Submit your Article

As Nepal moves toward the March 5 elections, tensions between Prime Minister Sushila Karki’s government and the main opposition, the Communist Party of Nepal–Unified Marxist Leninist (CPN-UML), have intensified. What began as a political disagreement has evolved into a full-blown confrontation, with the UML positioning itself as the principal challenger to Karki’s administration.

Nepal’s political landscape has remained volatile since the promulgation of the 2015 Constitution. The three major parties—the Nepali Congress (NC), CPN-UML, and CPN (Maoist Center)—have oscillated between alliances and rivalries, amid frequent changes of government.

Maoist Chairman Pushpa Kamal Dahal was among the first to claim credit for steering the country away from a constitutional crisis following the turmoil of Sept 8–9. He has since cast himself as both a key supporter and mediator in the formation of the Karki-led government, even declaring early on that elections would be held on March 5.

Over the recent weeks, relations between the UML and the government have deteriorated sharply. PM Karki has reportedly refused to meet top leaders of the major political parties, including Dahal, UML Chair KP Sharma Oli, and NC President Sher Bahadur Deuba. At a recent press conference, she allegedly remarked that she “does not want to see the faces” of the three senior leaders, suggesting they should retire and make way for younger politicians.

Her comment provoked strong reactions from both Oli and Dahal, though the latter continues to back the government. Maoist leaders have accused Oli of failing to adapt to changing political realities, while UML leaders have denounced the Karki administration as “unconstitutional.”

In contrast, the Nepali Congress has maintained a cautious stance—neither overtly supporting nor openly opposing the government—choosing to avoid the kind of direct confrontation pursued by the UML.

Two major issues have fueled the government-UML conflict. First, early in her tenure, Prime Minister Karki reportedly held consultations with security agency chiefs regarding the possible arrest of Oli for his alleged role in the deaths of 19 students during the Sept 8 protests. The move infuriated the UML.

Soon after, a probe committee led by Gauri Bahadur Karki—reportedly under government pressure, according to UML leaders—suspended Oli’s passport and restricted his movement outside the Kathmandu Valley. Oli has repeatedly complained that he has been prevented from visiting his burned-down house in Jhapa, allegedly destroyed by protesters.

Meanwhile, Home Minister Om Prakash Aryal’s remarks against UML leaders have further deepened hostilities. UML politburo member Mahesh Basnet has emerged as a leading voice against the government, organizing rallies and public programs that the Home Ministry has condemned as provocative.

At the heart of the dispute lies a clash over the interpretation of the Sept 8–9 protests. The Karki government views the unrest as a “GenZ revolt,” a spontaneous youth uprising born of generational frustration. The UML, however, insists it was a politically motivated conspiracy designed to weaken the party and destabilize the country.

According to UML leaders, GenZ activists withdrew on the afternoon of Sept 8, and the subsequent violence on Sept 9 cannot be considered part of a youth movement. Oli has repeatedly dismissed the term GenZ as “a Western construct irrelevant to Nepal’s socio-political reality.”

The UML has rejected the legitimacy of the Karki government, accusing it of acting unconstitutionally. On Nov 9, Oli alleged that “those who set the country on fire” during the protests are the same individuals now in power. The party has since declared a nationwide protest campaign against what it calls a “repressive and illegitimate regime.”

As the government finalizes preparations for the March 5 elections, the UML is taking to the streets, setting the stage for a high-stakes confrontation. Meanwhile, the Karki administration continues to demand the restoration of Parliament, arguing that only a fresh constitutional mandate can resolve the crisis.

The Nepali Congress (NC), Nepal’s oldest democratic party, finds itself mired in deep internal divisions. Factional rivalries, leadership disputes, and conflicting ambitions have pushed the organization into disarray. As the party grapples with a leadership crisis and intensifying power struggle, questions are mounting over its ability to present a united front and play an effective national role. The chronic intra-party rift has widened further after Party President Sher Bahadur Deuba named Purna Bahadur Khadka as the acting party president.

