The Alternative IDEA
Thursday, March 12, 2026
Wednesday, February 18, 2026
Why can't I say I won't vote for anyone?
American writer Franklin
Adams said, "Whoever wins an election wins not because he voted for him,
but because he voted against someone else."Voting is said to be the
best form of donation, but in the absence of good people to donate to, voters vote against
the wrong ones, resulting in someone winning. However, those who win proudly
say - I won. The situation of saying 'I won' will only come when voters are
given the right to reject the candidates standing in the election.
The House of
Representatives election to be held on the upcoming 5th March, will be recorded
as an election where you can't say you won't vote for anyone. This article will
discuss the right to say you won't vote for anyone in the election.
Voting is the process of
people who are eligible to run for office and indicating their vote that they
will not vote for anyone or that they will vote for so-and-so among those who
have registered. The result of voting is victory or defeat. This democratic
process of elections has been adopted by countries that adopt modern
democracies. When there is no option to indicate that one will not vote for
anyone, it leads to a situation where one boycotts, disrupts the election
process, or questions the legitimacy of the election through a low turnout
process.
Despite the Supreme
Court order, in the context of Nepal, there is no option to say that one will
not vote for anyone. This means that the right to refuse is not guaranteed.
Whether one likes it or not, one is compelled to vote for one or the other of
the candidates standing. If one does not accept this compulsion, there is
another compulsion to adopt the path of active boycott that disrupts the
election process. Due to this compulsion to become a member of a class
organization, the Congress Communists did not participate in the elections
during the Panchayat period, while even after the multi-party system, some
'revolutionary communists' adopted the policy of boycotting the elections
because the rights of the people were not protected through elections.
After the Mahakali
Treaty, which is considered one of the unequal treaties, the Nepali people
widely understood that elections were not a means of exercising democratic
rights but a license to sell the country. For this reason, election slogans
were also made saying that my one vote and your one vote should not become a license
to sell the country. Despite all this, the practice of the None of the Above
(NOTA) system could not be implemented.
Despite the Supreme
Court's order issued several years ago regarding the NOTA system in Nepal, it
could not be implemented in practice. In fact, the right to vote in elections
is not only a right, but also the right to reject a candidate or party through
voting. On this basis, the belief has developed that one should be able to
express through the ballot paper that the parties or candidates who have
entered the electoral fray or that one should not vote for any of the
candidates.
This system, which is
prevalent in many countries of the world, has been issued a mandate in the name
of the government to make similar arrangements in our country. The Supreme
Court has deemed it necessary to guarantee the use of more democracy through
elections and to make arrangements to allow candidates standing in the
elections to say that they will not vote for any of them. What arrangements can
be made for this? It is necessary to discuss how to make arrangements for
groups outside the mainstream of the state to express their disagreement by
participating in the elections by boycotting the elections, but this issue has
not been given priority at the political level.
International Practice
on the ‘Right to Reject’
In the 1990 elections of
the then Soviet Union, which led to the dissolution of the Russian Federation,
the Communist Party led by Boris Yeltsin had to suffer defeat in this election
due to this provision. This situation arose because people voted for the option
of not voting for any of the above on the ballot paper. This practice has been
abolished in the Russian Federation, which was formed after the dissolution of
the Soviet Union, since 2006. In Ukraine, a country currently in the throes of
war, there is a system in place on the ballot that allows voters to vote
against everyone.
Greece has a system of
compulsory voting. Since voting is mandatory, the option to leave the ballot
blank, cancel the ballot, or vote for no one is available.
Across the United
States, there is a campaign to vote with the option of "no to no one"
in various states, and this type of ballot is being used effectively in states
such as California and Nevada. It has been used in the US state of Nevada.
Bangladesh brought this system into discussion in 2008.
Bulgaria used it in the
2016 presidential election. If this type of system, which says "no to
everyone" or "no to no one" above, gains a majority, there is a
risk that the validity of the election will be terminated. In this case, since
the public's trust is expressed through votes, political parties and candidates
are forced to maintain the public's trust at all times. It is believed that
this helps strengthen democracy.
In neighboring India,
the Supreme Court in 2013 issued a directive order. In the writ petition, the
court ordered that no one should be allowed to vote. The Election Commission of
India also placed a cross mark on the electronic voting machine used by it.
This has been used because the Indian government and the Election Commission
suggested the option of voting for none of the above. It does not seem to have
had much effect on the overall vote result. However, Indian activists maintain
that this type of option protects the right of voters to vote.
On the other hand,
Pakistan had started this practice in 2013. Then, due to the fear of being
rejected through the election itself, due to the dominance of military rule, the
Election Commission of Pakistan rejected this system.
In Bangladesh, among the
SAARC countries, this system was proposed to be included in the law by the
government since 2008, considering it necessary. Although a law with a
provision for the right to reject, i.e. not voting for anyone, was presented in
the draft law, that provision was removed through amendments. Currently, this
system is not in use in Bangladesh.
In Spain, three types of
ballot papers are counted: valid votes, blank votes and invalid votes. Among
them, there is a campaign to vote by leaving the ballot paper blank, that is,
to make the candidate blank. The process of voting by leaving the ballot paper
blank is classified as voting for no one. An example of this was seen in the
2011 elections in Spain, when the campaign to vote for no one was carried out,
in Barcelona and its surrounding areas, about two percent of the vote was
recorded.
This system is also
practiced in Colombia. Because this system of voting by leaving the ballot
paper blank is accepted, if the number of blank ballot papers is greater than
the votes received by the candidates running in the election, a new vote is
held. The previously running candidates are considered rejected and the
election is held only among the new candidates.
Chile had a law that
required voting. This law was repealed in 2012. Both votes marked in a place
where there is no candidate and votes for two or more candidates are counted as
invalid votes. However, voting in a place where there is no candidate is
considered as a no vote. The candidate who receives the majority of the valid
votes is declared the winner. No votes are also counted as invalid votes.
