<img width="1279" height="774" src="https://superdesk-pro-c.s3.amazonaws.com/sd-nepalitimes/2022111016118/636d141b9c7e80680e0a995fjpeg.jpg" alt=""/>Till he was recalled last month by Prime Minister Sher Bahadur Deuba, Nilambar Acharya was Nepal’s ambassador to India since 2019. Acharya had previously served as Law Minister, as well as the Chairman of the Constitutional Committee. He spoke to Santa Gaha Magar about Indo-Nepal relations, and the country’s domestic politics:Nepali Times: As someone who was posted to New Delhi during a <a href="https://www.nepalitimes.com/latest/untangling-the-kalapani-knot/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">rocky period in bilateral relations</a>  please give some insight into the current state of India-Nepal ties.Nilamber Acharya: The relationship between Nepal and India is vast and nuanced. There are problems as well as positives, and they cannot be understood if we look at them in a one-dimensional framework. We need to be careful that the problems do not overshadow the positive aspects of our relationship. The Indian people have a lot of goodwill towards Nepalis.Like any other relationship, our bilateral ties need to evolve in the context of the times. And that has been the biggest challenge. Both governments and their political leadership need to be especially mindful of this fact.What could be the reasons why India has not formally received the report prepared by the bilateral Eminent Persons' Group (EPG) on Nepal-India relations?I am not sure why India has been reluctant to receive the EPG report. The document, which is integral to strengthening the foundations of our bilateral relationship, was finalised in consensus with four members from both countries. If India delays acknowledging and receiving the report any longer, it will be that much more difficult to move forward to review our diplomatic relations.Could it be that Nepal has not taken a more active initiative to implement the report?We have consistently engaged with our Indian counterparts to follow up on the EPG. There was not a single meeting during my term as ambassador when this report wasn’t discussed.In fact, then-Foreign Minister Sushma Swaraj at one stage before the 2019 Indian elections had assured us that India would receive the report. Prime Minister Narendra Modi said the same thing during the inauguration of the Nepal-India Petroleum Pipeline. Ultimately, it did not work out.After that, was there not enough pressure from Nepal, or did the Indians change their mind? Initially, both sides had agreed to submit the report first to the Prime Minister of India, then to the Prime Minister of Nepal, following which it would be made public via a press conference. However, there has been a roadblock from the Indian side. As I said, Nepal has repeatedly reminded and urged our counterparts to move forward with the report, but to no avail. Once the report is received, it would then be up to both the governments to decide whether to implement the its provisions and to what extent. One thing is for sure. Our bilateral relationships cannot move forward on the basis of the 1950 treaty.Could <a href="https://www.nepalitimes.com/latest/india-china-and-nepals-political-crisis/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">India’s perceptions on Nepal vis-à-vis China</a> be one of the reasons?Our relations with India and China are mutually exclusive to one another. Establishing diplomatic ties with another country does not mean that our relations with India have weakened. Diplomatic relations with countries have different contexts, and must therefore be understood separately. Diplomatic ties with one nation do not and should not have a negative effect on relations with another.Let us turn to Nepal. As a former law minister, what are your views on the <a href="https://www.nepalitimes.com/latest/nepals-lawyers-on-warpath-against-chief-justice/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Supreme Court row</a>?The current controversy surrounding the Supreme Court is not limited to whether the Chief Justice should resign or not. This issue is emblematic of a widespread disease that has for long plagued the very foundation of Nepal’s judiciary, which needs to be addressed properly. It is the responsibility of the Chief Justice, the judges of the court, and the government to address and solve those problems immediately.However, instances of judges boycotting the court and refusing to hear and try cases are not representative of the principles of the judiciary. The <a href="https://www.nepalitimes.com/opinion/the-real-story-in-nepals-supreme-court-debacle/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">problems within the court</a> must under no circumstances impact the judicial process or hinder Nepalis’ right to justice.Who is responsible?The government, political leadership, and experts in the field must come together to identify the problem through research and investigation. <a href="https://www.nepalitimes.com/latest/what-is-happening-to-nepals-supreme-court/">What is happening to Nepal’s Supreme Court?</a>, Santa Gaha MagarMany have linked the Constitutional Council, the Judicial Council, and even the Constitution of Nepal to the problems surrounding the Supreme Court. Do you see any flaws in the constitution?Seeing as the Constitution maintains objectivity over all things, debates about flaws in the Constitution do not come into play in this matter. What needs to be thoroughly examined is whether there are irregularities in institutional appointments and if the concerned authorities have been doing the work that they were assigned to do. Corruption must be investigated and the corrupt punished, but baseless public indictment must not be entertained. That is how this disease can be treated.Is our constitutional structure equipped to establish bodies to address our current problems?
