Submit your Article

KP Sharma Oli has made it clear that he is not planning to step down as party chair in the near future. This comes despite calls from the public and party leaders to hand over the leadership to the new generation.

In a Zoom meeting with the party’s district presidents, the head of CPN-UML said that what happened on September 8–9 was a conspiracy against him, his party, and ultimately the country. “Though I am kicked out of power, I am continuously working for the party and country,” said Oli.

Even the top leaders of the party want to see Oli continue as leader. Within the UML, leader Mahesh Basnet has been vocal against the government and the Zen-Z protestors. Other top leaders—except General Secretary Shankar Pokhrel, who frequently expresses his opinion on Facebook—have remained silent.

Meanwhile, the Nepali Congress is preparing to hold a series of meetings in the coming weeks. Party President Sher Bahadur Deuba, who has yet to appear in public after being attacked by protestors on September 9, has called a meeting of the party’s senior leaders to discuss the agenda for the Central Working Committee, which will convene soon. The CWC meeting is likely to clarify the party’s position on elections and the restoration of democracy.

Deuba is also expected to appoint Purna Bahadur Khadka as acting party president in response to the Zen-Z protests. Party General Secretaries Gagan Kumar Thapa and Bishwa Prakash Sharma have initiated a signature campaign demanding a special general convention of the party. However, this move is being opposed by second-tier leaders aligned with Deuba, who are attempting to block Thapa’s rise to party leadership.

Amid fears of another wave of Zen-Z protests and possible clashes with youth organizations of major political parties, the Ministry of Home Affairs has issued an appeal for dialogue and negotiation. It has urged protestors to express their agendas through civil, dignified, and peaceful means.

Meanwhile, media reports suggest that the chiefs of security agencies and the Home Minister have differing opinions on how to proceed against those involved in the killing of 19 students on September 8 and the vandalism and arson the next day. A group of Zen-Z protestors is demanding the arrest of Oli and his Home Minister Ramesh Lekhak.

According to reports, Home Minister Aryal and Prime Minister Karki are in favor of arresting the leaders, while the heads of the security agencies believe that such action could further inflame tensions. It remains unclear whether the government will leave this matter to the probe committee or take direct action.

There are still fears that potential street protests could turn violent, especially as the morale of the security forces has declined. During the September 8–9 protests, the Nepali Police were a primary target—protestors looted their weapons and vandalized offices. Media reports indicate growing misunderstandings between the Home Minister and security officials on how to handle the situation. Tensions could rise further if clashes erupt between Zen-Z groups and youth wings of political parties.

In a new development, the Election Commission (EC) is preparing to hold consultations with major political parties regarding the upcoming elections. This is expected to create a more favorable environment for conducting the elections. Earlier, the EC had faced criticism for preparing unilaterally without consulting the parties. The EC will hold talks with political leaders on October 16.

Separately, Prime Minister Sushila Karki has assured the EC that the government is ready to provide logistical support to conduct the elections. Two major parties—Nepali Congress and CPN-UML—are quietly preparing to file a case in the Supreme Court demanding the restoration of the dissolved Parliament. In the current fragile political climate, a possible court-ordered restoration of Parliament cannot be ruled out. If the case moves forward, it could impact the election environment.

Prime Minister Sushila Karki has briefed Nepali ambassadors abroad on the foreign policy priorities of her government. She instructed the ambassadors to coordinate with relevant organizations to ensure the success of the elections. “We will inform you separately and soon if we need to request special technical support from a friendly country,” said Karki.

She also mentioned that homework is underway on whether Nepali citizens temporarily living abroad can vote in the upcoming elections. In her policy paper, Karki discussed the current geopolitical situation and Nepal’s economic diplomacy. Unlike previous prime ministers, she did not emphasize that the new government’s priority is immediate neighbors India and China.

UN Resident Coordinator Hanaa Singer Hamdy met with PM Karki to reaffirm the United Nations’ strong partnership with Nepal. According to the UN Nepal office, the discussions highlighted shared priorities: credible and inclusive elections in 2026, advancing transitional justice, promoting good governance, tackling misinformation, and sustaining progress toward graduation from Least Developed Country (LDC) status. “The UN remains committed to supporting Nepal’s democratic journey and the aspirations of its people for peace, justice, and prosperity,” the office said.

In sum, it appears the government is focused on holding elections on time.

Kamal Dev Bhattarai 

Editor 

More than 14,000 inmates escaped from 28 prisons and juvenile detention centers across Nepal during the GenZ–led protests on Sept 8–9. The unprecedented prison break posed a grave security threat and prompted a nationwide manhunt to recapture the fugitives, many of whom were serving sentences for serious crimes such as rape and murder.

