Submit your Article

President Ramchandra Paudel administered the oath of office and secrecy to four newly-appointed ministers on Monday, further expanding the interim cabinet led by Prime Minister Sushila Karki.

Those sworn in at a ceremony held at the President’s Office, Sheetal Niwas, were former Supreme Court Justice Anil Kumar Sinha, National Innovation Center founder Mahabir Pun, journalist Jagadish Kharel, and agriculture scientist Madan Pariyar.

According to the allocation of responsibilities, Sinha has been assigned the Ministry of Industry, Commerce and Supplies, the Ministry of Law, Justice and Parliamentary Affairs, and the Ministry of Land Management, Cooperatives and Poverty Alleviation. Pun has been given the Ministry of Education, Science and Technology, Kharel will head the Ministry of Information, Communication and Technology, while Pariyar has taken charge of the Ministry of Agriculture and Livestock Development.

This is the second expansion of the cabinet since Karki assumed office as interim prime minister on Sept 12 following the GenZ movement. With the new appointments, the size of the council of ministers has reached eight.

Earlier, the prime minister had inducted Kulman Ghising, Om Prakash Aryal, and Rameshore Khanal as ministers. Following Monday’s reshuffle, Khanal has been given the additional responsibility of the Ministry of Federal Affairs and General Administration alongside the Ministry of Finance. Aryal has been relieved of the law portfolio and will now look only after the Ministry of Home Affairs.

Despite these additions, Prime Minister Karki continues to retain nine ministries under her direct control. These include the ministries of Foreign Affairs; Defense; Health and Population; Women, Children and Senior Citizens; Labor, Employment and Social Security; Culture, Tourism and Civil Aviation; Forests and Environment; Urban Development; and Energy, Water Resources and Irrigation.

The swearing-in ceremony was attended by senior officials including Speaker Dev Raj Ghimire, National Assembly Chair Narayan Prasad Dahal and Prime Minister Karki. This is the first time Speaker Ghimire gave his attendance in an official forum after the recent political shuffle.

After assuming office, the newly-appointed ministers outlined their priorities. Education Minister Pun said his immediate focus would be on strengthening science, technology and innovation. He cautioned against the tendency to form unnecessary committees, stressing that resources should be directed to practical programs with measurable outcomes.

Pun assumed office in Keshar Mahal. Following the arson during the GenZ movement that damaged the Ministry of Education inside Singhadurbar, the new education minister’s office was prepared at Keshar Mahal. 

Speaking to journalists, Pun said he would not speak much immediately as his appointment was sudden. “If I were Shiva or God, I would have said I’ll do this and that using my third eye. But suddenly, I’ve been brought here as a minister. I don’t want any perks or facilities. I’ll stay here in the ministry with just a bed,” he said. In a lighthearted tone, he added, “The ministry must have a kitchen. I’ll cook and eat here and sleep here as well.”

Pun stressed that he would quickly implement good suggestions received during his tenure. He said his top priority would be science, technology and innovation, in line with the ministry’s mandate. While education is also linked to his portfolio, he said he would not immediately speak about reforms and changes in education. He noted that he never wanted to become a minister, but circumstances brought him here.

The new minister emphasized that merely forming committees would not be enough; rather, concrete actions must be taken. Before signing his first decision upon assuming office, Pun made this point clear. Ministry officials had requested him to sign a decision to form a new committee of think tanks. Officials explained that based on the opinions and suggestions of experts in the field of science and technology, the ministry had decided to form a committee to guide future policies and programs, identifying four key areas to begin with.

However, Pun objected, saying forming committees alone would not suffice without securing financial resources. He pointed out that issues often remain stuck in ministries for want of funding. “Committees are always formed, but nothing progresses. The real issue is resources. We must first secure financial sources. Things have stalled simply because there’s no money. We need to identify where funds can come from,” Pun said.

Pun announced that a team of experts would be formed to work on the Education Act. Asked what the Act would look like, he admitted, “I don’t know yet. I’ll form a team of experts, and based on their advice, I’ll move forward.” Since parliament has already been dissolved, rendering all parliamentary committees inactive, he appealed to experts to provide honest recommendations.

Asked about people calling him the “scrap minister,” Pun requested not to be addressed as a minister outside the ministry premises. He also said he would engage young people between the ages of 16 and 30 in his work. On the issues of ending corruption and ensuring good governance raised by the GenZ generation, he stated that his ministry would also pay close attention.