The government should not remain silent in this matter by leaving it up to the judiciary. Rather, should find a solution to this problem through political means, by hearing the grievances of all disputing groups.
Moreover, it is natural to protest and make your voices heard, but the movements concerning this issue must not be drawn out to the degree that it affects the people's right to justice. That is not correct.
If the government gets involved, doesn’t it mean that the executive and the legislature are interfering in matters of the judiciary?
It is not to say that the government should direct the judiciary on what to do and what not to do, and should not be taken to mean as a call against the<a href="https://www.nepalitimes.com/here-now/supreme-court-puts-nepal-politics-back-on-track/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer"> separation of powers</a>. Rather, the government must facilitate the judiciary in the administration of justice. This is similar to how the executive assigns the budget to the court, and how laws implemented by the judiciary are passed by the parliament.
As it is, this became a matter of political concern as soon as the problem could not be contained within the judiciary, and the fights and disagreements spilled out into the streets.
Many have compared the current state of Nepal’s judiciary to that of post-panchayat Nepal in 1990. Was the judiciary in a better position then than it is now?
The circumstances surrounding Nepal’s courts then and now are incomparable. Nepal’s judiciary only became independent after 1990, following which judges were appointed through a democratic system. Before that, judges used to be assigned for having joined a political party, or simply for holding and voicing opinions about the need for democracy. 
Was that a good arrangement? Certainly not. Barring some decisions in the favour of the people and the media, court decisions largely discriminated against the citizens and deprived them of their rights.
Other aspects of Nepali society have been cited as being better before than it is now.
As I said, comparisons do not help. Nepal in the past did not have inclusion, in the human, political, and civil rights and liberties spheres. And while this is not to say that the past was without any progress, it is inaccurate to say that Nepal was more just or democratic in the past. 
The people could neither form governments nor change them if they were dissatisfied. In fact, they were not people at all, but subjects. As far as the courts were concerned, judicial decisions were heavily influenced by forces outside the judiciary. As it was, people were able to demand to be heard and were ultimately successful in establishing democracy in 1990. Following the king’s refusal to be a subordinate to his people, Nepal became a republic.
What is your response to those who ascribe the current problems within Nepal to republicanism, secularism and federalism?
The reasons for problems in Nepal at present are not due to the Constitution--although the Constitution should be amended in time--but due to a failure to implement its provisions. Societal instability is not due to republicanism or inclusion, but due to the inability to bring those concepts into practice. The flaw lies not in democracy, but in the fact that we do not have a functioning democratic process. The multi-party system is not responsible, but <a href="https://www.nepalitimes.com/editorial/they-fail-we-fall/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">factions operating within individual political parties</a> are.
The problem is not the Federal Democratic Republic of Nepal. The problem is that we have not yet been able to bring into practice what the Federal Democratic Republic of Nepal symbolises.
So republicanism or secularism are not directly threatened?
Everyone has the freedom to voice different views in a democratic society, and we have come a long way to achieve this. When people are dissatisfied with the democratic process, they can express that through the polls. What is in the past will remain there, be it the Rana regime, the Panchayat, or the monarchy. The only way to move is forward.
Does it seem like Nepal’s major political parties have been stingy in taking ownership of the federal democratic republic?
Nepal’s history from a monarchy to a federal democratic republic is the result of significant transitions. We have been headed in a positive direction, and things are not worse than they were before. For instance, it is not to say that corruption has increased, rather the awareness of corruption and the need to hold those corrupt to account has increased. Similarly, we are at a point where we can openly speak out against discrimination and mistreatment of communities. 
There is no need to be discouraged by the momentum of Nepal’s socio-political progress. However, even though Nepal is a multi-party democracy, the responsibility of preserving the democratic process and strengthening the republic lies primarily with the Nepali Congress and the UML. Nepalis are soon going to make their voices heard through the polls, and how they fare in the upcoming elections will determine the future of the country.