According to the Department of Prison Management, 8,851 escapees, including 341 juvenile detainees, have voluntarily surrendered since the incident. However, public concern remains high, as nearly 5,700 individuals are still at large.

On the day of the protests, several inmates were killed during escape attempts. Three prisoners were shot dead while trying to breach security perimeters in Ramechhap and Dhading, while five juvenile detainees died in a clash at the Naubasta Juvenile Correctional Home. Escapes were reported across the country, including Kathmandu, Lalitpur, Sunsari, Saptari, Mahottari, Rautahat, Sindhuli, Makawanpur, Rasuwa, Chitwan, Tanahun, Kaski, Parbat, Myagdi, Kapilvastu, Dang, Banke, Rukum West, Nawalparasi, Jumla, Bajhang, Kailali, Darchula, Baitadi, Dadeldhura, and Kanchanpur. Similarly, 963 juveniles escaped from correctional homes in Morang, Parsa, Bhaktapur, Makawanpur, Kaski, Rupandehi, Jayandu, Banke, and Doti.

The Ministry of Home Affairs has issued an ultimatum requiring all escapees to return by Oct 6. Those who fail to comply face additional legal charges, including escape, public endangerment, and violent conduct. “This mass escape must not be allowed to undermine the rule of law,” the ministry said in a statement.

A nationwide operation, coordinated by a special task force under the Ministry of Home Affairs, is underway to track down the remaining fugitives. The task force includes local authorities, Nepal Police, the Armed Police Force, and other security agencies. Each district has formed a dedicated team led by the Assistant Chief District Officer, with representatives from law enforcement and other relevant agencies, to locate, control, and re-arrest escapees as swiftly as possible.

“There are currently 30,646 prisoners serving sentences for various offenses in 75 prisons across 72 districts,” said Chomendra Neupane, director of the Department of Prison Management. “There are no prisons in Dhanusha, Bara, Bhaktapur, Nawalparasi East, and East Rukum.”

Neupane added that the number of returnees is gradually increasing, particularly after the Dashain festival, and that the department expects more inmates to surrender in the coming days. “If anyone has information about escaped prisoners or juveniles, they can contact the nearest police station or notify the department directly,” he said.

According to the department, some escapees have already reoffended, committing crimes such as theft and even murder. “We have found that many of those who escaped were not rehabilitated despite their time in prison,” Neupane said. “We are taking stricter measures to ensure public safety and are reinforcing law enforcement operations to make the process more effective.”

Regarding how the escapes will affect inmates’ sentences, Neupane said each case will be reviewed individually. “Some may have fled out of fear for their safety amid the chaos, while others deliberately took advantage of the situation,” he said. Prisoners who left due to credible safety concerns may be required to serve only their remaining term, whereas those who escaped without justification face extended prison sentences and new legal charges.

Authorities are currently preparing detailed reports on each case, and district police offices nationwide are conducting investigations to assess the specific circumstances of each escape. Outcomes will depend on several factors, including the severity of the original crime, behavior during incarceration, and conduct following the escape.

“In some cases, escapees may lose eligibility for parole or early release,” Neupane said. “Every situation is different, and we are working to ensure that justice is served fairly within the existing legal framework.”

The mass escape during the GenZ protests has placed significant strain on Nepal’s prison and law enforcement systems. With nearly 5,700 inmates still on the run, authorities are under mounting pressure to restore security and public trust. In the longer term, the crisis may prompt major reforms in Nepal’s prison management and security protocols, particularly concerning the treatment and supervision of juvenile detainees.

To put it bluntly, Nepal’s disaster management system is a chronic liability for the nation’s economy and development. Year after year, the same pattern repeats: infrastructure buckles under predictable monsoon pressure, commerce grinds to a halt and the government scrambles to provide the bare minimum response. From a commoner’s perspective, this is not just a humanitarian crisis; it’s a fundamental risk to growth, and public trust.

Let’s look at last week’s flood as a case study. Over 120 millimeters of rain in the Kathmandu valley, and what happens? The Bagmati river overflows, settlements get submerged and thousands of travelers get stuck. Major roads, the arteries of trade and mobility, are paralyzed. The cascading impact on businesses, logistics and supply chains is enormous. Missed deliveries, spoiled goods, delayed projects: these translate directly into lost revenue.

The government’s response? Only warnings and temporary road closures. That’s risk mitigation at its most reactive, not proactive. This signals a systemic weakness. If the capital city can’t guarantee basic resilience for its infrastructure, what does that say to entrepreneurs or multinationals considering Nepal as a regional hub? It’s not just embarrassing; it’s a red flag.