Deuba is currently in Singapore for treatment after being seriously injured during the Sept 9 protests, when demonstrators attacked him and set his private residence on fire. On two key issues—the party’s general convention and its position on current national affairs—the NC remains undecided. A power struggle has emerged among the party’s second- and third-tier leaders. Senior figures such as Khadka, Bimalendra Nidhi, and Prakash Man Singh are opposing calls to hold the party convention before the March 5 elections, while the reformist camp, led by General Secretary Gagan Kumar Thapa, is pushing for early elections within the party structure.

The party has splintered into multiple factions, each seeking to consolidate control. As a result, the organization has become a hostage to indecision, fueling fears of an eventual split. Another worrying sign for the party rank and file is the sharp decline in enthusiasm for renewing active membership. According to party insiders, of the roughly 800,000 members, only about 300,000 have renewed their membership so far, a signal of the party’s weakening grassroots presence. The continued infighting among top leaders, according to many, is likely to deepen frustration among the cadres.

NC General Secretary Bishwo Prakash Sharma has argued that a special general convention becomes mandatory if 54 percent of the general convention representatives formally demand it. He emphasized that the immediate issue is not whether the regular convention is held in Mangsir, Poush, or Baisakh, but whether to respond to the written demand of the majority for a special convention.

“The demand for a special general convention can be addressed only in two ways,” he wrote, “either by holding the special general convention itself or by organizing the regular convention within the same timeframe. This must be understood clearly without ifs, buts, or excuses.”

As the party’s Central Working Committee fails to take decisive action, various factions have begun holding separate internal meetings to advance their positions.

Sher Bahadur Deuba, who has led the party since 2016, is not expected to contest for the leadership again. This has set the stage for a fierce contest for the top post. General Secretary Thapa and senior leader Shekhar Koirala have already announced their candidacies for party president, while several other leaders are reportedly preparing to join the race.

Although there is hardly any consensus among the party’s senior leaders, many appear united in their intent to prevent Thapa from securing the presidency. How the internal negotiations unfold remains to be seen. If Thapa and Koirala reach an understanding, they could together secure the leadership. It is also unclear whether all of Deuba’s loyalists will support Khadka as their candidate. The Deuba faction itself is fractured, with some leaders aligning with Koirala and others with Thapa. It also remains uncertain whether Deuba will openly endorse any candidate or remain neutral.

The NC’s internal paralysis is having a direct impact on national politics. The two major parties—CPN-UML and CPN (Maoist Center)—have already clarified their positions on recent political developments. The UML maintains that the current government is unconstitutional and that the events of Sept 8–9 represent a regression; it has declared that it will not accept any elections held under Prime Minister Sushila Karki. The Maoist Center, led by Pushpa Kamal Dahal, on the other hand, has decided to move ahead with the elections. The Nepali Congress, however, remains undecided. Immediately after the protests, the party had joined others in declaring the formation of the Karki government unconstitutional and in supporting the restoration of Parliament. But since then, its stance has become fragmented.

The leadership vacuum has allowed individual leaders to voice their own positions. General Secretary Thapa and his supporters favor holding elections and are engaging in talks with Prime Minister Karki, while Khadka and other senior leaders have remained silent. Meanwhile, a faction within the party has begun a signature campaign demanding the restoration of Parliament. One top leader commented, “The chances of holding elections appear slim. The only way to save the constitution is by restoring Parliament.”

NC leader Prakash Sharan Mahat has argued that the party should focus on addressing the national crisis instead of being consumed by internal disputes. “There has been no meaningful discussion on the national agenda, and that is unfortunate,” he said. “We should have been debating the causes of the crisis, possible solutions, and the party’s leadership role, but that has not happened.”

As Nepal moves toward the March 5 elections, tensions between Prime Minister Sushila Karki’s government and the main opposition, the Communist Party of Nepal–Unified MarxistLeninist (CPN-UML), have intensified. What began as political disagreement has evolved into a full-blown confrontation, with the UML positioning itself as the principal challenger to Karki’s administration.

Nepal’s political environment remains volatile since the promulgation of the new constitution in 2015. The three major parties—the Nepali Congress (NC), CPN-UML, and CPN (Maoist Center)—have alternated between alliances and rivalries amid frequent government changes.
 

