Submit your Article

In the 275-member House of Representatives (HoR), opposition parties together hold one-third of the seats (93). However, the opposition is highly fragmented and lacks cohesion. As a result, it is unlikely to play an effective role in holding the government accountable. Moreover, many opposition leaders appear hesitant to take a strong critical stance against the government, reportedly due to fear of legal or corruption-related cases being brought against them. Even leaders of the Rastriya Swatantra Party (RSP), who could have played a more assertive opposition role, are also unlikely to do so effectively, as the party has been criticized for adopting a restrictive internal approach toward its own lawmakers. Consequently, one of Parliament’s key functions—scrutinizing and checking executive power—appears increasingly weakened. The judiciary, which should serve as an independent check on executive authority, also faces structural and political constraints. First, the dominance of ruling parties in the Constitutional Council and Judicial Council, which are responsible for judicial appointments, raises concerns about institutional independence. Second, the political tensions and protests of September last year have reportedly created an atmosphere of fear, which may discourage bold or independent judicial decision-making. The media, often referred to as the fourth estate, also plays a crucial role in ensuring accountability. However, the current condition of the media sector is weak. Financial pressures have made many media houses vulnerable, reducing their capacity for independent and critical reporting. In addition, there is growing concern that media organizations may hesitate to challenge the government due to fears of reprisal. Recent government actions—such as restricting access and reducing revenue channels for private media houses—have further strained the sector. Furthermore, there has been no strong commitment from major political actors, including the RSP, to uphold press freedom, and relations between media institutions and political leadership appear increasingly tense. Civil society, which traditionally acts as an important watchdog, is also largely ineffective at present. Its fragmentation along political lines has significantly weakened its independence and public trust. In the past, the international community—particularly democratic countries—played an active role in raising concerns over freedom of expression and press freedom, often issuing statements when governments took repressive actions against journalists. However, in recent years, this engagement has noticeably declined. The international community appears to have shifted toward a more cautious or accommodating stance toward governments, even in the face of media restrictions and attacks on journalists. The democratic countries no longer uphold those values in Nepal. Taken together, these developments suggest a worrying trend: Nepal appears to be moving toward a system with a strong executive but increasingly weak and constrained institutions of accountability, with limited effective opposition voices.