Indonesia has also used
the NOTA (None of the Above) ballot. This system does not allow for unopposed
elections even if only one candidate is nominated. Even if only one candidate
is nominated, he or she is not considered elected unless he or she participates
in the voting and obtains a majority. Due to this system, many candidates could
not be elected due to this option.
In Britain, which is
considered the mother of democracy, a request was made to the Parliamentary
Politics and Constitutional Reform Committee (PCRC) of the Parliament for such
a legal system, and the committee recommended holding a public consultation on
the matter before the next election.
Parties and candidates, including the NOTA party (None of the Above Party or the party that says no one
is capable of getting my vote) in Britain, are active in pressuring the
implementation of this suggestion.
Although this system has
not been formally implemented in Canada, the practice of forming a Zero None of
the Above party and participating in the election, similar to that in the UK,
is widespread. In the state of Ontario, the Zero None of the Above party is
registered with the Election Commission and is used to field candidates in the
election.
In Norway, a country
considered to be excellent in the Prosperity and Happiness Index, this system
has also been adopted by making rules. There is a provision for voters to be
present and cast blank ballots. In the 2017 election, it was found that about
one percent of such votes were received.
In Brazil, there is a
system of compulsory voting. Therefore, it was customary to leave the ballot
paper blank and such ballots were also counted. But since such a vote does not
make a difference to the election result today or tomorrow, the ballot paper is
considered invalid and is not counted.
In Belgium, the option
of voiding the ballot paper or leaving the ballot paper blank is used to say
that one will not vote for anyone. In the 2010 parliamentary election, the
percentage of such votes was 5.8. This number of votes is considered the
largest to date.
After the introduction
of the electronic voting system in France, the option to vote in a place where
there is no candidate was provided, but the option of "I will not
vote" was not provided.
In conclusion
The above international
practice establishes that the minimum right of the voter to vote or not to vote
is a right. It also helps to promote the belief that democracy will be
implemented only when this right can be implemented. It can also be said that
commitment to democracy will be expressed.
The examples of
democratic countries adopting it with priority and undemocratic countries
rejecting it also show that the right to reject has become a new standard of
democracy. Due to the guarantee of the right to vote or not to vote, in such
countries, at least there is no need to listen to issues such as boycotting the
vote and loss of property and life during the boycott movement. It has
established the belief that one can use one's opinion in a civilized manner. In
addition, for the protection and development of democracy, i.e. more people
Labels: Article
Saturday, February 14, 2026
Tuesday, February 3, 2026
Wednesday, January 14, 2026
Friday, December 19, 2025
Effectiveness of the Upcoming Parliament after the Gen-Z Movement in Nepal
Effectiveness of the Upcoming Parliament after the Gen-Z Movement in Nepal
Dr. Khimlal
Devkota
Constituent
Assembly Member and Senior Advocate
Abstract
The Gen-Z movement that broke out all
over Nepal in September 2025 is a watershed moment in Nepali politics. Highly
powered by youth mobilization, internet mobilization, and an unbreakable
combination of grievances of corruption, exclusion, and the sudden shutdown of
favorite social media sites, the revolt ousted the governing government,
precipitated an interim government, and burning and looting of the central
secretariat of government, the Supreme Court, including the parliament
building, despite the Gen Z movement's mission. This article examines the
probable performance of the forthcoming Parliament of Nepal following these
incidents. The article constructs an analytical framework in which parliamentarians
are located in four fields: institutional continuity, representativeness and
legitimacy, effective law-making capacity, and effective oversight of the
government functions with accountability, and deliberation of the people's
voices. The piece contends that although the Gen-Z movement generates both
immediate demand for change and single-party political opportunity for renewal,
the next Parliament's potential will be hampered by (a) institutional
disruption and physical destruction of parliament infrastructure, (b)
legitimacy gaps among mainstream party elites, (c) frayed mechanisms of
effective youth engagement, and (d) lingering powers of extra-parliamentary
forces (security services, networks of informal elite). It ends with specific
suggestions in line with similar uprising international experiences to enhance
parliamentary performance during the transition: expedited post-conflict
institutional construction, electoral reform to ensure youth engagement,
increased legislative monitoring and post-legislative scrutiny, and a transparent
process of accountability for suspected human rights abuses during the movements.
Keywords: Gen-Z Movement,
parliamentary effectiveness, Democracy, Constitution and Parliamenterians.
1. Introduction
The political journey of Nepal, since the 1990s, has been marked by cycles of the hottest political contest and
institution building: from the struggle for democratic republicanism, to ten
years' Maoist insurgency, to constitution-making to 2015. Gen-Z rebellion is
the latest, and perhaps one of the most spectacular, examples in that journey
on last September 2025. Spurred by state actions like social-media platform
shutdowns and fueled by long-standing complaints of corruption and elite
capture, the movement quickly evolved from youth-led online-organized protest
to national direct action that included mass protests, arson raids on
government offices (including the parliament building), and the fall of the
prime minister. The state then appointed an interim government to guide the
nation to new elections. These incidents generate short and long-term issues
about the institutional capability of Nepal's Parliament to perform its
constitutional duties effectively in a post-Gen-Z political situation.
This paper analyzes the potential
effectiveness of the next Parliament in the future by: (1) theorizing about
parliamentary effectiveness; (2) outlining the particular disruptions and
political realignments caused by the Gen-Z movement; (3) analyzing structural
and procedural risks and opportunities for the parliament; and (4) proposing
institutional and policy solutions to ensure and strengthen Parliament's
capacity to legislate, represent, and hold the executive accountable.
1. Conceptualizing
Parliamentary Effectiveness: Theoretical Framework
Parliamentary effectiveness is a
complex, multi-dimensional construct. Drawing on comparative legislative
studies and the literature on governance, this paper conceptualizes parliamentary
effectiveness as a four-dimensional construct:
2.1.
Institutional Continuity & Capacity: the capacity of the parliament to
sit, do business, form committees, and have a minimum of administrative
support. Without maintaining institutional continuity and capacity, no
institution can prevail, including parliament.
2.2.
Representativeness & Legitimacy: whether Parliament's composition
and operation express citizens' political will, particularly that of group
interests (here, youth/Gen-Z), and whether the latter enjoys public confidence.