original

674x448

610x380

500x500

400x266

400x240

400x203

301x200

1250x600

1084x550

“India-Nepal ties must move beyond 1950 treaty”

<figure><img src="https://superdesk-pro-c.s3.amazonaws.com/sd-nepalitimes/2022111016110/636d121a9c7e80680e0a98bbjpeg.jpg" alt="" width="890" height="500"/><figcaption></figcaption></figure>The current questions about the separation of powers surrounding Chief Justice Cholendra SJB Rana and Prime Minister Sher Bahadur Deuba after <a href="https://www.nepalitimes.com/latest/nepal-govt-fills-cabinet-after-3-months/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">the appointment</a> (and subsequent resignation) of Rana’s brother-in-law Gajendra Hamal as a minister in government has raised serious questions about the conduct of justices, as well as interference in the judiciary by Nepal’s political leadership.This seeming give-and-take between the PM and the CJ set off an outcry from within Nepal’s judicial community, political commentators and the mainstream media. The public also made its opinion known through charged discourse on social media.Rana, for his part, swiftly refuted allegations that he had proposed Hamal’s ministership, as did a spokesperson for the prime minister when the issue was raised during a House session ahead of the cabinet expansion. Meanwhile, those in the Nepali Congress (NC) blamed the opposition UML for being behind “baseless rumours”.But less than 48 hours since his appointment, Minister Hamal resigned, proving that the explanations of the PM and CJ did not hold water. Rana has subsequently faced growing <a href="https://www.nepalitimes.com/latest/nepals-lawyers-on-warpath-against-chief-justice/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">calls for his resignation</a> from former chief justices, current justices of the court, as well as the Nepal Bar Association and the Supreme Court Bar Association.Justices and lawyers have been boycotting full court hearings called by Rana, as well as cases in the Supreme Court and other courts across Nepal since, affecting the judicial process.The Nepal Bar Association issued an ultimatum to Chief Justice Rana to resign, and protests, as well as calls for his impeachment, have been escalating when he failed to meet the deadline set before the Tihar festival.The controversy has exposed the transactional relationship between Nepal’s executive and judicial branches. However, what has been is that the nexus between political leadership and <a href="https://www.nepalitimes.com/latest/what-is-happening-to-nepals-supreme-court/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">the Supreme Court</a> existed long before the current debacle.Political influence over the judiciary was seen when Chief Justice Khil Raj Regmi was appointed chairman of the council of ministers by the then CPN-Maoist government in March 2013, following the failure of Nepal’s Constituent Assembly to draft the Constitution after two term extensions.Since then, it has become commonplace for politicians to interfere with the courts and judges through the Judicial Council, hand out positions to those deemed favourable, block unfavourable judicial appointments in Parliament hearings, engage in ‘bench buying’ in the Supreme Court, and even attempt to impeach the Chief Justice for failing to cater to their demands.In fact, this is not the first time Deuba and Maoist leader Pushpa Kamal Dahal have tried to undermine the independence of the judiciary. In 2017, the NC-Maoist coalition government filed an impeachment motion against Chief Justice <a href="https://archive.nepalitimes.com/article/interview/a-woman-is-as-capable-sushila-karki,3375" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Sushila Karki</a>, accusing her of interfering with executive decisions after she overturned the appointment of the Chief of Police.It was actually Justice Cholendra Rana who issued an order against <a href="http://archive.nepalitimes.com/blogs/thebrief/2017/05/05/sc-stays-impeachment/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">the impeachment motion</a>, rejecting the interference over the judiciary by the executive branch. Rana also helped overturn K P Oli’s dissolution of Parliament in July which led to regime change and the five-party coalition under Deuba.The irony is that the same figure who was once hailed as the protector of the sanctity of the judicial process is now being held responsible for encroaching upon the dignity of the judiciary and tarnishing the reputation of the Supreme Court.By becoming an active collaborator in political and constitutional appointments, Chief Justice Rana has acted against judicial discipline, also contributing to eroding the principle of the separation of powers. The latest collusion between the PM and CJ has laid the precedent for unchecked political bargaining and the blurring of lines between the judicial and the executive branches.In August, Deuba ended the Parliament session in the midst of a budget debate to issue the ordinance to amend the Political Parties Act that allowed his ally Madhav Kumar Nepal to break away from the UML, form a new party and join his coalition. A little more than a month later, <a href="https://www.nepalitimes.com/latest/political-expediency-trumps-nepal-constitution/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">he repealed the ordinance</a> to make way for this cabinet expansion.Issuing such an ordinance by suspending Parliament to benefit a particular person or party, and then repealing it once it had served its purpose, is a deliberate and cynical attack on the rule of law.What happened with Gajendra Hamal is evidence that the current leadership is running the state like a private company to perpetuate its own power – not an institution that serves the Nepali people.Deuba’s coalition has crushed the very foundation of our Constitution under the pretext of defending it. Prime Minister Deuba and Pushpa Kamal Dahal have found willing and enthusiastic co-conspirators in each other, using the judiciary to fulfil their individual agendas and destroying our democracy in the process.It is becoming increasingly clear that one of the primary reasons why Deuba and Dahal have orchestrated this political theatre is to garner support from within the judiciary to avoid being held accountable for war crimes committed when both were leaders of opposing sides in the 1996-2006 insurgency.Furthermore, the leadership is seeking to silence the international community on the <a href="http://archive.nepalitimes.com/regular-columns/guest-editorial/justice-delayed-justice-denied-transitional-justice,849" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">matters of transitional justice</a> by paving the way to clear their names of any involvement in further cases that might arise in court.Indeed, Maoist leader and <a href="https://www.nepalitimes.com/latest/speechless/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">House Speaker Agni Sapkota faces a war crime charge</a> in the Supreme Court. Both Sapkota and Rana are members of the Constitutional Council, and Sapkota stands to benefit in the courts through his association with the Chief Justice.In 2018, the Maoist government rejected the nomination of Deepak Raj Joshi as chief justice in retaliation against his imprisonment order on Maoist cadre Chhabilal Poudel for the abduction and murder of Krishna Prasad Adhikari during the conflict in 2004. Adhikari, a resident of Fujel in Gorkha, had been accused by Maoists of spying on behalf of the state. Other judges involved in the case who ruled against the victim have all since been rewarded by the party.The Maoist war ended 15 years ago and <a href="https://www.nepalitimes.com/latest/nepal-runs-out-of-excuses-to-address-war-crimes/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Nepal’s transitional justice process is stalled</a>. Families of the 1,400 disappeared are waiting for the truth, victims of war crimes also want justice, and the thousands who were wounded, tortured, raped, or lost property during the conflict await compensation.And while the Supreme Court verdict seven years ago to amend the Enforced Disappearances Enquiry, Truth and Reconciliation Commission Act to prevent perpetrators of war crimes from being exempt from punishment has still not been carried out, the order to make Sher Bahadur Deuba the prime minister was implemented within 24 hours.Such is the failure of the judicial system to stand for transitional justice, and the two erstwhile enemies, Deuba and Dahal, are among the primary players stalling the process.Over the coming days, the Chief Justice may very well buckle under judicial and public pressure and resign. And while his exit is necessary to the preservation of the impartiality of the judiciary, the buck must not stop with him. The prime minister and other leaders of Nepal’s coalition are equally, if not more responsible for the dismantling of state mechanisms, and cannot be spared from consequences.In particular, the Nepali Congress, the party once synonymous with democracy now seems hell bent on demolishing it, and must be held accountable. The prime minister blatantly used the judiciary to fulfil partisan interests, and must have to answer for it.The judiciary is, without compromise, the foundation of a democratic system, and freedom, fairness and autonomy are its cornerstones. It is a source of great hope and is the last line of defense against the violation of individual freedoms and the constitutional rights of victims.The hopes and trust of millions of Nepalis rest upon the judicial system. As such, the sustainability of an independent judiciary depends upon the competence, empathy, and sincerity of the leadership within all institutions of the branches of government.The institution will crumble without public trust, and our democracy, achieved through the countless sacrifices by Nepali citizens over the years, will be reduced to just a showpiece on the mantle of Nepal’s history.Charan Prasai is a human rights activist and coordinator of Accountability Watch Committee.cprasai@gmail.com