Information Minister Kharel announced that his ministry would launch a campaign to expand free internet services in public spaces across 10 major cities within the next five months. He said the initiative would improve digital access for citizens, particularly students and professionals who rely on public connectivity.

Kharel refused to sign the first decision prepared by ministry staff, instead asking them to bring a different one. Later, his first decision was to provide free internet service in public places across 10 major cities within five months. At his swearing-in and subsequent press conference, Kharel vowed to deliver visible results “with dust and ashes still in hand,” expressing his wish to trust Nepal’s bureaucracy and pledging non-interference in their work.

Industry Minister Sinha, who appeared visibly emotional during his remarks, recalled those who lost their lives in the recent GenZ protests. He pledged that the sacrifices of the youth would not be forgotten and said his ministry would prioritize reforms aimed at promoting justice and transparency. He signed his first decision to provide employment opportunities for families of martyrs and the injured from the protests, as well as to prioritize domestic products in government procurements.

Agriculture Minister Pariyar emphasized the importance of modernizing agriculture and strengthening farmers’ livelihoods. He said his ministry would work to ensure food security, boost productivity and promote sustainable practices in the sector. He approved the formation of a coordination committee to implement Nepal-Korea cooperation on potato and rice crop research. 

Addressing journalists, Pariyar pledged to work differently in the agriculture sector, prioritizing elections while also tackling governance issues and corruption. Experts stress that Nepal’s agriculture is in crisis, with multidimensional problems such as land ownership, access to quality seeds and fertilizer, irrigation, climate change, global trade policies, and weak infrastructure. They argue that long-term systemic solutions are needed to build resilient and inclusive agricultural systems. Pariyar now faces the challenge of addressing farmers’ dissatisfaction, resource limitations and market management issues during his tenure.

The expansion of the cabinet comes at a time when the Karki-led interim government is under pressure to respond to the demands raised during the GenZ movement, which called for accountability, reforms and better governance. The appointment of professionals and experts from outside traditional party politics has been seen as a response to public sentiment.

Consequent to the Gen Z movement, former Chief Justice Sushila Karki (74) has become the interim Prime Minister of Nepal, making history as the nation’s first female PM. Karki had already set a precedent by becoming the first woman to serve as Chief Justice of Nepal. In this sense, she has achieved a double milestone—being the first woman to hold two of the country’s top five constitutional positions. Her impartial judgments and bold leadership undoubtedly paved the way for this achievement, though she is not without shortcomings.

As the chief executive, she committed two notable mistakes. First, she projected herself as the Prime Minister and made this public through foreign media, despite only being proposed by certain sections of the Gen Z movement. Second, during a hospital visit to the injured, she reacted emotionally and told one young victim that he had to “remove the ridge” of the policeman responsible for his injuries. Furthermore, in yesterday’s cabinet meeting, the government made a biased decision regarding the treatment of the families of policemen who succumbed to death. Her interpretation of the constitution on the issue of dissolving parliament has also come under question, as she had earlier denounced dissolution as unconstitutional, yet now she has done the same.

Nevertheless, this is not the right time to scrutinize the weaknesses of this cabinet. It deserves the benefit of the doubt. On Sept 15, Prime Minister Karki formed a small cabinet with three ministers—two retired government officials and one lawyer, who had previously served as legal advisor to the mayor of Kathmandu metropolis, Balen Shah. The mayor is widely regarded as an opponent of political parties. 

Interestingly, no members of the Gen Z movement have been included in the cabinet. Symbolically, the inclusion of at least one Gen Z representative would have strengthened the message of this transition. There is still room for her to make such an adjustment. This article reviews the unfolding political situation in Nepal and offers some suggestions for Prime Minister Karki’s interim government.

Questions and concerns

First, why did the Gen Z movement begin? It remains unclear who the real leaders are, as multiple groups have claimed ownership. Videos and images suggest that some genuine Gen Z activists have been sidelined, while others with questionable legitimacy have taken control. One can observe the presence of youth influenced by Balen Shah, Harka Sampang, Durga Prasain, Sudan Gurung, and several others—at least a dozen figures in total. These characters are anarchic. 