2.3.
Law-making & Policy Responsiveness: political and technical ability to
bring forward, debate, amend, and enact legislation in response to major public
interest issues (anti-corruption, freedom of press, social protection, people's
prosperity).
2.4.
Accountability & Oversight: parliamentary control, monitoring,
and oversight of the executive power, investigatory powers, committees, and
post-legislative scrutiny procedures with deliberations of the people's
spirits.
This approach enables us to measure
both immediate operational issues generated by the unrest (e.g., ruined
infrastructure, dissolved HoR) and deeper normative/political issues with
mandate, representation, and checks and balances. It also gives the highest
priority to those indicators most closely aligned with democratic resilience:
fairness and speed of electoral reset, inclusiveness of deliberation, quality
of legislative product, and efficacy of oversight. (Carnage, 2025)
2. The Gen-Z
Movement: Facts, Political Fallout, and Immediate Institutional Shock
Contemporary journalism produces a
series of undeniable facts about the Gen-Z mobilization: wide-scale youth
protests erupted in early September 2025, quickly swept the nation, and became
violent across the country. Government buildings; central administrative
complex (Singha Durbar), parliament, supreme court, presidential residence, and
others; were burned and reduced to ashes at the height of unrest; official
tallies of injury and fatalities stood in the hundreds. The incumbent prime
minister resigned, and a caretaker government headed by a non-partisan leader
was instituted until new elections could be held. Worldwide coverage is
concentrated on the movement's mobilization via the internet channels of
Discord and Instagram, and the mobilization by means of pop-culture symbols as
symbols of mobilization. Such facts accentuate a systemic break: the legitimacy
of the traditional elite was publicly challenged, and the state's monopoly over
the means of coercion and the safeguarding of public infrastructure was proven to
be weak.
Parliamentary operation had symbolic
as well as tangible immediate repercussions. Parliament buildings suffered from
fires; legislative proceedings were canceled or held elsewhere; significant
administration and record-keeping tasks were halted. Aside from material
destruction, the political legitimacy of the prior Representatives was
considerably dented among certain strata of society that were in support of or
allied with the Gen-Z protests. Trust in parliamentary processes, already
precarious with episodes of polarization, was subjected to a severe examination
of endurance.
4. Institutional
Harm's Impact on the Four Dimensions of Effectiveness
4.1.
Institutional Continuity & Capacity
Physical
loss of facilities affects the parliament's capacity in clear-cut ways: the
absence of records, destroyed committee rooms, lost IT infrastructure, and
disrupted administrative services all slow down law-making. Where critical
facilities are affected, Parliament has to fall back on temporary premises or
remote/virtual sittings. Both of which create adversity to substantive
committee work and deliberation quality. Administrative staff displacement and
security issues further decrease capacity for research, drafting, and
continuity in legislative support services. Reconstruction of infrastructure
and digital systems will thus be an early practical priority towards recovering
baseline effectiveness. A conducive environment has to be created for the
expected result from parliament, so that they come out of the trauma and fear
is a must.
4.2.
Representativeness & Legitimacy
The movement's
key political message, that current political elites have fallen on corruption,
inclusion, and accountability, politically challenges the parliamentary class's
moral authority. Even in the event of fresh elections, legitimacy is not
automatically regained: election results can be representative of continuity if
incumbent party machines continue to overbear candidate selection, or
fragmentary if youth factions, independent lists, and fresh movements are given
a voice. Net impact on effectiveness will hinge on whether the fresh Parliament
reweights representation (via fresh parties, youth quotas, or electoral reform)
or re-restores the pre-crisis balance. Without tangible action to incorporate
Gen-Z voices, parliamentary legitimacy suffers an extended erosion of
credibility, which weakens public responsiveness to legislative output.
4.3.
Law-making & Policy Responsiveness
Gen-Z
uprising demands are material (reversal of social-media bans, prosecution of
tainted players, compensation to the victims) and systemic (initiate reforms
for openness, youth recruitment). Parliament's law-making ability will be put
to the test by its ability to provide credible, timely, and effective reforms.
But political salience suggests the reforms are controversial: vested interests
that gained from secrecy will fight big change. The parliament's capacity to
produce good policy will thus depend upon: (a) committee make-up (reformist MPs
in charge of key groups with forward-looking agendas), (b) technical assistance
from the secretariat (research capacity, drafting competence), and (c) effective
monitoring from outside the parliament. (media scrutiny, civil society
involvement).
4.4.
Accountability & Oversight
An effective
Parliament must be able to examine the unrest itself, security force reaction,
reported abuses, and chain of command behind the excess use of force or police
breakdown, free from co-optation. The movement's calls for justice and
transparency put the parliament in the forefront of transitional justice
questions, ownership, trust, and implementation of the upcoming report of the Karki
probe commission. And if parliamentary supervision breaks down, or if
committees get packed to stop involved stakeholders from being pulled out,
public faith will be further shaken. But earnest and autonomous investigations
by parliamentary bodies can enhance legitimacy and provide a way towards reconciliation.
The evidence is in protecting oversight bodies from partisan takeover and
delivering procedural fairness.
5
Political Forces Building the Next Parliament
Fundamentals of the democracy is a
political parties. Several political forces will decide whether the next
Parliament will function:
5.1.
Electoral Rules and Timing: The party system structure of
elections (e.g., open lists, thresholds, timing) will determine how
representative the new parliament will be. Proportional reforms and reduced
thresholds to new parties or youth lists may amplify Gen-Z voice; however,
precipitous elections within established party structures might perpetuate
elite dominance again.
5.2.
Transitional Security and Executive Actors: The transitional regime's style, securitized
crackdowns or conciliatory reforms, will define the overall tone. Military or
security intervention in a political transition can undermine parliamentary
autonomy if commanders hold de facto veto power.
5.3. Civil
Society & Media: A vibrant civil society and independent media can act
as external channels of accountability, working in unison with parliamentary
committees and providing policy recommendations.
5.4.
