Submit your Article

Nepal has once again plunged into a deep constitutional crisis. What began as peaceful protests by Generation Z, initially demanding the lifting of the social media ban and an end to entrenched corruption, has snowballed into a political upheaval that led to the fall of the powerful Nepali Congress–CPN-UML coalition government, and dissolution of the Parliament, creating a legislative vacuum. Nepal had faced the similar crisis in 2012 when the first Constituent Assembly (CA) was dissolved without drafting the new constitution.

On September 9, when the protests turned violent—targeting state institutions such as the executive, legislature, and judiciary—Prime Minister KP Sharma Oli stepped down in an effort to calm tensions. However, his resignation failed to pacify the growing unrest. In response, the Nepal Army (NA), albeit a bit late, stepped in to restore law and order across the country. NA not only restored relative calm but also strategically engaged with both protestors to keep the street peaceful.  After stabilizing the situation, the NA handed over political responsibility to President Ram Chandra Poudel. Following intensive negotiations with protestors, political parties, and constitutional experts, President Ram Chandra Poudel appointed former Chief Justice Sushila Karki as prime minister—a decision favored by a section of the protestors.

However, this move has raised serious constitutional debates. Karki is not a sitting member of Parliament, and the 2015 constitution lacks any provision for appointing a non-parliamentarian as Prime Minister. The presidential statement justifying her appointment does not cite any specific constitutional clause. Instead, it claims that the President exercised his inherent constitutional authority as the guardian of the constitution in an "abnormal and difficult" situation, and that the appointment was made with the consent of outgoing Prime Minister KP Sharma Oli. Further controversy erupted when, based on Karki’s recommendation, the President dissolved Parliament and announced general elections for March 5, 2026. While this move has temporarily filled the executive vacuum, it has opened the door to a major constitutional showdown likely to be challenged in the Supreme Court. Political parties mainly Nepali Congress had advised amending the constitution to pave the way for Karki’s appointment as prime minister but those suggestions were ultimately ignored.

Although there were fears that the constitution might be dismantled under pressure from the streets, it has—at least for now—survived, and parties are thankful to the president. Yet, the path forward remains fraught. The Nepal Bar Association has condemned the dissolution of Parliament as unconstitutional, arguing that it violates past Supreme Court rulings and undermines democratic principles. It warned that such moves could erode public trust in the constitution and democratic institutions. Notably, the oath-taking ceremony of the new Prime Minister was marked by the absence of key figures such as the Speakers of both houses and heads of constitutional bodies, signaling a growing institutional disconnect.

A key challenge for the Karki-led government is whether it can successfully conduct elections within six months, as mandated by the President. Achieving this will require navigating the conflicting interests of political parties and street protestors. Failure to hold timely elections could plunge the country into yet another constitutional crisis, especially since there will be no legislature in place to resolve it. Historically, the international community has played a key role in supporting Nepal’s elections, constitution drafting, and democratic consolidation.

But today, the global geopolitical environment has changed. Even democratic countries appear more concerned with strategic interests than championing democracy and human rights. International actors now prefer to maintain working relationships with whoever holds power, regardless of their democratic credentials. Domestically, public trust in political parties has eroded due to years of perceived corruption, incompetence, and anti-democratic tendencies. Meanwhile, a growing internal movement is openly calling for the dismantling of the 2015 constitution, and with it, the abolition of federalism, secularism, and the broader democratic framework.

In such a volatile scenario, the media has a vital role to play in safeguarding democracy. Unfortunately, over the past year, media freedom has come under systematic attack. During the protests, prominent media houses such as Annapurna Media Network and Kantipur Media Group were targeted, with their offices torched during pro-monarchy demonstrations in May. These attacks inflicted significant material damage and deep psychological trauma on journalists. Yet, the international community has remained largely silent on these violations of press freedom. In addition to physical attacks, journalists face increasing online and offline threats, further shrinking Nepal’s civic space. It remains uncertain whether the new government will initiate investigations into these incidents, or whether national and international stakeholders will take meaningful action.

In conclusion, Nepal’s hard-won constitution—which institutionalized democracy, federalism, secularism, and minority rights—is now under serious threat. The immediate priority for all political parties, civil society, and democratic stakeholders should be to support the current government in conducting free and fair elections within the next six months. However, they must also maintain constant vigilance to ensure the government does not veer toward unconstitutional or autocratic practices.