Maoist Chairman Pushpa Kamal Dahal (Prachanda) was among the first to claim credit for saving the country from a constitutional crisis after the turmoil of September 8–9. He has since positioned himself as a key supporter and negotiator in the formation of the Karki-led government, even announcing early on that elections would be held on March 5.

Over the past few weeks, the relationship between the UML and the government has deteriorated sharply. PM Karki has reportedly refused to meet top leaders of the major political parties, including Dahal, UML Chair KP Sharma Oli, and NC President Sher Bahadur Deuba. At a recent press conference, she allegedly remarked that she “does not want to see the faces” of the three senior leaders, suggesting they should retire and make way for younger politicians.

This statement provoked strong reactions from both Oli and Dahal, though the latter remains broadly supportive of the government. Maoist leaders have accused Oli of failing to adapt to changing political realities, while UML leaders have denounced the Karki administration as “unconstitutional.”

In contrast, the Nepali Congress has maintained a cautious stance—neither overtly supporting nor openly criticizing the government—choosing to avoid the kind of direct confrontation pursued by the UML.

Two major issues have fueled the government-UML conflict. First, early in her tenure, PM Karki reportedly held consultations with security agency chiefs regarding the possible arrest of KP Sharma Oli over his alleged responsibility for the deaths of 19 students during the September 8 protests. The move infuriated the UML.

Soon afterward, a probe committee led by Gauri Bahadur Karki—under government pressure, according to UML leaders—suspended Oli’s passport and restricted his movement outside the Kathmandu Valley. Oli has repeatedly complained that he has been prevented from visiting his burned-down house in Jhapa, allegedly destroyed by protesters.

Meanwhile, Home Minister Om Prakash Aryal’s sharp remarks against UML leaders have further deepened hostilities. UML politburo member Mahesh Basnet has emerged as a leading voice against the government, organizing rallies and public programs that the Home Ministry has condemned as provocative.

At the heart of the dispute lies the contrasting interpretation of the September 8–9 protests.
The Karki government views the unrest as a “Gen-Z revolt”, a spontaneous youth uprising reflecting generational frustration. The UML, however, insists it was a political conspiracy aimed at undermining the party and destabilizing the country.

According to UML leaders, Gen-Z activists withdrew on the afternoon of September 8, and the subsequent violence on September 9 cannot be considered part of a youth movement. Oli has repeatedly dismissed the term Gen-Z, calling it “a western construct irrelevant to Nepal’s socio-political reality.”

UML has rejected the legitimacy of the Karki-led government, accusing it of acting unconstitutionally. On November 9, Oli alleged that “those who set the country on fire” during the protests are the same individuals now in power. The UML has declared a nationwide protest campaign, from grassroots mobilization to mass demonstrations in Kathmandu, to challenge what it calls a “repressive and illegitimate regime.”

As the government finalizes preparations for the March 5 elections, the UML is mobilizing on the streets, setting the stage for a high-stakes showdown. Meanwhile, the Karki administration has demanded the restoration of Parliament to establish what it calls a legitimate constitutional mandate.

The Supreme Court  has begun preliminary hearings on more than a dozen writ petitions challenging the formation of the interim government led by Sushila Karki and her subsequent decision to dissolve the House of Representatives (HoR) before the end of its term.

The Constitutional Bench of the Supreme Court will hear a total of 16 writ petitions. Chief Justice Prakash Man Singh Raut has already given his consent to forward all cases to the bench. The petitioners have argued that Karki’s appointment as interim prime minister is unconstitutional, as Nepal’s 2015 Constitution does not allow non-members of Parliament to assume the prime ministerial position.

Furthermore, while appointing her as prime minister, no specific constitutional article was cited. The Office of the President has argued that Karki was appointed under Article 61 of the Constitution, which relates to the president’s duty to safeguard the Constitution. However, in 2015, all provisions related to the formation of government were clearly outlined under Article 76. Karki was appointed interim head following the GenZ protests on Sept 12.