International Actors and Normative Pressure: Donors and multilateral actors can
make aid conditional upon democratic guarantees, enhancing parliamentary reform
incentives. These forces are interrelated: for example, international pressure
for genuine elections can prevent the elite from manipulating the electoral
code; a strong civil society can assist parliamentary committees in an inquiry;
however, an active security sector can thwart both. (Mulmi, 2025)
6. Obstacles
to Effectiveness, Structural and Political
As the movement creates
possibilities, among the long-standing hurdles, some challenges to hold back
parliamentary performance. Elite Resilience and Co-optation is crucial. Political
parties are institutionally well-established and possess patronage networks.
Parties will evolve but co-opt Gen-Z icons without substantive reform, thus
legislation will have performative instead of structural impacts.
Weak Legislative Capacity is another
problem. The parliamentary secretariat and research support in Nepal have to
develop fast enough to fulfill the need for high-level statutory changes
(digital rights regimes, anti-corruption infrastructure). Gaps in capacity can
enable poorly drafted legislation that will not pass the tests of implementation.
Security-Legitimacy Tradeoffs will
be disastrous. In the transition, impunity or over-delegation to security
agencies can limit Parliament from monitoring abuses or passing reforms to
manage security excess.
Polarization and Fragmentation are
unwanted consequences. A fractured party system consisting of several minor
groupings can inhibit the formation of coalitions, causing legislative gridlock
as well as short-term governments.
Public Expectations vs.
Institutional Tempo always happens. The public mobilized by the movement will
anticipate rapid accountability and visible change. Parliament's deliberative
process is slower, creating a gap that can fuel further discontent unless
expectations are met (ABC, 2025).
7. Windows
of Opportunity: Why Parliament Can Be Effective
Genuine Gen Z has to be promoted, and
criminal elements should be punished, is a fundamental principle of the time and
situations. The focus has to isolate the ulterior motives and promote
forward-looking causes. In addition to the challenges, post-Gen-Z also brings special
opportunities:
7.1.
Political Shock as Catalytic Momentum: Extended splitting apart of society
can lead to institutional change when political visionaries seize the agenda.
The interactive tension between mass mobilization and an incoming executive dedicated
to reform can facilitate legislative breakthroughs.
7.2. Youth
Mobilization as Political Resource: If parties and independent
candidates include youth activists and leaders in candidate lists, Parliament
can be opened to new ideas and reform legitimacy steps.
7.3.
International Normative Pressure and Global Visibility:
International visibility of the crisis raises reputational risks for
backsliding and can stimulate donor-funded legislative capacity building.
7.4.
Instruments of transparency technology: Websites (utilized by Gen-Z) may be
utilized for crowdsourced surveillance, live feeds on legislative action, and lessening informational asymmetries between Parliament and the masses.
7.5.
Reparations and transitional justice momentum: Politically
popular calls for accountability provide the Parliament with a clear mandate to
craft reparations, judicial commissions, and institutional protection measures
that, if implemented in earnest, can rebuild trust (The Guardian, 2025).
8. International
Experiences
8.1.
Tunisia:
When mass movements topple or heavily destabilize
political regimes, parliaments become where protest demands are typically
translated into permanent reform. The Arab Spring gave space in Tunisia for a
new constitution. But the long road from reformist constitution to de-captured,
working institutions was arduous; oversight loopholes and compromised
separation of powers left many early gains contingent on continued legislative
follow-through to become actual. The Tunisian experience, therefore, emphasizes
that popular mobilization-created constitutional space must be followed with
long-term parliamentary consolidation (legal institutions, independent
judiciary, and administrative capacity) to prevent reversal. (Carnegie, 2025). Tunisia
has no national history to draw on in terms of how an empowered parliament
should operate. Moreover, in Tunisia’s fragmented political party landscape,
members of parliament from a myriad of political movements will have to
find a way to work together to put institution-building ahead of their
political differences. (Fride, 2012).
8.2. Chile:
Chile's
protests of 2019–2020 similarly demonstrate how mass mobilization can force
constitutional and parliamentary reckoning at the systemic level, but also how
procedure and legitimacy matter. Massive public enthusiasm led to a successful
referendum to draft a new constitution, but the first draft was later rejected
as a reminder that inclusiveness at every stage (formation of drafting body,
discussion, and final ratification) and respect for technical design are
crucial if parliament-led reform processes are to be translated into popular
energy into accepted, workable structures. Chile demonstrates that parliaments
can be good sites for mediated reform only if processes are representative,
transparent, and tied to citizen deliberation.
8.3.
Iceland:
Iceland's
post-2008 trial offers the reverse lesson with respect to participatory
legitimacy and institutional momentum. Following the financial crisis, Iceland experienced
a remarkably participatory constitutional exercise crowdsourcing initial provisions
and boosting civic voice that revealed the power of public engagement in its
purest form to build parliamentary legitimacy and produce innovative reform
concepts. But the ultimate inability to enact the new constitution in full also
underlines a structural fact: participatory feedback can reframe the agenda,
but without a steadfast parliamentary and party will to institutionalize those
changes, momentum can dissolve. In short, participatory drafting can maximize
legitimacy but is dependent on parliament to translate it into functioning
institutions.
8.4.
Ukraine:
The street
protests across the country that led to this outcome were spearheaded by young,
enthusiastic Ukrainians. Unlike the historic movements in 2004 and 2013,
protesters demanded strong, independent government institutions, rather than
facing the challenges of changing the country’s strategic course or replacing
the president. This new wave of civic activism underscores an evolving
democratic spirit among Ukraine’s youth, determined to ensure the stability of
the rule of law and institutional integrity (Nova, 2025). Ukraine achieved notable
anti-corruption advances in parliament and outside parliament, but subsequent
political backsliding and controversial legislative measures show how easily
such gains may be undone without ongoing monitoring, civil-society scrutiny,
and international attention; corrective rollbacks (or reversals) can happen
quickly, illustrating the dynamic triadic relationship among protest, parliament,
and public accountability.