The real story in Nepal’s Supreme Court debacle

Next to my home in Bhainsepati stood a dead Uttis tree next to a public tap. A nearby water tank built a year earlier had killed its roots.
If the tree collapsed, people living nearby and those queuing up to fetch water at the tap would be hurt. With the storm season approaching, the risk was obvious. The tree could also fall on my own house, so I volunteered to find a way to remove this threat.
Little did I know how difficult it would be. A forest officer acquaintance told me there is a special procedure for cutting risky trees. I contacted the Lalitpur District Forest Office (DFO).&nbsp;
He said a technical report from a field officer was needed, and passed on her number. When I called, she asked for the location, photos, and a video. I send them all.
The ward office also suggested I use Lalitpur Metropolitan City’s mobile app, Lalitpur Alert, to report the problem. I uploaded photos, and submitted the complaint. This seemed to be very easy and efficient.
Indeed, the next day the municipality called me back and I explained the situation. They said they could not act without permission from the DFO. I asked why the app existed if the city could not act on such complaints. The officer said he did not know. My happiness was short-lived.
A couple of days later, the app notified me that my problem had been solved, and the complaint was removed. But the dead tree still stood there defiantly.&nbsp;
A week later, two forest technicians arrived on a scooter to inspect the tree. They looked up at the tree and asked if I had a measuring tape so they could measure its diameter.
“You are the technicians,” I told them. “You came to inspect the tree, and you came without a measuring tape?”
I rummaged at home and found a tape measure. They got the diameter and said they would prepare a technical report, but I would have to obtain a recommendation letter from the ward office and submit it to the DFO.
“This tree is dead,” I told them. “It is on public land. You have seen it with your own eyes. You know it's dangerous, so write a report and arrange for it to be cut. Why do I have to run from office to office to apply for recommendation letters?”
Their answer was simple, yet expected: “Those are the rules.”
They left, and I gave up. Two technicians spent half a day visiting the site. The metropolis runs a complaint system with a mobile app funded with public money. The ward office has staff to solve problems. Yet none of these institutions took the responsibility to remove a dangerous tree.
Everyone is busy citing rules and regulations and passing the buck. Weeks passed. Everyone reacted to the problem, but no one took any responsibility to resolving it.
Then, one bright December morning under a deep blue sky, a few neighbourhood boys were swinging their axes on the trunk. They had no proper equipment, no safety gear, and no professional experience.
I gave the boys some money and so did a neighbour. It took an hour or so for the tree to come crashing down safely. We had paid to have the tree cut illegally, and the matter ended there.
Multiple government offices, technicians, procedures, and mobile apps could not remove a dangerous tree, and we had to break the law to cut it. The tree is gone now, but the real problem remains: an inefficient bureaucracy.&nbsp;
It is perhaps symbolic that the tree is the election sign of the Nepali Congress, which was part of Nepal's governance and bureaucracy for decades and did not perform well in this month's election.&nbsp;
That is the bureaucracy that the new RSP government now has to get to work. But it will not be easy.
I posted on Facebook: ‘When people feel leaders have grown arrogant or corrupt with power, they change their minds and their votes. If those who replace them follow the same path, voters will again change their minds and votes.’
I continued: ‘The strength of democracy lies in this simple principle: the more citizens act as independent voters, the stronger democracy becomes. The more they behave as party loyalists, the weaker it grows. If we want a better system, we must demand deep reform of the state bureaucracy and hold institutions accountable.’&nbsp;
The first responses came from two senior government officials. They told me privately that they agreed by 200% but could not say so publicly.
It is quite normal for a Nepali to get the run around in government offices, it is almost a given to be asked for a bribe. As an environmental reporter and citizen, I have numerous such examples.
It is not just one sector that has been suffering. It is everywhere, and this is just an example of how complicated our bureaucracy is. As a 40 something person, I am old enough to remember the 1990 pro-democracy movement, &nbsp;the Maoist insurgency. Many promises made then by the politicians were broken.
We fought for rights, we fought for regime change. The country has changed political systems several times, from monarchy to multiparty democracy and finally a republic.
Yet one thing that remains largely untouched or reformed is our inefficient and corrupt bureaucracy. The new government, to be led by the youngest prime minister in our history must start this reform if it wants to deliver.&nbsp;
Otherwise, we may have to keep changing governments every few years, and still find ourselves unable to legally cut down even one dead tree.