Another argument raised by the petitioners concerns Article 132(2) of the Constitution. Lawyers Bipana Sharma and Ayush Badal contend that a former chief justice cannot hold any government office except within the National Human Rights Commission (NHRC). Article 132(2) states: “No person who has once held the office of Chief Justice or a Judge of the Supreme Court shall be eligible for appointment to any government office, except as otherwise provided in this Constitution.”

This means that, except for roles in the NHRC, former chief justices and Supreme Court judges cannot assume any other government positions. However, those in power argue that the current government emerged from the GenZ revolution, and therefore, its constitutionality and legality should not be judged through the lens of “normal times.”

Nepal had faced a similar situation in 2013, when then–Chief Justice Khil Raj Regmi led an interim government. His appointment was also challenged in the Supreme Court, but the court delayed its hearing until after Regmi stepped down upon completing the elections. Later, Supreme Court judges were divided over the verdict. Interestingly, current Prime Minister Karki, who at the time was serving as a senior justice, had expressed that Regmi’s appointment went against the spirit of the interim constitution. Now, legal observers are keen to see how Karki will defend her own appointment.

Karki faces three major constitutional challenges: A non-parliamentarian assuming the office of prime minister; the lack of any cited constitutional article in her appointment by President Ramchandra Paudel; and the restriction under Article 132(2), which bars former justices from holding government office.

Similarly, several writs have been filed against the dissolution of the House of Representatives. Shortly after taking office, Karki recommended to President Poudel that Parliament be dissolved. Reports suggest that Karki believed she could only serve as prime minister after Parliament’s dissolution. Media sources also claim she faced pressure from Kathmandu Mayor Balendra Shah to dissolve Parliament immediately. Legal experts, however, argue that Karki’s appointment was justified under the “doctrine of necessity.”

Still, constitutional experts point out that, under Article 76(7), the prime minister can recommend dissolution of Parliament only after all attempts to form a new government have failed. On this very basis, the Supreme Court in 2020 and 2021 had reinstated the Parliament dissolved by then Prime Minister KP Sharma Oli, ruling that the House could still produce a new government. The current House of Representatives, elected in 2022, is set to complete its term in 2027.

As the Supreme Court prepares to begin hearings on the 16 petitions, the prospects of the March 5 elections look increasingly uncertain. Dialogue between the government and political parties has begun, but it has not helped rebuild trust. Political leaders continue to raise concerns about security, saying they still fear openly holding meetings and rallies. Nepal Police has yet to recover the 1,200 weapons looted during the Sept 9 protests, and more than 4,000 escaped inmates remain at large and reportedly involved in criminal activities.

Party leaders claim they are still receiving threats. In this context, if elections do not take place on March 5, the interim government may lose its legitimacy, creating a new political vacuum. Senior leaders of the Nepali Congress and CPN-UML argue that the only way to preserve the current Constitution is for the Supreme Court to reinstate Parliament.

They contend that restoring Parliament would provide a legitimate institution to address the demands of the GenZ protesters, including ending corruption, ensuring systemic reform, and curbing nepotism. NC and UML leaders also say that, as their party offices have been destroyed and many leaders have lost their homes, the current environment is not conducive to holding elections.

Devraj Ghimire, Speaker of the dissolved House of Representatives, is also strongly advocating for Parliament’s restoration. He is currently consulting with legal experts to create a constitutional and political pathway for the reinstatement of the House.

The largest party in the dissolved House of Representatives (HoR), the Nepali Congress (NC), is embroiled in an internal rift over whether to convene the party’s convention to elect a new leadership.

The party’s youth leaders are demanding that the convention be held before the next election, arguing that the NC should go to the polls with new leadership and renewed energy. However, the establishment faction, led by Vice-president Purna Bahadur Khadka, prefers to hold the convention after the election. The party has faced growing criticism for failing to take initiative to resolve the ongoing political stalemate, appearing instead preoccupied with its internal disputes. The rift has laid bare the ongoing struggle between the party’s second- and third-tier leaders for control of its future direction.