All these examples show the
underlying motifs: (1) popular forces create opportunities for substantial
parliamentary reform but are no guarantee against institutionalization; (2)
inclusionary mechanisms (extended participation, open rules, independent
oversight) maximize the likelihood that parliamentary outputs will be
legitimized and implemented; and (3) technical capacity legislative drafting
support, committee independence, and post-legislative review is required to
bridge mandates into effective law. For cases like Nepal's post-movement
transition, these international lessons suggest prioritizing procedural
legitimacy, strengthening parliamentary oversight institutions (e.g.,
anti-corruption and investigative committees), and balancing channels of
participation for young people and civil society with real capacity building in
the parliament if reform is to be lasting. (Carnegie, 2025)
9. Policy
and Institutional Recommendations
To enhance the performance of the
subsequent Parliament, this paper proposes short- and medium-term measures in
four directions aligned with the discussion above.
9.1. Rebuild
Institutional Capacity and Continuity has to be a priority. A Quick Restoration
Plan for Infrastructure is a possible way. Reconstruct parliamentary premises,
computer centers, and archival documents as a top priority. Where possible,
utilize hybrid (physical and virtual) models to reinstate committee work
simultaneously. Emergency Legislative Secretariat Boost is also a burning
issue. Increase the research and drafting personnel temporarily, perhaps
supplemented by other national and international technical assistance as a model
of outsourcing, to work off the backlog of critical bills and oversight
questions.
9.2. Improve
Representativeness & Youth Representation in all sectors of society. Electoral
Reforms for Youth Representation in political parties have to be a priority.
Explore temporary or constitutional solutions, such as youth quotas on party lists,
incentives for taking independent youth candidates, or reserved seats, to institutionalize Gen-Z representation. Candidate Training & Rapid Civic
Education is a proper solution. Assist efforts at training young candidates for
legislative seats (procedure, ethics, committee work).
9.3.
Increase Law-making & Policy Responsiveness for the country. Priority has
to be in the Legislative Agenda. Parliament must embrace an explicit,
time-limited agenda prioritizing first: (i) an overhaul of online censorship and
safeguarding net rights; (ii) anti-corruption law and transparency; (iii)
relief in emergency situations and reparations; and (iv) electoral and
parliamentary procedure reform. Evidence-based drafting is the top priority. Develop
a system of fast but evidence-based drafting (civil society and academic inputs
in technical working groups).
9.4.
Strengthen Oversight and Accountability is key to society. Independent
Parliamentary Inquiry is an effective tool for oversight. Set up cross-party,
independent inquiry committees to investigate the unrest, exercise powers of
subpoena, and provide reports. Include non-partisan experts and civil society
observers as an index of credibility. Effective implementation of the law is a
key element for the rule of law. The Post-Legislative Scrutiny Unit has to be established.
Enshrine post-legislative review to oversee law enforcement and rectification,
thus enhancing the long-term quality of legislation.
9.5.
Enshrine Civil-Parliamentary Dialogue for vibrant democracy. Enshrine Forums
for Youth Dialogue to respect the spirit of the Gen Z movement. Hold formal,
recurring forums that convene representatives of Gen-Z, civil society, and MPs
to debate priorities for policy and offer scrutiny. Transparency Portals are
must waited tools for anti-corruption. Increase public access to legislative
documents, voting patterns, and committee reports to rebuild confidence.
Ultimately, building trust by
participation, deliberation, communication, and transparent and accountable manners
are key elements for the upcoming parliament. These are recommendations that need
political will from the governments and political parties and concerted
international backing, respectful of Nepal's sovereignty, national interests, but
in favor of democratic strength instead of regression.
10. Possible
Risks and Mitigation Measures
10.1. In
politics, risks are always there, but a viable solution is a way of
mitigation. Different political movements that took place in Nepal before Nepal
was declared a republic argue that all the earlier political movements failed
to declare a republic, before 2008, due to the crisis of political leadership
and leaders’ dilemma to make decisions in the right time (Devkota, 2021). There is no
risk-free way of implementing reforms. The principal risks and their
mitigations are as follows;
10.2. Co-optation
of youth symbols by the elite is crucial. Mitigation is a tool to achieve it. Pass an open selection of candidates by
primary election both in the party and the community, and make party lists and
selection criteria public before elections.
10.3. Security
pushback against oversight will be another risk. Provide legal cover to
parliamentary committees and insert independent international observers for
controversial issues.
10.4. Rapid elections
favored by incumbents will be another risk factor. To mitigate, promote neutral
electoral management and international observation; permit adequate time for
new party consolidation and candidate screening.
10.5. Polarization
and legislative gridlock are also other risk factors. To mitigate it, establish
procedural rules for vital bills (committee stage time limits) with safeguards
against deliberation quality deterioration. By pre-empting such risks,
Parliament and its allies can craft well-targeted interventions that maintain
democratic legitimacy as well as establish order (Kathmandu Post).
11. Conclusion
In the context of Nepal, the
adoption of federalism represents a significant shift in the country's
political landscape, aiming to address historical grievances, promote
inclusivity, and foster socio-economic development (Devkota,2024). However huge
problem in implementation fuels frustrations among youth. In this
scenario, the Gen-Z movement has propelled Nepal into a high-risk
political transition. The new parliament is at a turning point: it can ride the
wave of reformist opinion to become an institution of democratic, sustainable
transformation, or keep on with the old elite accommodation politics that do
not deal with the sources of the grievances that drove the revolution.
Parliamentary performance in this respect is not an inevitable byproduct of
elections but is contingent on conscious efforts to recreate capacity, increase
representation (particularly youth), enhance the quality of legislation, and
create sound mechanisms of oversight capable of focusing on suspected abuses
amidst the chaos.
Ultimately, the route to a good parliament
goes through an equilibrium between public expectations and institutional
reform. Quick, open, and effective policymaking in the context of the Gen-Z
movement requires participatory electoral processes and independent scrutiny to
regain trust and make the parliament the master builder of responsible
governance. Instability perpetually and repeatedly performed is the
alternative. The hour is delicate but holds an unprecedented chance: if Parliament
seizes on propounding reform and inclusiveness, it can convert the pause into a
sustainable revival of Nepal's democratic institutions (Reuters, 2025).
