Treaty of Peace and Friendship between the Government of India and the Government of Nepal. Signed at Kathmandu on 31 July 1950. The Government of India and the Government of Nepal recognizing the former gangs that fortunately existed between the two countries; Desiring to further strengthen and strengthen these relations and to maintain peace between the two countries, have therefore decided to conclude a treaty of peace and friendship and, to this end, have appointed the following persons as agents, namely the Government of India: His Excellency Shri Chandreshwar Prasad Narain Singh, Ambassador of India to Nepal. The Government of Nepal: Maharaja Mohan Shamsher Jang Bahadur Rana, Prime Minister and Commander-in-Chief of Nepal, This treaty is described as unequal by most Nepalese because Nepalese law does not allow for the opening of borders and Indians should not be able, according to the law, to buy land and property in Nepal or do business on their behalf. They claim that the 1950 treaty was signed by un democratic leaders of Nepal and can be abolished with one year`s notice. The treaty was particularly unpopular for Nepal`s Pahari segments, who often see it as a violation of its sovereignty. In addition, agreements have been manipulated in favor of an undemocratic autocratic domination of Nepal, where the power of the people is fragmented.  The agreement was signed by Ngapoi Ngawang Jigme, who defended China`s Tibetan tolerance, and the 23 sealed in Beijing on May 1, 1951 and confirmed a few months later by the Tibetan government.  In addition, the Dalai Lama publicly announced that he would ratify the agreement, and its adoption was also sent to Beijing on October 24 in the form of a telegram : although the Chinese filed new labels for Tibetans, they were only personal seals engraving the name of each delegate.
Otherwise, there were no false government seals. Part of the confusion stems from the fact that Ngabo had in his possession the seal of the governor of East Timor, but he did not want to use it. This seal, however, was not the official seal of the Tibetan government, so its non-rejection did not reduce the validity of the agreement. In his autobiography, the Dalai Lama explains that Tibetan delegates claimed that they had been forced “under duress” to sign the agreement. Their sense of compulsion stems from China`s general threat to resume military force in the center of the country if no agreement is reached. However, under international law, this does not invalidate an agreement. As long as there is no physical violence against the signatories, an agreement is valid. However, the validity of the agreement rests on the full power of the signatories to conclude an agreement and, as we have seen, this has clearly not been the case. In this sense, the Dalai Lama had reason to deny it.  The signing of the seventeen point agreement was later challenged as invalid in the Tibetan community in exile, which accused Tibetan delegates of signing under duress and that the Chinese allegedly used false Tibetan government seals. The exiled community and its supporters continue to claim that Tibetan representatives are not allowed to propose changes and that the Chinese government has not allowed Tibetan representatives to communicate with Lhasa.  The Seventeen Point Agreement, The Agreement Between the Central People`s Government and the Local Government of Tibet on Measures for the Peaceful Liberation of Tibet, abbreviated as the Seventeen Point Agreement for the Peaceful Liberation of Tibet, is the document by which the delegates of the 14th Dalai Lama, ruler of the de facto state of Tibet, reached an agreement in 1951 with the Central Government of the People`s Republic of China newly created to reassert China`s sovereignty over Tibet….