A dead tree tests Nepal's bureaucracy

The RSP and its prime minister are being sworn in this week after gaining an unprecedented election victory. This is a welcome change for many Nepalis who see it as a remedy to decades of coalition instability.&nbsp; Yet Nepal’s political history suggests otherwise. No majority government has ever completed its full term. This reveals a deeper structural problem: weakly institutionalised parties dominated by personalities rather than ideas. 1951: Dissatisfaction with the oppressive Rana regime among the educated elite led to the creation of political parties like the Nepali Congress (NC), Praja Parishad (later merged into the Nepali Congress), Gorkha Parishad, and the Nepal Communist Party.&nbsp; They emerged secretly, mainly in India during the height of that country’s independence. They organised a successful armed uprising against the Rana rule.&nbsp; 1959: The NC won a two-thirds supermajority in the first general election. Within a year, King Mahendra staged a coup and established the partyless absolute monarchy called the Panchayat system.&nbsp;  <figure> <img src="https://publisher-publish.s3.eu-central-1.amazonaws.com/pb-nepalitimes/swp/asv65r/media/20260322130332_a416ab5703287898f0566dc6d2a6b95d797ce2f4ed55bffcfae2e8edc7737c5e.jpg" data-media-id="editor_0" data-image-id="20260322130332_a416ab5703287898f0566dc6d2a6b95d797ce2f4ed55bffcfae2e8edc7737c5e" data-rendition-name="original" width="675" height="849" loading="lazy" alt="Mahendra and BP"> </figure>  1991: After the People’s Movement, the ban on parties was lifted and Nepal became a constitutional monarchy. Elections were held under a new Constitution and the NC won 110 out of 205 seats, joining the United Leftist Front which functioned as a loose coalition.&nbsp; Prime Minister Girija Prasad Koirala’s first term ended with his resignation due to infighting, particularly with Ganesh Man Singh, who accused him of <a href="https://doi.org/10.2307/2645025" target="_blank">“emerging as a dictator, downgrading democratic norms and values, and even selling out national interests.”</a> Parliament was dissolved and the NC ended up losing the ensuing elections. 1994: Following the NC’s defeat, a <a href="https://doi.org/10.2307/2645025" target="_blank">hung parliament emerged</a> with the UML forming a minority government that lasted only nine months before collapsing after a no-confidence vote, allowing a NC-led coalition to return to power.&nbsp; 1999: Voters gave the NC a second chance and the party won 111 out of 205 seats. The party was divided between supporters of Koirala and Krishna Prasad Bhattarai, who became prime minister. &nbsp;The internal NC power struggle intensified and Koirala became prime minister again only to face bribery scandals, the Maoist insurgency, and the royal massacre.&nbsp; In 2001, under growing pressure from both the public and the party, <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2001/07/20/world/nepal-premier-resigns-caught-in-chaos-after-royal-blood-bath.html" target="_blank">Koirala was forced to resign</a> to be replaced by Sher Bahadur Deuba. The party eventually split into Koirala’s NC and Deuba’s NC (Democratic). &nbsp;In this chaos, king Gyanendra dissolved the parliament and assumed executive powers.  <figure> <img src="https://publisher-publish.s3.eu-central-1.amazonaws.com/pb-nepalitimes/swp/asv65r/media/20260322130332_e107b95de5641044f72a13fd20f417d16b9a2d1ecbae3492126ee5fd4244bd84.jpg" data-media-id="editor_4" data-image-id="20260322130332_e107b95de5641044f72a13fd20f417d16b9a2d1ecbae3492126ee5fd4244bd84" data-rendition-name="original" width="1250" height="753" loading="lazy" alt="Deuba and Girija"> </figure>  2017: This was the first election under the federal constitution. The UML and Maoists created a surprise pre-electoral alliance, breaking the Maoist coalition with the NC. The left alliance won a massive victory with the UML winning 121 seats and the Maoists 53 seats. Prime Minister K P Oli fell out with Pushpa Kamal Dahal of the Maoists. The House was dissolved, with the UML itself breaking into factions. What followed was seven shaky coalition governments in eight years.&nbsp;  <figure> <img src="https://publisher-publish.s3.eu-central-1.amazonaws.com/pb-nepalitimes/swp/asv65r/media/20260322130352_8b09b374d7fcb811e0a652c7f60b30eea4b9052a19ed3d768ba8ca9aaeb4dec7.jpg" data-media-id="editor_5" data-image-id="20260322130352_8b09b374d7fcb811e0a652c7f60b30eea4b9052a19ed3d768ba8ca9aaeb4dec7" data-rendition-name="original" width="667" height="1000" loading="lazy" alt="Oli and Prachanda"> </figure>  2022: The RSP was formed only four months prior to elections, but managed to become the fourth-largest party. In this month’s &nbsp;election, the RSP won a commanding parliamentary majority by presenting itself to the electorate as different from the discredited old parties.&nbsp; The RSP leadership structure is largely personality-driven and opaque. Party leader Rabi Lamichhane joined the governing coalition with the Maoists and UML securing four ministerial positions. Lamichhane became Home Minister and Deputy Prime Minister, using his swing vote to be the kingmaker party in the coalition. Lamichhane was embroiled in various scandals which he blamed on political vendetta. There was internal dissent within the party and among supporters who felt the coalition betrayed RSP’s founding ideals.&nbsp; Lamichhane <a href="https://thediplomat.com/2023/02/key-ally-quits-government-in-nepal/" target="_blank">reportedly</a> bypassed the party’s internal mechanisms, unilaterally deciding to pull out of the government without broad consultation.&nbsp; The youth-led September protests gave the RSP an opportunity to represent GenZ aspirations, and its popularity was cemented after Balendra Shah joined the party as a prime ministerial candidate.&nbsp; With its dramatic election victory, there is a question whether the &nbsp;party can separate itself from its two leaders, and have internal democracy. Or will it just be a vessel for new political elites to continue staying in power?&nbsp; ‘BALEN PARTY’ The RSP has increasingly relied on the same tactics that the NC once used in its heyday. Backed by Balendra Shah’s meteoric rise to fame, the RSP is called ‘The Balen Party’. <a href="https://nepalitimes.com/opinion/cyberia/rsp-s-pr-list-is-not-good-pr" target="_blank">RSP’s PR list</a> includes celebrities, actors, singers, pageant winners, business personalities, and athletes to maximise visibility and public appeal. Many of these soon-to-be MPs have little to no experience working in government, or together as a team. Which is perhaps why they needed a two-day orientation last week. In today’s attention economy, political currency depends on visibility. This is why the RSP’s strategy to harness Shah’s popularity was necessary to secure victory, while Shah needed a political platform for the election.