Senior figures such as Khadka, Prakash Man Singh, Krishna Prasad Sitaula and Bimalendra Nidhi are reportedly intent on preventing Gagan Kumar Thapa from ascending to the party presidency. Thapa, however, remains firm in his intention to contest. In the absence of Sher Bahadur Deuba, the NC is facing a clear leadership vacuum as intergenerational rivalries intensify. Meanwhile, senior leader Shekhar Koirala has chosen to remain silent amid the escalating discord.

In contrast, the CPN-UML appears to be making steady progress toward its general convention, scheduled for mid-December. Initially, the party planned to hold the convention in Pokhara but later shifted the venue to Kathmandu due to party Chair KP Sharma Oli’s travel restrictions. Although some voices within the UML had earlier urged Oli to step aside, those calls have largely faded. A few leaders still argue that the party should not go into the elections under Oli’s leadership, but he has made it clear that he intends to contest at the General Convention.

Some party members have proposed that former President Bidya Devi Bhandari’s membership be reinstated so she could take over the UML leadership after Oli, but he has shown no inclination to welcome her back. On national politics, the UML maintains that the only viable path forward is to briefly restore Parliament to legitimize the election process. Meanwhile, tensions between Prime Minister Sushila Karki and the UML continue to grow. Oli believes he is being directly targeted by the government and fears possible arrest.

Amid this shifting political landscape, a growing number of GenZ activists have entered the scene. They are engaging with political parties, civil society and business groups, though the government and established parties find it difficult to work with them due to their lack of unified positions. Rather than coalescing around shared reform agendas such as anti-corruption or governance reform, many GenZ figures appear increasingly motivated by personal political ambitions. An unhealthy competition has emerged among them to secure ministerial positions or advance individual agendas, while some remain openly hostile toward traditional political parties.

Seeking to consolidate his base after recent turmoil, Pushpa Kamal Dahal, chair of the Communist Party of Nepal (Maoist Center), has brought together 10 communist parties to form a new organization under the old banner, the Nepali Communist Party. Meanwhile, the CPN (Unified Socialist) led by Madhav Kumar Nepal is fragmenting. One faction has merged with Dahal, another is preparing to rejoin the UML, and a third, led by Ghanashyam Bhushal, plans to form a separate political force. Within the Maoist Center itself, Janardhan Sharma has resigned protesting against the unification, and is reportedly in talks with other leaders to create a new political party.

In an effort to create momentum for elections, Prime Minister Karki has held consultations with former presidents Ram Baran Yadav and Bidya Devi Bhandari. She appears to believe they could help facilitate dialogue among top political leaders. However, without direct engagement between the prime minister and major party heads, progress toward a conducive electoral environment remains uncertain.

Meanwhile, controversial businessperson Durga Prasai is preparing to launch a street movement calling for the restoration of monarchy and the Hindu state. The government is concerned that his activities could disturb public order, especially given that protests he organized in March turned violent. Authorities have invited him for dialogue, as his influence appears to be growing, particularly after Prime Minister Karki made conciliatory remarks about him and the Nepali Army invited him to consultations as a “stakeholder.”

With less than 120 days remaining before the March 5 elections, the Ministry of Home Affairs is currently drafting an integrated security plan to safeguard the electoral process. So far, the government has yet to ensure a stable political and security environment. This has fueled speculation about potential successors should Prime Minister Karki fail to conduct the elections. Names such as Baburam Bhattarai and Kalyan Shrestha have surfaced as possible candidates. 

Adding to the tension, the Supreme Court recently issued an interim order restraining the government from implementing its decision to recall 11 ambassadors. The government, however, has defied the order, insisting the ambassadors return to Nepal, citing a lack of trust. This defiance has sparked a broader debate over the balance of power between the executive and the judiciary.

Strains between the government and Parliament are also deepening. HoR Speaker Devraj Ghimire has accused the interim government of acting against the legislature and its members. In a meeting with journalists at Singhadurbar, Ghimire said the government appears intent on weakening the parliamentary system. His statement was prompted by the government’s decision to remove personal secretaries of the Deputy Speaker, Vice-chairperson of the National Assembly and 58 National Assembly members.