Finally, let's hope, let's make a plan for forward-looking change as the
spirits of the Gen Z movement, and isolate criminal elements and their ulterior
motives wherever they are.
12. References
Devkota,
K. (2021). Leadership Crisis in Nepali Politics: Specific Focus on National Parties
in the Context of Declaration of the Republic. Social Inquiry: Journal of
Social Science Research, 1(1). DOI: https://doi.org/10.3126/sijssr.v1i1.26915.
Devkota,
K. (2024). Cooperative Federalism in the Nepali Constitution: A
Comprehensive Analysis. Samsad Journal 1(1), 51-66. https://doi.org/10.3126/sj.v1i1.75903
Fride, (2012). Parliamentary reform
after the Arab spring, Policy brief.
Nova (2025) Ukraine’s
Parliament Restores Independence to Anti-Corruption Agencies. Nova, Ukraine.
Mulmi, A.R. (2025). From street to
discord: How toppled the Nepal's Government. Carnegie Endowment for
International Peace.
https://carnegieendowment.org/research/2025/09/nepal-gen-z-topple-government?lang=en.
Hannah Ellis-Petersen & Gaurav
Pokharel. (9 September 2025). The Nepalese government removes social media ban
following protests [The Guardian/BBC reporting used in summaries]. The
Guardian. https://www.theguardian.com/world/2025/sep/09.
Reuters. (14 September 2025). Number
of deaths from Nepal's anti-corruption protests raised to 72.Reuters.,https://www.reuters.com/world/asia-pacific/death-toll-nepals-anti-corruption-protests-raised-72-2025-09-14/.
ABC News. (15 September 2025).
Nepal's Generation Z calls for change as nation embarks on new transition. https://www.abc.net.au/news/2025-09-15/nepal-generation-z-anti-corruption-protests-kathmandu/105773042.
Carnegie Endowment for International
Peace. (24 September 2025). From streets to Discord: How Nepal's Gen Z
overthrew a government Analysis.
Kathmandu Post Editorial. (12
October 2025). Divided, Gen Z falls. The Kathmandu Post. https://kathmandupost.com/editorial/2025/10/12/divided-gen-z-falls.
Thursday, December 18, 2025
स्थायित्वको नारा, असन्तोषको यथार्थ
स्थायित्वको नारा, असन्तोषको यथार्थ: जेनजी आन्दोलनलगत्तै नेतृत्व छोड्न अत्यन्त दवावमा रहेका केपी ओली नेतृत्वको नेकपा (एमाले) को एघारौं महाधिवेशनलाई संस्थापन पक्षले औपचारिकरूपमा ‘एकता, अनुशासन र स्थायित्व’को महाधिवेशन भनेर चित्रण गर्न कोसिस गर्यो । तर महाधिवेशनका दृश्य– अदृश्य पक्ष, नेतृत्व चयनको प्रक्रिया र राजनीतिक सन्देशले भने फरक यथार्थ उजागर गर्यो । यो महाधिवेशन संगठन सुदृढीकरणभन्दा...
Monday, December 1, 2025
चुनावको माहोल : नेतृत्व, शक्ति–सन्तुलन र भूराजनीतिक संकेत
पुराना शीर्ष नेताहरू केपी, प्रचण्ड र देउवा नै फेरि पनि चर्चाको केन्द्रमा छन् । तर, यसपालि तस्बिर बदलिएको छ । युवा पुस्ताका आकांक्षा, वैकल्पिक नेतृत्वको खोजी, स्थानीय सरकारको प्रभाव, निराश मतदाताको मनोविज्ञान तथा अमेरिका–चीन–भारतको रणनीतिक रुचिले चुनावी वातावरणलाई थप जटिल बनाएको छ ।https://www.onlinekhabar.com/2025/12/1817740/election-atmosphere-leadership-balance-of-power-and-geopolitical-signals
Thursday, November 20, 2025
Tuesday, November 18, 2025
सरकारसँगको अपेक्षा
सरकारसँगको अपेक्षा: सुशासन कुनै एजेण्डा होइन, लोकतान्त्रिक स्थिरता, न्याय र समृद्ध राष्ट्रको आधारशिला हो । पारदर्शिता, जवाफदेहिता, सहभागिता र शक्ति–संयमित संरचनाबिना सुशासनको कल्पना पनि गर्न सकिँदैन । तर, नेपालमा राजनीतिक नेतृत्वको संक्रमण आशाले सुरु र निराशाले अन्त्य हुने चलन जस्तै छ । यही अस्थिरता, अविश्वास र दण्डहीनताले नागरिक जीवन, राज्यका संरचना र...
Monday, November 17, 2025
Sunday, November 16, 2025
पुरानो राजनीतिले बुझ्न नसकेको नयाँ पुस्ताको सोच
https://www.onlinekhabar.com/2025/11/1801067/the-thinking-of-the-new-generation-that-the-old-politics-cannot-understand
नेपाल अहिले राजनीतिक रूपमा अत्यन्तै संवेदनशील चरणमा अनुमानै गर्न नसकिने अस्थिरताबाट गुज्रिइरहेको छ। संविधानसभाबाट बनेको संविधान छ, सोही संविधानको शपथ खाएको सरकार छ। यसको कार्यभार विघटित प्रतिनिधिसभाको निर्वाचन घोषित मितिमै गराउनुछ। यद्यपि, यो सरकार संविधानको सरकार बन्ने धारा ७६ बमोजिम बनेको हैन।
वैधताको धरापमा उभिएको सरकार हुनुका नाताले संक्रमणको यो संवेदनशील घडीमा सडकदेखि सरकारसम्म, गाउँदेखि शहरसम्म, सानो नीतिगत निर्णयले पनि अस्थिरता सिर्जना गर्न काफी हुन्छ।
Thursday, November 13, 2025
Saturday, November 1, 2025
चुनाव, वैधता र भूराजनीतिक चपेटामा अन्तरिम सरकार
सामाजिक सञ्जाल–आधारित विद्यार्थी/युवा आन्दोलन (जेनजी आन्दोलन) को तीव्र उदयले राजनीतिक संकट उत्पन्न गर्यो । दर्जनौंको ज्यान र अरबौंको धनको नाशपछि प्रधानमन्त्रीको राजीनामा र संसद्को विघटन हुँदै सुशीला कार्की नेतृत्वको अन्तरिम सरकार गठन भयो ।
हालको अन्तरिम सरकारलाई नियुक्तिका बखत नै राष्ट्रपतिबाट फागुन २१ मा निर्वाचन गराउने जिम्मेवारी दिइएको छ । यति महत्वको जिम्मेवारी सहित गठन भएको सरकारका कार्यभार के के हुन् ? लेखमा यसबारे चर्चा गरिनेछ ।https://www.onlinekhabar.com/2025/10/1792095/elections-legitimacy-and-geopolitical-tensions-in-the-interim-government
Sunday, October 26, 2025
Expectations from a Karki-led government facing challenges in terms of good governance
Expectations
from a Karki-led government facing challenges in terms of good governance
Dr.