&nbsp;  <figure> <img src="https://publisher-publish.s3.eu-central-1.amazonaws.com/pb-nepalitimes/swp/asv65r/media/20260322130348_abd1522a1f4f8ad4a0861c3916d86bd9688deafc7c44081b976378405d2b8e39.jpg" data-media-id="editor_8" data-image-id="20260322130348_abd1522a1f4f8ad4a0861c3916d86bd9688deafc7c44081b976378405d2b8e39" data-rendition-name="original" width="900" height="900" loading="lazy" alt="Balen and Rabi"> </figure>  Political parties are essential for a democracy, but when they &nbsp;revolve around one dominant leader, internal institutions become weak, and decision-making becomes centralised in the leader rather than in party committees, rules, or ideological platforms.&nbsp; This is exactly what led to the downfall of the NC and the UML. Both over the years were ridden with inter- and intra-party strife and failed the electorate. RSP must take a lesson from this and unite to institutionalise beyond its two personalities. Or it will suffer the same fate as the legacy parties. Since its inception, RSP has espoused a populist and anti-establishment agenda. The ‘new’ RSP with the Balendra brand gained massive support by being a clear ‘other’.&nbsp; The RSP can fall into the same trap as the NC and the UML by defining itself by what it is not, rather than what it is for. Beyond the external enemies they oppose, these parties often struggle to articulate what they actually stand for.&nbsp; RSP positions itself as an alternative to established parties — a pragmatic, results-oriented political force rather than one driven by traditional ideologies. However,<a href="https://www.cambridge.org/core/books/abs/theorizing-in-comparative-politics/parties-and-ideology/8386083191B53EC86A239B8852D4A6A6" target="_blank"> ideology gives a party identity and direction.</a> Without ideological grounding, RSP risks becoming a hollow vessel for power-chasing politicians who oppose each other’s every move, a story that is all too familiar.&nbsp; RSP can no longer define itself as being anti-establishment. It is now the establishment.&nbsp; While RSP might look like Congress 2.0 to many who have seen Nepal’s democratic trajectory, RSP does differ from past majority parties in both positive and negative ways.&nbsp; Times have also changed. Nepal is no longer a monarchy, literacy rates are much higher, social media has made information more accessible, and Nepalis are less forgiving, as seen by the events that transpired on 8-9 September 2025.&nbsp; The RSP has fielded more qualified candidates, and they could steer the country in the right direction. Many are experts in their fields and have had years of experience prior to joining politics. Having experts from such different backgrounds is a huge asset.&nbsp;  <figure> <img src="https://publisher-publish.s3.eu-central-1.amazonaws.com/pb-nepalitimes/swp/asv65r/media/20260322130352_426011e8c377bffcef6fcb4371325b36fb940eb5a8ab66d3c76ff5cf6f1943c7.jpg" data-media-id="editor_10" data-image-id="20260322130352_426011e8c377bffcef6fcb4371325b36fb940eb5a8ab66d3c76ff5cf6f1943c7" data-rendition-name="original" width="1600" height="1066" loading="lazy" alt="RSP new MPs"> </figure>  Moreover, having MPs from various other parties/fields can also prevent a cult following of hardcore loyalists within the party.&nbsp; There are members loyal to certain RSP leaders in the party, but there are also those who will not hesitate to go against their leaders if need be. The RSP has little opposition in Parliament, so its own members may have to take on a check-and-balance role. Nepal is in a much better spot institutionally compared to what it was like back in the early days of its democracy. There is a Constitution, there is no active conflict, the monarchy is no longer an existential threat to democracy, and the local and provincial governmental bodies have had the time to settle.&nbsp; This means the RSP is in a better position to work without the basic institutional hurdles that previous governments faced, but it will not be able to hide behind institutional issues if it fails to deliver.&nbsp; In the past, majority parties could easily pin the blame on an authoritarian monarchy, a Maoist conflict, a lack of consensus during the constitution-building process, or a newly implemented federal system.&nbsp; Most of these were just excuses for incompetency. Governments were formed and fell based on self-serving negotiations, but they managed to keep the parties afloat, and the citizenry was willing to give them a second, third, or even fourth chance.&nbsp; The RSP will not have this privilege. Nepal has many problems, but its governmental bodies are better institutionalised than when the NC last had a majority. A challenge for RSP now would be fixing broken institutions, not building new ones. A recurring issue during Balendra Shah’s tenure as Kathmandu’s mayor were his <a href="https://kathmandupost.com/politics/2026/01/28/can-nepal-s-viral-mayor-run-the-country" target="_blank">disputes with the bureaucracy</a> that resulted in months of unpaid salary for KMC staff, a lack of collaboration between him and Deputy Mayor Sunita Dangol, and rarely any public appearances.&nbsp; The RSP is inheriting a bureaucracy tainted by deep-seated patronage networks. Sustaining a government requires institutional collaboration and a willingness to work together, not disruption and division.&nbsp; While Nepal has seen the rise of many populist figures in its democratic history, the RSP’s victory based on Balendra Shah’s fame is new. Populism is usually harmful for a democracy because it punishes dissent, turns criticism into betrayal, and fuels hyper-nationalism, authoritarianism, and polarisation. A trend of punishing criticism is already visible on online spaces. Without an effective parliamentary opposition, the responsibility for democratic accountability will fall on the media and civil society. If the trend of intolerance to criticism deepens, Nepal risks sliding toward a majoritarian politics where popularity replaces accountability. Time and again, the Nepali people have given opportunities to parties that promise change, only to face disappointment. Nepal’s political history shows that majority governments fail not because they lack seats, but because they lack institutions.&nbsp; The electoral earthquake Nepal just witnessed could bring sweeping reforms or drown the country’s fragile democracy. If RSP hopes to succeed where others failed, it must build a party that outlives its founders. Suvexa Pradhan Tuladhar is an Early Career Policy Research Fellow at the Nepal Institute for Policy Research (NIPoRe).

