Always have to look deeper either way

The Chinese constitution guarantees free speech universally, another part of the constitution is used to control all facets of life in line with the state narrative, and that’s a charitable interpretation when we just pretend that the process of law matters at all, and distinguish when it is just procedural theatre or a real constraint on the state

Conflicting parts of constitutions can change everything

The Chinese, North Korean, and old USSR constitutions all contain(ed) strong language "guaranteeing" universal freedom of speech.

It's a bit like that Game of Thrones scene where Sean Bean brings a slip of paper into the throne room.

Appreciate the analysis. Do you think this is the status quo continuing in Nepal, or is the human right situation degrading?

A Constitution is just a piece of paper.

I think Westerners and perhaps especially Americans think it has intrinsic power because they have a strong rule of law and effective independent courts so they are used to their Constitution being well inforced.

However, in a country where this is not the case the Constitution is just a piece of paper...

Agreed but if the right doesn't exist on paper it's not likely the government is going to respect it in practice. Although there are exceptions (most Somalia has de facto right to bear arms despite it being super illegal).