Recent developments suggest that the Nepal Army, while active in stabilizing the situation, is not interested in staging a coup and appears to be respecting constitutional values. Similarly, President Poudel has, despite making compromises, largely positioned himself as a defender of democracy and constitutional order. The coming months will be decisive. The success of the new government depends on PM Kari’s ability to adopt a broader and more inclusive approach to national issues. As a former chief justice, there are high expectations that Karki will uphold the constitution and remain uncompromising in her commitment to democracy.

Neighbouring country India has welcomed the formation of the new interim government in Nepal. 

Issuing a statement, Indian Ministry of External Affairs welcomed the development immediately after former Chief Justice Sushila Karki took charge as the Interim Prime Minister. 

“We welcome the formation of the new interim government under the leadership of Sushila Karki. We hope this would help in fostering peace and stability in Nepal”, the statement read. 

As a close neighbour, a fellow democracy and a long-term development partner, India will continue to work together with Nepal for the welfare and prosperity of both the nations and the people, it has been stated.

President Ram Chandra Paudel has dissolved the House of Representatives, the lower House of the federal parliament, upon the recommendation of Prime Minister Sushila Karki. It is effective from 11 pm Friday. 

According to a press release issued by the Office of the President,  the next election to the HoR will be held on March 5, 2026.

President Ram Chandra Poudel on Friday administered the oath of office and secrecy to newly appointed Prime Minister Sushila Karki, who will serve as interim head of government with the primary responsibility of holding national elections within the next six months.

Karki has made history as the country’s first female prime minister, breaking her own earlier record from 2016 when she became Nepal’s first female chief justice.

Earlier, President Poudel appointed her under Article 61 of the Constitution, which states that it is the president’s duty and responsibility “to adhere to and protect the Constitution.” However, Karki’s appointment is likely to be challenged in the Supreme Court, as Article 61 does not grant the president the authority to appoint a prime minister.

According to current constitutional provisions, the prime minister must be a member of the House of Representatives and nominated under Article 76. Top leaders of the major political parties, except former prime minister Baburam Bhattarai, boycotted the oath-taking ceremony. 

Even KP Sharma Oli, who resigned following the killing of 19 Gen-Z protesters, did not attend the swearing-in ceremony, breaking the tradition of an outgoing prime minister formally handing over power to the incoming one. The ceremony was attended by ambassadors from various countries, including the US and China, along with government officials, security chiefs, and Gen-Z representatives.

The violent protests of Sept 8 and 9 left at least 51 people dead and more than 400 injured, with the toll expected to rise as police continue to recover bodies from burned private homes and commercial buildings. In line with the demands of Gen-Z protesters, Nepal’s 275-member House of Representatives is expected to be dissolved once election dates are announced.

Karki’s foremost challenge will be winning the confidence of major political parties such as the Nepali Congress, CPN-UML, and CPN (Maoist Center), which together command a two-thirds majority in parliament. These parties have already opposed the possible dissolution of parliament and the announcement of new elections, arguing that parliament should not be dissolved without a clear guarantee of elections.

Soon after Karki took the oath, the Maoist Center issued a statement opposing preparations to dissolve parliament, becoming the first party to formally reject her move. Similarly, UML General Secretary Shankar Pokhrel has also spoken out against it. Other major parties that remained silent in the immediate aftermath of the protests may gradually unite to push their own agenda.

In 2013, the interim government led by then–chief justice Khil Raj Regmi successfully held the second Constituent Assembly elections, largely due to strong backing from major political parties. This time, however, Karki is unlikely to receive such support. She faces double pressure: from Gen-Z protesters demanding action against political parties in the name of fighting corruption, and from established political forces at both the central and local levels who may resist cooperating with her government.

At the same time, Gen-Z and other political groups are pressing for constitutional amendments—or even the scrapping of the charter—an agenda that the major parties strongly oppose. If Karki fails to hold elections within six months, she will come under pressure to step down.

Another major challenge will be reviving Nepal’s already troubled economy, which has been severely hit by the protests. She will also face domestic and international pressure to address serious human rights violations committed during the unrest. Another key responsibility will be tackling corruption, including investigations into past scandals, which remains a central demand of the youth. With reports of rights violations by both police and protesters, public pressure is likely to mount for impartial investigations and prosecutions.

On the economic front, Karki must restore security and confidence in the private sector. Attacks on industries and businesses have sent negative signals about Nepal’s investment climate and further threatened the tourism industry. The lack of jobs and political stability could push even more young Nepalis to seek employment abroad.

Externally, Karki faces the task of convincing the international community that Nepal is safe for investment, while securing support for reconstruction and elections. Like every government before hers, she will have to carefully manage relations with the three major powers most influential in Nepal—India, China, and the United States.

Photo: Photo Library