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.
posted by KDevkota @ December 19, 2025
0 Comments