Earlier this week, Prime Minister Karki met with chief ministers of all seven provinces. The provincial heads objected to several recent federal decisions that they claimed infringed on their constitutional powers. The meeting also touched upon election preparedness and coordination between federal and provincial governments.

Following the GenZ protests, the number of political parties in Nepal continues to rise. As of now, 18 new parties are awaiting registration with the Election Commission (EC). The most recent application is from the Nepali Communist Party, bringing the total number of registration requests to 18. Before the GenZ movement, only nine such applications had been filed, while the rest followed in its aftermath. Currently, 125 political parties have already obtained official registration certificates from the EC.

Except for the CPN-UML, most major political parties have not opposed the March 5 elections to elect the new House of Representatives. All major parties generally agree that holding elections is the only viable way to end the ongoing political and constitutional deadlock.

The UML, however, has proposed an alternative political roadmap that calls for the restoration of the dissolved House, arguing that the current environment is not conducive to holding elections. The party has also branded the Sushila Karki-led government as “unconstitutional.”

The Nepali Congress (NC), though seemingly in favor of elections, remains ambiguous in its position. The party is currently entangled in internal disputes over convening its General Convention to elect new leadership. Acting party president, Purna Bahadur Khadka, appears more aligned with KP Sharma Oli’s proposal for restoration, while general secretaries Gagan Kumar Thapa and Bishwa Prakash Sharma, who favor elections over reinstatement, are reportedly in secret talks with Prime Minister Karki to create an environment conducive to polls.

The March 5 election timeline is looking increasingly difficult, both politically and in terms of security. There is a deep trust deficit between Prime Minister Karki and the top leaders of major parties. Karki is reportedly hesitant to hold formal meetings with them, fearing backlash from GenZ protesters who have accused the political class of manipulation and betrayal.

Talks between the government and political parties have begun, but largely for show. Only lower-ranking party leaders are participating, and Baluwatar is quietly engaging with less influential figures within major parties who lack decision-making power. Among the top leaders—KP Sharma Oli, Sher Bahadur Deuba, and Pushpa Kamal Dahal—Deuba is currently abroad for medical treatment, while the other two remain in Kathmandu.

The Karki administration faces particular difficulty in engaging with Oli, who remains controversial due to the killing of 19 students during his tenure as prime minister. Karki is under pressure from Kathmandu Mayor Balendra Shah to arrest him, while the UML demands that the government revoke its decision restricting Oli’s foreign travel. UML leaders insist they cannot participate in elections while their party chair remains confined to the Kathmandu Valley.

Karki has also not reached out, at least publicly, to NC’s acting president Khadka or Maoist chair Dahal. Both leaders, insiders say, ignore the advice of their representatives attending meetings at Baluwatar. As such, real negotiations between the government and major parties have yet to begin. No formal dialogue has taken place among the three key political forces—the NC, UML, and CPN (Maoist Center).

Engaging with GenZ protest groups poses another challenge, as there is no unified leadership structure. With over two dozen groups claiming representation, neither the government nor the Election Commission has been able to hold substantive consultations with them.

Meanwhile, the government is preparing election-related policies and bylaws without meaningful consultations with political parties or with youth groups. Despite being formed in response to the protestors’ demands, the Karki administration has failed to reach any agreement with them to ensure a conducive electoral environment. As a result, the political climate remains far from ready for polls.

Security is another major concern. The government and Election Commission are in talks with security agencies to draft a comprehensive security blueprint. The Nepal Army’s role is expected to expand during the elections, though the exact modality remains undecided. The Nepal Police, already short on arms and ammunition, was further weakened during the Sept 8–9 GenZ protests. The government is considering seeking logistical assistance from India and China, but it remains uncertain whether that will be sufficient.

Even if the government manages to create a secure environment, political parties are not yet convinced that election campaigns can proceed safely. The police have yet to recover weapons looted during the protests. Youth wings of major political parties and several self-proclaimed Gen-Z groups remain in a confrontational mode. Unlike the largely peaceful 2022 national elections, the current context poses new and unpredictable security threats.

Time, meanwhile, is running out. Only 120 days remain before the March 5 deadline. If the government and parties reach an agreement soon, the EC could technically conduct the elections within 70–80 days. But given the current political trends, rapprochement between the government and major parties appears increasingly difficult.