Khimlal Devkota
Member
of the Constituent Assembly and Senior Advocate
Introduction
Good
governance is the cornerstone of democratic stability, justice, and
development. It refers to the effective, transparent, accountable, and
participatory use of power in the management of the country's resources and affairs.
In Nepal's political landscape, leadership transitions have often come with
hopes of reform and disappointment in performance. Among those who have
captured the public's attention for their integrity, courage, and commitment to
justice, Sushila Karki stands out as a rare figure. Whether she is in this
position by necessity or by someone's design, the future will confirm. However,
the ethics and judicial activism she demonstrated as the first female Chief
Justice before becoming Prime Minister continue to pave the way for discussions
about the kind of governance Nepal wants.
This
article discusses the expectations that the Nepali people and democratic
institutions have of a Prime Minister like Sushila Karki. It is natural to
expect more from Sushila Karki, who is especially imbued with a deep
understanding of law, ethics, and justice, especially in the context of good
governance. Especially her statement that corruption can be ended in a week,
even if it is only five of her leaders, has become a yardstick by which to
measure her.
The
six-month government, with the election as its main responsibility, faced the sarcasm
of the ousted Prime Minister, her own prejudices towards political parties, the
controversial past of the government ministers, the situation where the asset
details have not been made public so far, and the Council of Ministers has not
even been given a complete mandate.
Various
demands of various kinds of genji, most of the demands are outside the
constitution, the government formed on the foundation of the movement for good
governance, the start of the recovery business from hydro, the eternal movement
and its economy, youth psychology and on top of that, the bread of foreign
interests, the Dalai Lama's death in this mess and the increased interest of
the West are the burning issues of Nepali politics today. The current
government, eager to travel on the edge of the khukuri by solving all these
issues, is on a mountain of challenges. The government is in a dilemma of
reaching its destination or surrendering itself.
Less
than a month after the formation of the government, there has been an attempt
to put pressure by naming another former Chief Justice and a former President. Balen
and Sudhan, who were pressuring Oli and Lekhak to arrest them, have given up
after a complaint was filed against them. Miraj, Durga, and Nikolas are busy in
their shops, and Balen and Victor are busy with hot ashes. Nepali politics is
in a place where it is impossible to review. In such an environment, there is a
government led by Sushila Karki. It is needless to keep repeating that there is
no easy solution like shouting on the streets. In any case, Nepali politics is
in the throes of a crisis. If the crisis can be resolved, progress can be made;
otherwise, the very existence of the country is in danger. The people have not
stopped expecting good governance from a government born in such a background.
1.
The challenge of establishing integrity and moral leadership
The
foundation of good governance is honesty. The moral commitment to work for the
public good rather than personal or party gain is the main thing. The
challenges of Nepal's governance largely arise from the crisis of people's
trust in the leadership. Sushila Karki, known for her uncompromising stance
against corruption and political influence in the judiciary, has naturally
expected reform-oriented results.
During
her tenure as Chief Justice, her judicial career was characterized by personal
integrity and refusal to bow to political pressure, in addition to the
appointment of judges. As Prime Minister, similar ethical leadership is
expected, one that emphasizes clean politics, transparently declares assets,
and ensures that all members of the government adhere to conflict of interest
standards. Such ethical leadership can help restore the moral compass of
governance in Nepal, inspiring both the bureaucracy and citizens to act
ethically.
2.
Another challenge is the expectation to strengthen the rule of law
The
rule of law is the backbone of democratic governance. Sushila Karki’s legal
background will enable her to ensure that laws are implemented fairly and
institutions operate independently. One of her landmark decisions as Chief
Justice, disqualifying politically connected candidates from government
contracts and appointments, demonstrated her belief that no one is above the
law. Against this backdrop, as Prime Minister, her approach is likely to focus
on:
- ·Ensuring the independence of the
judiciary and constitutional commissions from executive interference.
- · Promoting law reforms that are
consistent with constitutional principles and international standards.
- ·Implement judicial accountability
through transparent appointment and performance appraisal mechanisms.
- ·Strengthen constitutional bodies and
other monitoring and oversight institutions to check executive overreach.
- ·Emphasis on the rule of law will
prevent arbitrary use of power and promote predictability in governance, an
essential feature of good governance.
3.
The challenge of systematically combating corruption
Corruption
is Nepal’s most entrenched disease, which has become a formidable challenge to
governance, undermining development and trust in democracy. Sushila Karki’s
judicial history was a continuous effort to discourage corruption and abuse of
power. One of theAs Prime Minister, the public expects him to institutionalize
anti-corruption reforms and see results. His good governance agenda is likely
to include:
- · Strengthening the Commission for the
Investigation of Abuse of Authority through genuine independence and legal
clarity.
- ·
Promoting whistleblower protection
laws and citizen oversight mechanisms.
- ·
Enhancing transparency in public
procurement through digital platforms and audit systems.
- ·
Promoting public officials’ asset
disclosures.
- ·
Promoting a culture of
accountability at all levels of federal, provincial, and local government.
