पनीले बीमा ऐनको उल्लंघन गरेका छन् ।
अब यो प्रतिवेदन अख्तियारमा पुगेसँगै पुनर्बीमा प्रकरणले कानुनी मोड लिने संकेत देखिएको छ ।
The investigation report prepared by the Nepal Insurance Authority into the reinsurance dispute involving the international hotel chain Hilton has finally been forwarded to the Commission for the Investigation of Abuse of Authority. The report, prepared amid concerns of large-scale financial irregularities and institutional negligence, was submitted to the anti-graft body through the Ministry of Finance.
The probe was initiated after complaints were filed alleging serious misconduct in the reinsurance of riot and terrorism risks related to Hilton Hotel. The complaints claimed that insurance policies were issued retroactively, bypassing regulatory procedures, in an attempt to process claims worth billions of rupees.
Following the complaint, the CIAA, on Kartik 11, instructed the Nepal Insurance Authority to conduct a comprehensive investigation into the entire reinsurance process.
Initial Report Rejected by Finance Ministry
After completing the investigation, the Authority submitted its first report to the Finance Ministry in Mangsir. However, the ministry returned the document, stating that it lacked clarity.
According to ministry sources, although the report mentioned possible disciplinary actions, it failed to specify which company committed which violations and under which legal provisions they fell. Due to this ambiguity, the report was not accepted.
The ministry then directed the Authority to prepare a revised report clearly detailing company-wise offenses, applicable legal provisions, and proposed actions. After revising the format, the Authority submitted a comprehensive report to the CIAA through the ministry.
Authority Hesitant to Take Disciplinary Action
Despite the investigation confirming regulatory violations, the Nepal Insurance Authority has been struggling to take decisive action against the companies involved.
The report recommends action against four companies: Oriental Insurance, Nepal Reinsurance Company, Himalayan Reinsurance, and Alliant Reinsurance Broker.
Although the matter has been discussed twice in board meetings, no final decision has been reached. Sources say that the involvement of the state-owned Nepal Reinsurance Company has complicated the decision-making process.
Nevertheless, the Authority’s own investigation has concluded that all four firms violated existing insurance regulations during the reinsurance process.
Provisions Under Insurance Act 2079
Under Section 138 of the Insurance Act 2079, companies that conduct insurance business against regulatory directives or submit false information may be fined up to NPR 200,000 for a first offense. Repeat violations may lead to fines of up to NPR 2.5 million and NPR 5 million respectively.
Similarly, Section 134 empowers the Authority to issue warnings, suspend officials, freeze assets, halt dividend distribution, restrict business operations, and even recommend license cancellation through the High Court when necessary.
Background of the Hilton Reinsurance Controversy
The controversy stems from damage caused to the Hilton Hotel Kathmandu during the “Gen-Z” protests on Bhadra 23 and 24. The hotel, backed by the Shankar Group, suffered extensive structural damage, raising the possibility of insurance claims amounting to several billion rupees.
Following the incident, allegations emerged that reinsurance coverage for riot and terrorism risks was arranged retroactively in order to process large compensation claims.
Investigations revealed that insurance worth nearly NPR 5 billion had been issued by Oriental Insurance. However, the mandatory procedure of routing reinsurance through Nepal Reinsurance Company’s pool was not properly followed.
Records show that Oriental Insurance had formally approached Nepal Reinsurance Company for reinsurance. However, the company failed to provide any official response. Subsequently, Oriental transferred the premium through Alliant Reinsurance Broker.
Although Alliant forwarded the premium to Himalayan Reinsurance, Himalayan later claimed that it had rejected the premium related to riot risk coverage.
Findings of the Investigation
The Authority’s investigation concluded that:
Oriental Insurance diverted reinsurance outside regulatory channels,
Nepal Reinsurance Company remained silent on a valid proposal,
Alliant violated regulatory instructions by routing reinsurance improperly, and
All four companies acted in violation of the Insurance Act.
With the report now in the hands of the CIAA, the case has entered a formal legal phase. Observers believe that the next steps taken by regulatory and investigative agencies will be crucial in determining accountability and restoring confidence in Nepal’s insurance sector.