Among them, Miraj Dhungana publicly announced a two-point agenda—political stability and transparency. Recently, however, he has disappeared from public notice and has claimed he is under threat. This is unfortunate, as his agenda reflected the true aspirations of the movement. Contrary to popular belief, a ban on social media was not the central cause of the protests, though it may have acted as a trigger. The core issue was corruption. My humble request to the Gen Z generation is to remain focused on that declared agenda—fighting corruption—with sincerity and consistency.

Second, the GenZ leaders must publicly condemn the criminal acts carried out during the protests. There is little doubt that genuine youth activists were not behind the arson and vandalism that destroyed public institutions such as the Supreme Court, Parliament building, and other government offices, nor the violent attacks on the homes of political leaders. Evidence indicates that criminal elements infiltrated the protests to destabilize Nepal. Visuals suggest involvement by individuals linked to several parties—including the RPP, RSP, the Maoists and some Madhes-based groups. The parties have denounced the violence and made it clear that they will take action against those involved in the riots.  Such violence must be unequivocally condemned, and perpetrators brought to justice. Likewise, the killing of peaceful protestors seeking reform and accountability deserves the strongest condemnation.

Third, conspiracy theories have begun to circulate. Some western media reports allege that the United States has encouraged violent uprisings in South Asia, citing Bangladesh and now Nepal, with the aim of countering China or creating a Christian-dominated state that could host US military bases. While such reports remain unverified, Nepal must remain vigilant against its territory being used by external powers. Claims that KP Sharma Oli’s government was “too close to China” and therefore had to be removed are baseless. Oli has consistently prioritized Nepal’s national interest.

Suggestions

As an interim government, Karki’s cabinet has a limited mandate—primarily to restore stability and prepare for elections within six months. And, of course, to eliminate corruption.  

Organizing credible elections within such a short period is undoubtedly the toughest challenge, especially after serious damage to government institutions. Yet it is not impossible if pursued with determination. Failure, however, would create dangerous consequences, including political vacuum and instability.

As a legal expert and former Chief Justice, Karki must remain firmly committed to protecting the constitution and democracy. If elections are delayed, foreign interference, criminal infiltration or authoritarian ambitions could emerge. Nepal cannot afford to join the list of failed states like Afghanistan, Syria or Libya. The Nepali Army has shown commendable restraint and loyalty to civilian authority; its timely intervention within constitutional limits could prevent greater damage. Still, why didn’t the army take control of the situation in the afternoon and waited till 10 pm? 

Corruption remains Nepal’s most deep-rooted problem. Karki’s government should investigate the wealth of both political leaders and bureaucrats. All major scandals should be investigated without bias, and legal action must be taken regardless of party affiliation. You have risen with the slogans of taking action against the corrupt people. You should immediately take action. Start investing the cases and files them. 

Prime Minister Karki should not overburden her interim administration with unrealistic goals. She must concentrate on two essential tasks: holding elections on time and combating corruption. She should also remain committed to the constitution, resist external pressures, and not be swayed by voices hostile to political parties. In the end, political parties remain the only foundation for democratic governance—not partyless systems or mob-led movements. Madam Prime Minister, history has placed a unique responsibility upon you. Fulfill your mandate with courage, integrity, and focus.

Nepal today looks like a textbook case of “illiberal democracy.” The country holds competitive elections and changes governments through the ballot box, but core liberal rights—free expression, religious liberty, equal treatment before the law, and checks on executive power—are consistently narrowed or unevenly enforced. This combination of electoral competition and weakened civil liberties is what scholars mean by an illiberal democracy: a political system that is democratic in form yet illiberal in practice.

Start with the scoreboard. Freedom House rates Nepal “Partly Free,” with a 2024 global freedom score of 62/100, made up of 28/40 for political rights and 34/60 for civil liberties. The summary makes clear why: formal institutions exist, yet corruption persists, key rights are unevenly protected, and transitional-justice bodies remain unfulfilled. These are not the marks of a liberal rule-of-law state but of an electoral system that struggles to protect basic freedoms beyond election day.

Recent history shows how fragile constitutional norms can be. In 2020 and again in May 2021, then–Prime Minister KP Sharma Oli dissolved the lower house, triggering a constitutional crisis. Nepal’s Supreme Court ultimately reinstated parliament and ordered the appointment of a rival as prime minister in July 2021. The Court’s intervention was a democratic backstop, but the attempted dissolutions themselves were classic illiberal moves—executive bids to sidestep legislative constraints.