Across all three major parties, establishment factions maintain firm control, making intra-party dialogue with rival groups largely symbolic. Beyond the NC, UML, and Maoists, other parties, such as the Rastriya Swatantra Party and Rastriya Prajatantra Party, have yet to even begin preparations for the polls.

Even without the GenZ protests, a leadership shake-up within the Nepali Congress (NC) was inevitable. Owing to the two-term limit in the party’s statute, President Sher Bahadur Deuba is ineligible to seek another term. Like CPN-UML Chair KP Sharma Oli, Deuba showed no interest in amending the statute for his leadership continuity.

The protests, however, have accelerated the leadership transition inside the NC. In the first Central Working Committee meeting held after the GenZ demonstrations, Deuba announced his decision to step down from active party politics and named Vice-president Purna Bahadur Khadka as the acting party president. While Deuba may continue to wield influence until the general convention, he is unlikely to return to party leadership. Facing mounting pressure to resign after the protests, Deuba urged party leaders to convene the general convention as soon as possible. 

Having led the NC for nearly a decade (2015–2025), many believe the party has grown weaker under Deuba’s leadership. His cautious, consensus-driven politics often prioritized coalition management over party reform. He also neglected organizational strengthening, leaving many sister organizations and departments headless and inactive.

The NC suffered a humiliating defeat in the 2017 national elections, only to regain prominence in 2022 through an electoral alliance with the CPN (Maoist Center). 

Now with Deuba’s exit, the Central Working Committee has begun discussions on convening the party’s general convention. A group of leaders has submitted signatures from 53 percent of convention representatives demanding an early convention to elect new leadership. Debates are ongoing over whether to hold a regular or special convention, but either way, the timing is apt since the current leadership’s term is about to expire.

The key question now is: who will succeed Deuba? Several contenders are already preparing for the leadership race. General Secretary Gagan Kumar Thapa has publicly declared his candidacy, while senior leader Shekhar Koirala has confirmed he will also run. Within the Deuba camp, speculation is rife that acting president Khadka could contest, though it is unclear whether senior leaders from the faction will unite behind him. Other veterans, including Prakash Man Singh, Bimalendra Nidhi, and Shashank Koirala, are also said to be weighing their options.

The party is now divided over whether to organize a regular or special general convention. Leaders close to Deuba argue that a special convention would rely on old delegates and fail to capture the sentiments of GenZ. They insist that a regular convention would allow more young members to participate.

“We need to involve new members as well. The young generation (GenZ) should be given active membership, and the renewal process for old members must be finished too,” said NC Spokesperson Prakash Sharan Mahat. “We also need to conclude the convention process starting from the ward level. Because of that, some colleagues believe that there won’t be enough time to hold it in Mangsir (November–December).”

According to the Active Membership Management Committee, 81 percent of active memberships have been renewed as of mid-October, though data entry is still ongoing. So far, 60 districts have completed the renewal process.

Senior leader Shekhar Koirala, however, has called for the regular general convention to be held in Mangsir (November–December). “If other political parties have already begun preparations to hold their conventions in Mangsir, why can’t we do the same? If we truly want to make the Nepali Congress a party of new direction and new possibilities, we must hold our 15th general convention in Mangsir 2082 (November–December 2025),”  he said at the party’s Central Committee meeting. “I am confident that the General Secretary will bring forward a schedule for it, and I want to make it clear that I will extend my full support to that plan.” Koirala added that the NC must hold its regular general convention on time, as there is keen interest in the future direction of the Nepali Congress.

Koirala’s statement may have struck a chord among younger party members, who see the upcoming convention as an opportunity to redefine what the NC stands for in future and to win back relevance among the youth population. The challenge, however, lies in balancing the party’s traditional power structures with the growing demand for generational change.

The coming months will be crucial. The way the country’s oldest democratic party handles its leadership transition will not only determine its internal cohesion but also its role in shaping Nepal’s political future.