Will it be different this time in Nepal?

Sometimes, we need to take a step back to realise what a tectonic movement Nepali politics witnessed this month.
In a region and world ruled by elected authoritarians, Nepalis &nbsp;went to the ballot box freely to express a collective will for change.
These faces in this group photo of the RSP’s 180 freshly-minted MPs at the ballroom of the Royal Tulip Hotel on Wednesday is symbolic of what Nepal has come through.&nbsp;
The ship of state righted itself after the September Storm, installing an interim government that held an election within six months in which voters banished obsolete politicians and their parties into oblivion.
Nepalis, fed up with the inept kakistocracy of the past three decades, took the country into a post-ideological phase — replacing Marxists, Maoists and monarchists &nbsp;with a belief in a new governing culture that rewards delivery and accountability. And they have trusted the RSP to carry it through.
Nepal’s history has never been linear, it jerks ahead in lurches. The polity also tends to take one step forward and two steps back, so the public’s great expectations is tempered by a sense of cautious optimism and guarded pessimism.
This could be the great leap forward that Nepalis have waited for and deserve, but it could also be a Gramscian interregnum in which the old is dead and the new is not yet born. We will have to wait to see whether this transitional period will also see ‘morbid symptoms’.
As disruptor-in-chief, it was the Balendra Shah ‘wave’ or ‘craze’ that propelled the RSP to power. The former Kathmandu mayor needed a party platform, and the RSP’s tainted leader Rabi Lamichhane required a booster. Nepal's voters were looking for a saviour.
Personality-wise Shah and Lamichhane are poles apart: one is Type B and the other Type A. One is enigmatic, the other phlegmatic. But yin and yang do also tend to complement each other.&nbsp;
Kathmandu’s chattering class is already making self-fulfilling prophecies about the two falling out, and are fishing for hints that they already have. Shah’s absence from the RSP’s orientation this week was taken as a clue.&nbsp;
Closing the two-day tutorial on Wednesday, Lamichhane delivered a fiery 30-minute speech that laid out the RSP’s main agenda: to function differently from the old parties, serve the people, avoid middlemen, become true lawmakers without taking the law into their own hands.&nbsp;
“The old political parties contributed to history, we will build the future with a new political contract with citizens,” he said, trying to rise over past controversies and his abrasive rhetoric to sound statesmanlike.&nbsp;
GIVE AND TAKE
Lamichhane is said to be in touch with the reclusive Shah to announce a compact cabinet next week. Its composition will be an indication of how much give-and-take there was, and whether the criteria for selecting ministers is competence or loyalty.
Will RSP ministers behave like rulers or service providers? The new government will dive right into the economic fallout of the West Asia war with soaring fuel &nbsp;prices, inflation and uncertainty about remittance inflows.
On Thursday, Gagan Thapa resigned as NC chair, taking moral responsibility for the party’s election loss. The UML’s unrepentant K P Oli does not share the same sentiment about who is responsible for his own party’s historic downfall.&nbsp;
NCP chair Pushpa Kamal Dahal, who was luckier than his cross-party cohort, is now a comparative relic in a Parliament largely comprised of freshmen and sophomore lawmakers.
But the NC, UML and NCP still control provincial and most municipal governments. The old parties could try to make things difficult for the RSP at the centre, but it is also an opportunity for them to clean up their act ahead of local elections next year.&nbsp;
Another test for the RSP will be dealing with a heavily-politicised klepto-bureaucracy which has to frontend its policy decisions. &nbsp;