What’s truly troubling is that none of this was unforeseen. Meteorological departments both local and international had issued alerts. Risk maps were available. The knowledge was there, but execution was absent. In the private sector, such a disconnect between planning and action would be deemed operational failure. Heads would roll. In the government, it’s business as usual, and that’s a problem.

The root cause isn’t the rain or the rivers or even climate change in isolation; it’s governance. Subpar infrastructure isn’t a quirk of nature; it’s the result of weak regulations, poor enforcement and a culture of shortcuts. When roads collapse or bridges fail, it’s often because substandard materials were used, inspections were skipped or contracts were awarded based on connections rather than competency. This is inefficiency that costs lives but also eats into GDP.

Every broken bridge or flooded market is a direct hit not only to the public purse, but to the broader economy. Taxpayer money gets funneled into rebuilding the same structures year after year, a recurring expense with no strategic return. Meanwhile, the opportunity cost is massive: funds that could go into education, healthcare, technology or even modernizing infrastructure are instead funneled into endless repairs.

And the cycle is disturbingly predictable. Disaster strikes, there’s a flurry of aid, some short-term fixes, and then the urgency fades. Budgets shift elsewhere, reports are filed and forgotten, and nothing really changes before the next crisis. This isn’t just bureaucratic inertia; it’s a structural risk that anyone would flag immediately. You can’t build a future on such shaky ground.

As climate volatility makes weather patterns more extreme and unpredictable, designing for “average conditions” is a recipe for failure. For Nepal to position itself as a viable market, it must engineer infrastructure to withstand not just the probable, but the possible. This means higher upfront costs, yes, but also far greater long-term returns and resilience.

Unplanned construction along rivers and unstable slopes is no longer a public safety issue; it’s a long-term occupational risk. Relocation of vulnerable communities should be done with foresight and dignity, not as a panicked reaction when disaster hits. Every major development project must include a robust climate risk assessment as part of due diligence. To ignore this is, quite literally, to invite future losses.

Accountability remains the missing ingredient. Nepal’s disaster agencies are good at issuing warnings but poor at delivering results. Coordination is weak, resources are stretched and responsibility is diffuse. In the private sector, a failure to deliver on risk management would mean restructuring, tighter oversight and clear consequences. The public sector must adopt a similar approach if it wants to foster sustainable growth and protect both lives and livelihoods.

This endless loop of crisis and neglect is not just unsustainable; it’s a major drag on competitiveness. It normalizes inefficiency, stifles innovation and discourages the kind of long-term planning that underpins successful economies. 

Why do the same roads collapse every year? Why does reconstruction always cost more than prevention? 

These are some of the questions the government must address, without further delay.

Accepting this as normal guarantees the same losses, year after year. If Nepal wants to break the cycle, disaster management must become a strategic priority, not an afterthought. This means investing in maintenance, building up local response capabilities, keeping risk maps updated and ensuring seamless coordination between agencies.

Relief efforts can only do so much; they’re a band-aid on a festering wound. True preparedness, the kind that saves lives and preserves economic stability, starts long before the rain begins to fall. Every failed bridge, every flooded street, every preventable tragedy should be a catalyst for investigation and reform, not just another line item in next year’s budget. Nepal can no longer afford to treat disaster management as a seasonal inconvenience. It’s a catastrophic risk and the cost of inaction is mounting.

The author is an engineer and certified project management professional advocating for enhancing project management practices in Nepal

A month after GenZ protesters toppled the KP Sharma Oli-led government and an interim administration headed by former Chief Justice Sushila Karki was formed, uncertainty still looms over whether the new government will be able to hold fresh elections on March 5 next year. Conducting free and fair elections remains one of the main demands of the GenZ movement, and the only viable path to safeguard Nepal’s constitution.

Beyond the election, the Karki government faces multiple challenges: managing factionalism among GenZ groups, rebuilding key government institutions damaged during the protests, and restoring law and order.

Except for the CPN (Maoist Center), major political parties remain undecided about joining the electoral process. A lingering climate of fear continues to grip the private sector as well, likely accelerating capital flight and worsening Nepal’s already fragile economy. The media, which should be playing a pivotal role at this critical juncture, has largely resorted to self-censorship due to fear and uncertainty. It also remains unclear whether major powers, who have long been influential in Nepal’s internal affairs, truly support the call for free and fair elections and the protection of the constitution.

The Sept 8–9 protests erupted against endemic corruption and the deep politicization of state institutions. Despite sporadic violence and criminal acts, the demonstrations reflected the people’s anger and frustration that had been simmering for years. Global experience shows that managing a nation after such a major upheaval is a herculean task. Many countries, after similar uprisings, have descended into prolonged civil wars or become arenas for international rivalries. Bangladesh, for example, remains uncertain about its elections more than a year after its own popular uprising. In Nepal, too, doubts persist over whether elections can be held on time amid so many unresolved issues.