Freedom of expression illustrates the pattern even more starkly. Authorities have repeatedly used the Electronic Transactions Act (ETA)—a law ostensibly aimed at cybercrime—to detain or investigate critics and journalists for online speech. Human Rights Watch has documented arrests and called for reforms to stop abuse of the ETA, while the Committee to Protect Journalists reported in February 2024 that two reporters were arrested under Section 47 of the Act following posts about alleged police misconduct. The message such prosecutions send is chilling: criticism can be criminalized if it travels over the internet.

The trend accelerated this week. On Sept 4, Nepal announced it would block major social media platforms—including Facebook and, reportedly, others—that did not register with the government and appoint local compliance officers. Officials framed this as “responsible” regulation; opposition parties and rights groups warned it was a broad tool for censorship. No liberal democracy should be comfortable with a government switch that can throttle the main channels of public discourse.

Religious freedom is constrained by law in ways that are hard to square with liberal principles. Nepal’s 2015 Constitution proclaims secularism, but the 2017 Penal Code criminalizes “converting” another person and contains “blasphemy-style” offences that penalize outraging religious feelings, with penalties that can include imprisonment. The International Commission of Jurists has warned that these provisions are vague and open to abuse, chilling legitimate religious teaching and expression. Liberalism protects the individual’s right to persuade as well as to believe; criminalizing peaceful proselytism curtails that liberty.

Rule of law also suffers from pervasive corruption—another hallmark of illiberal systems where institutions are captured or politicized. Transparency International’s 2024 Corruption Perceptions Index gives Nepal a score of 34/100 and ranks it 107th of 180 countries. That low score signals weak safeguards and uneven enforcement, which in turn erodes equal treatment before the law and citizens’ trust that public power serves public, not private, ends.

Transitional justice remains a long, unfinished project, undermining accountability for grave abuses during the 1996–2006 conflict. Parliament adopted a new law in Aug 2024 to restart the process, but Amnesty International and others flagged serious gaps, and victims’ groups criticized the 2025 appointments to the two commissions as politicized. Human Rights Watch’s submission to Nepal’s 2025 Universal Periodic Review describes continuing impunity and warns that the social media bill would add new speech crimes with prison terms. A liberal order requires credible accountability for past crimes and robust protection for present dissent; Nepal is still falling short on both.

Citizenship rights show progress mixed with persistent discrimination. In May 2023, President Ramchandra Paudel authenticated amendments to the Citizenship Act, clearing a path to documents for hundreds of thousands—especially in the Tarai—who had long been effectively stateless. Yet rights groups note remaining gender-based discrimination, including limits on women’s ability to pass citizenship on equal terms, illustrating how formal fixes do not automatically produce equal rights in practice. An illiberal democracy often delivers partial reforms that leave basic inequalities intact.

To be fair, Nepal has also seen liberalizing decisions from its courts, notably the Supreme Court’s 2023 interim order enabling registration of same-sex marriages, with the first registration recorded that November. These are genuine steps toward a more open society, and Freedom House credits them as improvements. But those bright spots coexist with a broader environment where speech can bring handcuffs, religion is policed, corruption is entrenched, and executive power tests constitutional limits. Liberal democracy is not only about counting votes; it is about guarding rights. On that test, Nepal still falls short.

Nepal’s voters deserve better than a choice between instability and control. A liberal path is available: repeal or overhaul the ETA and any new social media law to protect legitimate speech; narrow or scrap anti-conversion clauses that criminalize peaceful persuasion; empower truly independent anti-corruption and human rights bodies; and make transitional justice credible, victim-centered, and insulated from political horse-trading. Until reforms like these take hold, the most accurate description of Nepal’s political system is an illiberal democracy: electoral, yes—but not fully free.

I remember my first encounter with a Meconopsis betonicifolia (Himalayan blue poppy). It wasn’t in a perfect, well-known garden but on a rocky, exposed trail in the Annapurna Conservation Area of Nepal. There, at over 13,005 feet, this delicate, stunning blue flower seemed impossible, standing out against a backdrop of harsh gray rock and constant wind. It wasn’t just a plant, rather it was a conversation starter about resilience. The poppy’s survival, along with that of countless other species in this mountain nation, raises a crucial question for all of us: What do we lose when we allow the world’s unique and fragile ecosystems to disappear?