- Contrary to popular anti-corruption slogans and stunts, his legal approach will emphasize institutional reform, legal safeguards, and citizen empowerment, not political retribution.
4.
The challenge of promoting transparency and the right to information
Transparency
is a prerequisite for accountability. The Nepalese state has struggled to
institutionalize practical transparency beyond the rhetoric of open government.
Sushila Karki's government will ensure justice and not be subjected to
injustice, which is seen in practice as naturally consistent with the
principles of open governance based on the belief that there should be no
injustice. In the role of Prime Minister, her initiatives may include the
following:
5. The
Challenge of Accountability and Performance-Based Governance
Accountability
is the belief that those exercising public power are responsible for their
actions. Lack of monitoring, weak oversight and political protectionism have
weakened Nepal’s governance culture. This government is expected to deliver a
different perception, with accountability not seen as punishment, but as a
continuous process of performance monitoring. A Karki-led government is likely
to do the following:
- ·
Institute performance agreements for
ministers, civil servants and public enterprises in practice.
- · Strengthen parliamentary committees
for effective monitoring, oversight and oversight of all executive decisions of
the government.
- · Promote post-legislative scrutiny to
measure the implementation of laws, assess their effectiveness, and ensure their
implementation.
- ·
Encourage the Office of the Auditor
General and the Public Accounts Committee to work without fear or favor.
- · Such systems-based accountability
will transform Nepal from a culture of impunity to one of accountability and
measurable governance.
6.
The challenge of establishing gender justice and inclusive leadership
As
the first female Chief Justice, Sushila Karki is a symbol of breaking gender
barriers in the history of Nepal’s governance. Prime Minister Karki is expected
to further advance gender equality and inclusion not only through
representation but also through structural reforms. Her governance priorities
are expected to include:
- ·
Ensure 50% representation of women
in decision-making bodies.
- ·
Maintain gender-responsive budgeting
in all ministries.
- · Enforce laws against gender-based
violence through fast-track courts and victim-friendly mechanisms.
- · Promote inclusive governance that ensures the participation of Dalits, Janajati, Madhesi, Tharu, and persons with disabilities. Her leadership will be particularly effective in redefining how women in power can apply empathy, fairness, and assertiveness, critical elements of good governance in a democracy practiced in a diverse society.
7.
The Challenge of Establishing Administrative Reforms and Meritocracy
Nepal’s
bureaucracy, which is often criticized for being politicized, needs to be transformed
into a merit-based, citizen-serving institution. Sushila Karki’s judicial
professionalism will also be able to bring about revolutionary changes in the bureaucracy. With such a background, it is expected that a Prime
Minister with such a background will focus on the following:
- · Depoliticizing the civil service
recruitment and promotion system.
- · Expanding the practice of
e-governance to reduce arbitrariness and speed up service delivery.
- · Establishing a Citizen Charter
Evaluation Mechanism to ensure that public services meet the standards of
commitment.
- · Encouraging capacity building and professional ethics among public officials. These administrative reforms will reduce the potential for corruption, improve efficiency, and make the government more responsive to the needs of citizens..
8.
The challenge of maintaining citizen-centric governance
The
ultimate goal of good governance is to provide effective and impartial services
to citizens. Karki's public image as a judicial leader will not be an obstacle
to the development of democracy. As Prime Minister, his governance model will
likely be based on the following facts:
- · Strengthening federalism, including
enhancing the autonomy and capacity of provincial and local governments.
- ·
Promoting participatory planning and
community monitoring of local projects.
- ·
Developing efficient grievance
redressal mechanisms at all administrative levels.
- · Bridging the gap between citizens
and the state through digital platforms and social accountability.
- · Such a citizen-first governance
model will redefine the social contract between the state and the people.
9.
The challenge of adopting judicial-executive balance and constitutionality
As
a figure who has already led the judiciary, Karki will be ready to be open and
transparent about the constitutionality of every executive decision. As Prime
Minister, he is also expected to maintain institutional balance and curb the
executive encroachment that often plagues Nepali politics. His rule is likely
to emphasize the following:
- · Prioritizing the separation of
powers between the executive, legislature, and judiciary
- · Respecting judicial decisions even
when politically inconvenient and inconvenient.
- · Providing an environment for
constitutional commissions to function independently within their jurisdiction.
- · Creating an environment where
citizens understand their rights and duties
- · This approach will not only curb authoritarian
tendencies but also strengthen democratic norms within the governance
structure.
10.
The Challenge of Implementing a Vision for Sustainable and Just Development
Ultimately,
good governance cannot be separated from development. For Sushila Karki,
justice and governance are intertwined. Even if the relationship between
development and justice is not defined, justice without development is
incomplete. A government led by her will seek to integrate the two. To this
end, she will promote:
- · Implementing sustainable development
policies guided by environmental justice and intergenerational equity;
- ·
Preparing the basis for
evidence-based policymaking based on social impact assessments;
- ·
Ensuring integrity in development
projects, donor coordination, and transparency in infrastructure agreements,
while promoting the national interest;
- ·
Investing in education, health, and
access to digital technology to empower citizens as partners in governance.
- · This approach links justice with
prosperity, ensuring that governance reforms translate into tangible
improvements in the lives of citizens.
Conclusion:
Nepal’s
democratic journey has been fraught with transitions, frequent changes of
government, politicized public institutions, and crises of trust. In this
context, Sushila Karki’s government as Prime Minister will be more pragmatic
than imaginative. It will embody the nation’s desire for ethical, courageous,
and just leadership. Her judicial record reflects the central principles of
good governance: integrity, transparency, rule of law, accountability, gender
equality, and inclusion. While actual governance will be shaped by political
outcomes, the values associated with Karki’s leadership will provide moral and
institutional guidelines for Nepal’s democratic future. In a society that longs
for clean politics and efficient administration, the expectations from leaders
like Sushila Karki, honest, principled, and fearless, are a symbol of hope that
good governance in Nepal is not just an aspiration, but a goal that can be
achieved through law-based, people-centered, and justice-oriented leadership.