Time is running out for former Sushila Karki’s government to prepare for the March 5 elections. Tasked solely with holding polls within a stipulated timeframe, the administration has failed to create a conducive political and security environment. Engagement with political parties has been minimal, the security situation remains fragile, and confusion persists over election security modalities. Political parties, meanwhile, remain reluctant to participate. Deep-seated problems within the government are compounding the crisis.

Flawed beginning

From day one, Karki adopted an overtly anti-party stance, engaging primarily with self-styled Gen-Z activists who lack institutional legitimacy. Allowing such individuals to attend government meetings eroded trust and convinced political parties that the administration sought to undermine them. Her early hints at arresting party leaders further deepened hostility, damaging her neutrality as the head of an election government.

Anti-party approach

From the outset, Karki adopted an overtly anti-party posture, choosing to engage with self-styled Gen-Z activists over institutional actors. Allowing such individuals to attend cabinet meetings blurred the line between activism and governance, eroding trust. For political parties, this was confirmation that the government was not neutral but adversarial. Her early hints at arresting senior leaders deepened hostility and exposed a worrying authoritarian streak in an ostensibly non-partisan caretaker government.

Alienating the old guard​​​​​​​

Karki has publicly said she is not interested in meeting senior leaders of major parties, suggesting they should retire to make way for a younger generation. This statement not only offended top leaders, but also ignored the political reality that leadership change is unlikely before party conventions. As prime minister, she should have engaged directly with senior leaders instead of delegating the task to the President.

Misreading the Gen-Z movement​​​​​​​

Despite aligning herself with the Gen-Z protests, Karki has shown little understanding of their structure or motives. The movement is not a unified entity but a loose network of groups with divergent demands. She has admitted meeting over 20 factions with conflicting agendas, making it impossible to satisfy all sides. Her struggle to select ministers, with youth factions opposing each other’s nominees, exposes her lack of strategic direction.

Unclear response to September violence​​​​​​​

The government has yet to clarify its stance on the September 8–9 violence, during which several people were killed and property vandalized. Police arrests have angered Gen-Z activists, while the administration has failed to distinguish between cases warranting prosecution and those eligible for amnesty. The hurried formation of the Gauri Bahadur Karki-led probe panel without consensus from parties or youth representatives has further muddied the waters.

Incomplete cabinet​​​​​​​

Despite two expansions, Karki’s cabinet remains incomplete. Rather than forming a broad-based team with diverse expertise, she has failed to reach out to capable professionals and independent figures. This delay has weakened the government’s efficiency and credibility.

Populist and risky decisions​​​​​​​

Karki has favored populist moves over substantive reforms. Her decision to withdraw security personnel from senior political leaders was rash, especially amid growing threats. Major parties now rely on their youth wings for protection. Similarly, police raids on relatives of political figures were conducted without transparency or explanation, reinforcing perceptions of bias.

Leadership under pressure​​​​​​​

Karki’s public remarks suggest she is struggling to assert herself as prime minister. She has admitted facing pressure from influential figures, including Kathmandu Mayor Balendra Shah, over arrests linked to the deaths of 19 students. Her inability to act independently or withstand external influence has raised doubts about her authority and neutrality.

Economic neglect​​​​​​​

The private sector, already battered by prolonged protests, has received little government support. Instead of ensuring business security, the administration worsened the crisis by disrupting electricity supply to industries. As a result, more than two dozen factories have shut down, deepening economic distress.

Diplomatic mismanagement

Karki’s handling of foreign affairs has been equally poor. It took more than a month to brief the diplomatic community in Kathmandu about her government’s priorities. The sudden recall of ambassadors from 11 countries, without clear justification, will leave key missions vacant for at least a year—even if elections proceed on schedule. Her claim that some ambassadors questioned the government’s longevity is unconvincing and reflects poor judgment.

A familiar pattern

Despite promising a break from the past, Karki’s administration increasingly mirrors previous party-led governments—frequent bureaucratic transfers, non-consultative decisions, populist gestures, and a failure to maintain neutrality. With time running out, Prime Minister Sushila Karki’s government appears adrift—caught between Gen-Z idealism and political realism, and struggling to deliver on its most basic mandate: holding credible elections.