Nepal often evokes a single, iconic image of Sagarmatha, with which many associate specially in America and Europe. It’s called the roof of the world, the ultimate challenge, a symbol of human endurance. Yet defining Nepal by its peaks misses the deeper story. The true ‘roof’ of Nepal is not just the snow-covered summit of Sagarmatha; rather it is the rich layer of life that covers its valleys, hills, and high-altitude slopes. Nepal isn’t just a geological wonder rather it is a botanical treasure of a biodiversity hotspot nestled between the giants of China and India forming home to many plants found nowhere else on earth. This biodiversity includes 3.2 percent of the world’s flora and 1.1 percent of its fauna, according to the Department of National Parks and Wildlife Conservation (DNPWC, 2025), representing Nepal’s forests. This isn’t just a nice travel story, rather it’s a wake-up call. Nepal’s rich plant life is under threat, and the importance of protecting it expands far beyond the country.

The global conversation about climate change and environmental protection has focused on large-scale crises like deforestation in the Amazon, melting polar ice caps, and coral bleaching for decades facilitating global warming and climate change. These are important issues, but they can feel distant and abstract, even for those who recognize their importance. The struggle of a ghost orchid in a Nepali forest or a rare rhododendron might seem trivial compared to these problems. However, it is in these small, local issues that we are losing the global battle for biodiversity.

There are 465 species of lichen, representing 2.3 percent of global diversity, 1,822 species of fungi (2.6 percent), 1,001 species of algae (2.5 percent), 1,150 species of bryophytes (8.2 percent), 534 species of pteridophytes (5.1 percent), 26 species of gymnosperms (5.1 percent), and 6,973 species of angiosperms (3.2 percent), according to the Government of Nepal/Ministry of Forest and Soil Conservation (GoN/MoFSC, 2014). The flora of Nepal isn't just interesting for researchers while it supports local communities and holds great potential for global health. These are traditional ayurvedic medicine, still widely used today, that rely on wild plants from the Himalayas. Over 700 plant species in Nepal are known for their healing properties. These aren't just local remedies but also genetic blueprints for future drug discoveries. One of them is taxol, a chemotherapy drug derived from the bark of the Taxus wallichiana (Himalayan yew) tree. Its discovery represented the enormous and often hidden value of various plant species. How many more ‘taxols’ remain untapped in the remote forests of Nepal?

The global market for medicinal and aromatic plants (MAPs) is worth billions, and Nepal plays a significant role, supplying raw materials to countries like China and India. This trade is still mostly unregulated and often depends on informal collectors who harvest unsustainably, which threatens the survival of valuable and rare species while providing little economic benefit to local communities. The loss of a plant is not just a loss for a botanist which directly affects the livelihood of a farmer, a healer, and a child’s future.

Some might wonder, “If the situation is so serious, why aren’t the Nepalese government and local people doing more?” This is a valid question, and the answer is complicated. In a country where many live in poverty and face daily struggles for survival, sustainable conservation can seem like a luxury. The immediate need for firewood, food, and income usually overshadows the distant goal of saving a rare plant. This isn’t about lack of will, rather it’s a problem with the system. Policy solutions must recognize this reality. We can’t just ask people to stop harvesting plants. We need to create an economic model that makes conservation a desirable choice. This means equipping local communities with the knowledge and resources to grow rather than merely collecting medicinal plants and investing in community managed forests by establishing fair trade cooperatives that provide a stable income for those who look after the land. 

The international community, including policymakers and consumers, needs to get involved. When you buy herbal supplements or essential oils, do you know their origins? We must ask for transparency and support companies that source their products responsibly. We must urge our governments to invest in international partnerships focused not just on aid, but on building sustainable and friendly economies. This change in thinking is crucial. It shifts the conversation from “what are they doing wrong?” to “how can we all improve?” It turns the issue from an abstract environmental disaster into a real chance for global cooperation and ethical trade.

Nepal’s natural legacy goes beyond its mountains; it exists in its soil, forests, and air. This legacy belongs to all of us, a shared resource for medicine, culture, and wonder. The effort to create a vibrant, healthy Nepal requires a different kind of ambition than climbing a mountain. It pushes us to look beyond the obvious and appreciate the intricate beauty hidden in its valleys and on its slopes. We must understand that the flora of Nepal is not just a backdrop for adventure, but it is central to the country’s history, present, and future. We aren't just saving a few rare plants by protecting them. We are preserving the genetic library of a delicate ecosystem, a potential source of cures, and a valuable lesson in how humanity can coexist with the natural world. This is the new Everest we must all aspire to climb.