Gen Z agitation propels Nepal into uncharted constitutional terrain

Deep political mistrust threatens the country's democratic future.

Following the fury and devastation unleashed by the Gen Z protesters on 8–9 September, which resulted in the loss of over 30 lives, including several youth killed in police firing, a semblance of order is returning to Nepal. President Ram Chandra Poudel has appointed former Chief Justice Sushila Karki as the Interim Prime Minister with the mandate to organise general elections by 5 March 2026. The ground situation, too, is gradually improving. Kathmandu airport has reopened, the police are returning to their duties, and normal life is resuming.

Justice Karki’s appointment is not without controversy. Although she was the nominee of the Gen Z protesters, under the Constitution of Nepal (2015), an individual who is not a member of the Lower House of Parliament cannot be appointed Prime Minister. However, there was wide political agreement on her candidature, including from the largest parties represented in Parliament.

The dissolution of the Parliament thereafter has also been controversial. Gen Z protesters insisted on this, arguing that Parliament housed discredited and corrupt politicians who would obstruct the work of the new government. Political parties, however, were apprehensive that dissolution could pave the way towards revoking the Constitution. They had hoped for some via media whereby Parliament would not function but continue to exist in a form of suspended animation to deal with any contingencies that might arise. For instance, what would happen if elections are not held within the prescribed time frame? The tenure of the interim government would then need to be extended, allowing it to function without parliamentary accountability for an indefinite period.

The President was initially opposed to dissolution but finally agreed, reportedly under pressure from protesters as well as Karki and the Army Chief. Such a situation is not new to Nepal. In 2013, Chief Justice Khil Raj Regmi was appointed Head of an Interim Council of Ministers in the absence of a functioning Parliament, on the basis of an all-party consensus, with the specific mandate to organise Constituent Assembly elections. This decision was validated in a majority judgement by the Supreme Court under the ‘doctrine of necessity’. Ironically, at that time, Justice Karki had delivered a dissenting opinion.

While the anxiety of political parties to safeguard the gains of the 2015 Constitution — which transformed Nepal into a secular, federal, inclusive, and democratic Republic — is understandable, these fears may be somewhat exaggerated. The President, the only elected office under the Constitution, continues to function, and Karki herself has an unblemished record of upholding the rule of law. Furthermore, she has been appointed under Part 6, Article 61(4) of the Constitution, which stipulates that the President’s main duty is to abide by and protect the Constitution. Nevertheless, citizens of Nepal will need to remain vigilant.

Serious challenges lie ahead for the Interim government. First, law and order must be restored. Second, it must begin functioning swiftly — a daunting task given that virtually all structures of democracy, including Parliament, the Supreme Court, Rashtrapati Bhawan, the Secretariat, regional offices, government vehicles, and court records, have been burnt down. Third, it is expected to address corruption in public life. Fourth, a Constitution Review Commission may be established. Finally, and most importantly, general elections must be organised within six months — no small task in the circumstances under which the interim government has assumed office.

Karki requires all possible support — domestically, from citizens as well as political parties that still retain public backing despite their discredited leaders. Some mechanism for periodic consultation between the interim government and parties may prove useful. Ideally, tainted leaders who have been fully exposed during the recent upheavals will resign from party positions. The government also requires international support, particularly from its closest neighbour, India. India swiftly welcomed the new government hours after it was sworn in and reiterated its commitment to work closely with Nepal. India should respond generously to requests for assistance, especially in reconstruction and the organisation of elections.

Our region has witnessed the power of youth and the mobilisation potential of social media to effect major political transformations — through street protests in Sri Lanka, in Bangladesh, and now in Nepal. Neighbourhood diplomacy must therefore focus on youth aspirations and on strengthening outreach and connectivity with this generation. Creative programmes for young people and smart use of social media should form a core part of this approach.

Indian audio-visual media also exerts a huge influence in Nepal. A more informed debate, discussion and presentation of neighbourhood issues — rather than speculative reporting — is needed. During the Nepal earthquake, the hashtag #GoBackIndianMedia trended widely. Even during the recent crisis, some Indian reportage provoked anger. Introducing proper briefing systems for the media would encourage a more nuanced understanding of issues. Although the present government is an interim one, India’s interests in Nepal are long-term. We should continue to advance connectivity initiatives and cooperation in hydropower.

A stable, peaceful and prosperous Nepal is vital for India’s security. India has always supported the aspirations and will of the people of Nepal for a democratic and prosperous future — and must continue to do so.

(The writer is a former Indian Ambassador to Nepal and author of ‘Kathmandu Dilemma: Resetting the India–Nepal Relationship)