The law and order situation remains fragile. Despite limited resources, the Nepal Police is trying to restore its offices, but officers continue to live in fear of renewed attacks. Their apprehension is not unfounded. Many believe protesters could again target them, as during the September unrest. The government’s handling of security has also been questionable. Last week, the Ministry of Home Affairs issued a directive instructing police not to arrest individuals directly involved in vandalism, arson, and attacks on public and private property.

Following the directive, police were compelled to release those arrested during the protests. Later, the probe committee led by Gauri Bahadur Karki clarified that government agencies are free to investigate criminal cases independently. Yet, with law enforcement still weak, many political leaders remain underground, and normal political activity has not resumed. The private sector, too, is hesitant to voice its concerns. “Who will protect us if some unidentified group attacks?” asked one businessman, expressing widespread anxiety within the business community. To restore confidence, the government must go the extra mile to ensure law and order and engage with both GenZ protesters and political leaders making provocative statements.

There should be no ambiguity in addressing the Sept 8-9 incidents. The government must investigate and take action against those who ordered police to open fire on unarmed students in broad daylight. While the inquiry commission can look into the matter, the police must act where clear evidence exists. Likewise, not all violent acts during the protests can be justified as spontaneous expressions of public anger. In several places, organized groups carried out arson and targeted attacks, many of which were captured on video. Some acts were clearly politically motivated. Therefore, all sides, including the government, political parties, and GenZ groups, must avoid a biased approach and commit to impartial justice.

There are now dozens of GenZ factions, each voicing distinct demands on social media and in the streets, often shaped by political leanings. One faction, for instance, advocates amending the constitution to introduce a directly elected presidential system in place of the current parliamentary one. While all political views should be heard and respected, constitutional amendment is neither feasible nor within the interim government’s mandate. Prime Minister Karki has made this clear in her address to the nation. The constitution was already stretched during the formation of this government, and President Ramchandra Paudel lacks the authority to amend it unilaterally.

Most of the issues raised by GenZ groups are not new; they echo debates from the constitution-drafting period. Today, various forces are again trying to push their agendas, such as restoring the monarchy, reviving the Hindu state, and dismantling federalism. All sides should recall 2015, when despite immense disagreements, a compromise was reached to finalize the constitution. They should recognize that failure could plunge the nation into instability. Reopening that Pandora’s box now would only invite further conflict. The current situation offers all forces a fair chance to compete in elections and present their agendas to the people.

Equally concerning is the lack of dialogue between the government and political parties, a crucial step toward creating an environment conducive to elections. The Election Commission has yet to invite parties for consultations. If its current office-bearers fear engaging in dialogue, they should step down to make way for new leadership. Unilateral decisions by the commission, without stakeholder consultation, risk undermining credibility.

A central demand of the GenZ movement is firm action against corruption. Yet, the government has done little on this front. The Commission for the Investigation of Abuse of Authority (CIAA), a constitutionally mandated anti-graft body, is under pressure as protesters demand the resignation of its leadership. The government may face legal hurdles in forming a parallel body, but it must find a way to address corruption, either through an understanding with the CIAA to investigate major scandals or by proposing new accountability mechanisms.

Since the GenZ protests, the public has also been watching how global powers perceive Nepal’s unfolding situation. These powers should firmly support the timely holding of elections within six months to protect the constitution. Any derailment of the electoral process might serve short-term interests, but long-term instability or conflict in Nepal benefits no one. While external actors should refrain from interfering in domestic politics, their goodwill and support should reinforce Nepal’s democratic path.

The major political parties, too, bear heavy responsibility. While the new political environment may be a setback for some leaders, it should not be for the parties themselves. They must support the electoral process and engage constructively with the interim government. If they do so, a conducive political environment will gradually emerge, and if necessary, they can also seek judicial remedies through the Supreme Court.

At this critical juncture, the role of independent media is indispensable. Unfortunately, due to insecurity and impunity, many journalists are resorting to self-censorship. The interim government has yet to make any commitment to safeguard media freedom, and the international community, once vocal on press freedom violations, has remained largely silent despite systematic attacks on journalists and media houses.

Ultimately, the government, political parties, judiciary, civil society, and all democratic actors must work together to stabilize the country. While some groups may seek immediate fulfillment of their demands, everyone must recognize the fragility of the state. Nepal cannot afford further instability or chaos, politically or economically. Those in positions of power must act responsibly, inclusively, and without provocation.

Kamal Dev Bhattarai 

Editor