People’s power

Deadly floods two years ago along the southern fringes of Kathmandu Valley killed 200 people. Climate change was blamed, but the destruction was magnified by quarries and sand mining owned by local politicians and crony contractors. Disaster mitigation and environmental risk was not a priority for any of the political parties that ran and won Nepal’s election last week. Although the RSP has a supermajority, rural municipalities that grant mining contracts are still ruled by the established parties that supply aggregates and sand to feed &nbsp;Kathmandu’s construction boom. Here in Lele Valley, residents are worried about another monsoon season that will start in June and fear more floods bringing unmanaged gravel from quarries down the Nallu River.&nbsp; The house of Sanumaya Nagarkoti, 65, and ten neighbours were washed away by the flood on the night of 28 September 2024. She and her husband petitioned the ward and municipal council to remove the crushers but no one listened. The slopes above are scarred by landslides from two years ago, and the banks of the river are strewn with bounders the size of cars that were brought down. “We live in constant fear of landslides,” says Chakra Nagarkoti, “the heavy crusher machinery and tipper trucks also constantly shake the house.”&nbsp; Google Earth images show that 24.6 hectares of mountain flanks have been excavated since 2010, and despite the disaster no lessons have been learnt.  <figure> <img src="https://publisher-publish.s3.eu-central-1.amazonaws.com/pb-nepalitimes/swp/asv65r/media/20260319090348_bdce7f17500eadac0ce0814c32c2b4190d01325976fd4d29db9985148459c0bc.jpg" data-media-id="editor_0" data-image-id="20260319090348_bdce7f17500eadac0ce0814c32c2b4190d01325976fd4d29db9985148459c0bc" data-rendition-name="original" width="1500" height="907" loading="lazy" alt="Lele"> <figcaption>Photo: GOOGLE EARTH</figcaption> </figure>  The RSP might have got a near two-thirds majority in Parliament but decision-making at the community level is controlled by politicians in cahoots with contractors.&nbsp; Along the Mahadev Khola, the Department of Mines cancelled excavation permits for crushers citing flood and landslide risk. Yet there are still 21 contractors mining stones and sand.&nbsp; Nearby Godavari Municipality also instructed operators who had not renewed permits to close down. No action was taken. One of them is Vinayak Multipurpose which delivers aggregate and stones for United Cement. Local ward chair Milan Silwal, has a stake in Vinayak and locals accuse him of taking the side of industry.&nbsp; Another slope is being gouged out near Mahadev Khola, and comparing satellite imagery from 2010 shows that the scar on the mountain is now five times bigger.  <figure> <img src="https://publisher-publish.s3.eu-central-1.amazonaws.com/pb-nepalitimes/swp/asv65r/media/20260319090348_21a8f7f7f9d6cc784c35719da737b20283f934bbe16c9de971d91bf01012499a.jpg" data-media-id="editor_1" data-image-id="20260319090348_21a8f7f7f9d6cc784c35719da737b20283f934bbe16c9de971d91bf01012499a" data-rendition-name="original" width="1500" height="1125" loading="lazy" alt="Lele"> <figcaption>United Cement operating near Mahadev Khola. Photo: ARCHANA DARJI</figcaption> </figure>  Nearby stands the lone house of 55-year-old Sabina Tamang, who lives with her husband and daughter. Due to the sound of the stone-breakers, they cannot hear each other speak. “Last year, a landslide destroyed our cowshed and latrine,” she says. “Next it is going to be our home.”&nbsp; DRY SPRINGS Lele gets its water from several perennial springs which have gone dry in recent years. One of them is near where the cement factory quarries limestone. “We hardly get any water, and the little that does flow is murky and red,” says local resident Rajesh Shrestha. A parliamentary committee directive ordered excavation to stop 15 years ago after a similar flood to the one in 2024.  <figure> <img src="https://publisher-publish.s3.eu-central-1.amazonaws.com/pb-nepalitimes/swp/asv65r/media/20260319090352_af7da754299116578cc1dd91d5318ec337b69e74b0676599260b7c57c6ec6fd7.png" data-media-id="editor_2" data-image-id="20260319090352_af7da754299116578cc1dd91d5318ec337b69e74b0676599260b7c57c6ec6fd7" data-rendition-name="original" width="1440" height="494" loading="lazy" alt="Lele"> <figcaption>Lele over the years. Photo: GOOGLE EARTH</figcaption> </figure>  United Cement’s manager Hari Upreti says his company has fulfilled all requirements and has permission to mine 15 hectares of its own property and 4 hectares of government land. “We have the Department of Mines permit which is valid till 2036 and extract 1,600 tons of limestone every day,” says Upreti. “The local community knew about the mining and if there is a problem with springs going dry it is not because of us.” Environmental researcher Uttambabu Shrestha, however, says there is a direct correlation between the quarry operation and floods, landslides and dry springs.&nbsp; “Extraction should not be allowed without an environmental impact assessment, and companies must stick to set limits,” he says. Investigation of permits show that there is collusion between local officials and contractors. Godavari-6 Chair Bishnuman Maharjan has investment in two quarries and crusher companies operating along Nallu Khola. A paper trail links Maharjan also to Sagarmatha Stone Crusher and Mankamana Aggregate Industries. IMPUNITY&nbsp; Godavari Municipality published a notice in June 2024, instructing crusher companies to submit environmental reports within two weeks, covering initial examination and impact assessment. It also told them to pay local development fees and clear outstanding dues. The municipality even wrote to the Department of Mines clarifying that it had issued permits to only five out of 27 contractors. Within a month, the Department wrote to the District Administration Office (DAO) and District Police Office instructing them to stop illegal excavation, and sent a copy to the Lalitpur Division Forest Office. The DAO then wrote to Lalitpur Police naming Machindranath Multipurpose as operating illegally and should be shut down. There was no followup. The municipality then issued fines worth Rs 60 million to it and one other company for non-compliance. The companies stalled, disputing the calculations.&nbsp;  <figure> <img src="https://publisher-publish.s3.eu-central-1.amazonaws.com/pb-nepalitimes/swp/asv65r/media/20260319090356_6e96403d3c5be4aef4d030974d6d92029a0eb396deafd19c511978dae30dd3d2.jpg" data-media-id="editor_3" data-image-id="20260319090356_6e96403d3c5be4aef4d030974d6d92029a0eb396deafd19c511978dae30dd3d2" data-rendition-name="original" width="4000" height="2250" loading="lazy" alt="Lele"> <figcaption>Another site of extraction near Mahadev Khola in Godavari. </figcaption> </figure>  Machhindranath Multipurpose operator Kedar Timalsina Shashi denies doing anything wrong, and says the landslides were collateral damage because of the steep terrain. When contacted Godavari Municipality Deputy Mayor Muna Adhikari declined to comment. It has been 10 years since Rajesh Shrestha, Nikesh Shrestha, and others raised their voices against the environmental destruction caused by the construction mafia. An agreement was finally reached two years ago between locals and mining and transport businessmen, stipulating that stone mines must close permanently by mid-2025. The agreement also stated that check dams must be built to manage mining debris, and damaged structures must be restored to their original state. Trees were to be planted at sites where stone mines had operated. But the mines in the catchment are still in operation with 500 tipper trucks working on the site every day, transporting stones and aggregate. Local youth have continued holding sit-in street protests and at Lalitpur DAO.&nbsp; After one sit-in, the mines closed for about a month but they started back up a month later.&nbsp; Birendra Maharjan owns one of the crusher units, and says he follows all environmental protocols. He told us: “You need stones to build, and we must dig to extract stones. Some trees have to be cut, people get employment, and besides, floods and landslides happen across Nepal.” &nbsp;&nbsp; Centre for Investigative Journalism – Nepal.

cheif-justice-cholendra-rana

“India-Nepal ties must move beyond 1950 treaty”

The real story in Nepal’s Supreme Court debacle

A dead tree tests Nepal's bureaucracy

Will it be different this time in Nepal?

People’s power

Loot in Lele