<img width="1574" height="658" src="https://superdesk-pro-c.s3.amazonaws.com/sd-nepalitimes/20221110131128/636ceeb39c7e80680e09ae46jpeg.jpg" alt=""/>In response to President Bidya Devi Bhandari’s call for the formation of a government under Article 76 (5) of the Constitution, the Leader of the Opposition Sher Bahadur Deuba and Prime Minister KP Sharma Oli submitted <a href="https://www.nepalitimes.com/latest/2-ex-pms-vie-to-be-nepal-pm/" data-saferedirecturl="https://www.google.com/url?q=https://www.nepalitimes.com/latest/2-ex-pms-vie-to-be-nepal-pm/&amp;source=gmail&amp;ust=1622281099084000&amp;usg=AFQjCNEhPxVkCQEg7_nSphiFjbuMNCda9Q">separate claims on 21 May</a> to her of commanding a majority of parliamentarians. Deuba had the claim of support of 149 MPs while PM Oli had 153.  It is not possible that there would be two majorities in the House of Representatives (HoR), and with the President <a href="https://www.nepalitimes.com/latest/nepal-sets-elections-in-middle-of-pandemic/" data-saferedirecturl="https://www.google.com/url?q=https://www.nepalitimes.com/latest/nepal-sets-elections-in-middle-of-pandemic/&amp;source=gmail&amp;ust=1622281099084000&amp;usg=AFQjCNG_RvqaIUUq6AhnG_0i6F90-QNx7A">rejecting both claims</a>, the main question right now rests on the interpretation of Article 76 (5). While the basis on which the Head of State reached the conclusion is a matter of her judicial discretion which cannot be questioned in court, it is nevertheless important to interpret and understand Article 76 (5) holistically, given the national importance of a prime minister’s election.In order to fully grasp the basis of the President’s decision, it is important to go into the text of Article 76 (5): ‘In case where the Prime Minister appointed under Clause (3) fails to obtain a vote of confidence under Clause (4) and any member under Clause (2) presents the ground on which he or she can obtain a vote of confidence in the House of Representatives, the President shall appoint such member as Prime Minister.’Under the Constitution, therefore, this article requires four preconditions to be clearly fulfilled before a decision is made:FIRST, the results from the application of Clause (4). While applying this clause, PM KP Sharma Oli sent a written letter to the President stating that as he did not have the numbers to obtain vote of confidence under existing circumstances, he recommended issuing the call under Clause (5) for the formation of new government. With the Prime Minister's recommendation following from his Cabinet's decision, the President had no choice but to make the call.  The opposition parties in the HoR initially criticised the recommendation of the Prime Minister and demanded he should rather have gone for a floor test. But then the leader of the opposition Deuba laid claim to government with 149 members under the President’s call under 76 (5) as recommended by the Prime Minister. PM Oli then also laid claim to government, saying he had the support of 153 members.What we see thus is a majority in HoR recognising activation of Clause (4) by default and the prime minister’s inability to gain confidence of the House. If that were not the case, there would not have been the condition for the claims of both candidates to be considered under Article 76 (5). Thus, there we see unanimous acceptance of the fact that the Supreme Court’s 23 February 2021 decision requiring the House to proceed through the application of Clauses (1), (2), (3), (4) and (5) had been followed to the letter. The political parties have themselves resolved the debate around this matter by participating in the call by the president. SECOND, the candidature for prime ministership under Article 76 (5) should be of a member of the HoR under Clause (2). This clause specifies, ‘any member of the House who can get a majority with the support of two or more than two parties’ may present the basis for obtaining the House of Representatives' vote of confidence.When read in the context of Article 76 (5), any House member, not necessarily the parliamentary party leaders of larger parties, who presents basis for gaining vote of confidence can be appointed prime minister. Under the process guided by these constitutional provisions, there can be no doubt that the support of political parties to such a candidate is a necessity.This aspect is evident in Deuba’s claim being supported by the Nepali Congress and CPN (Maoist Centre) along their party lines. In the case of PM Oli’s claim, however, the support of both the CPN (UML) party which he leads as well as the Janata Samajbadi Party is divided, denting his claim. His claim of majority is therefore subject to disapproval. THIRD, the prime question is whether the signatures or support of MPs during the process under Article 76 (5) that go against the decision of their parties are to be given validity. While the Deuba’s claim is based on an independent position taken by 38 MPs of the UML and JSP combined, the President appears to have accorded recognition to all members of the House.The president could have rejected the application at the first instance, using her privilege of office. Deuba’s claim was allowed to be registered following due process by the president herself.It was not possible to reject the application by Prime Mnister Oli because his claim included the decision of the parties concerned and the name-list of MPs by party. It was not unnatural for the two sides to place applications, given that the JSP as a party which had earlier decided to remain neutral had changed its decision at the last minute and to participate in the process under 76 (5). FOURTH, the application under Article 76 (5) made before the President for appointment as prime minister requires placing ‘the basis (आधार) to be able to win a vote of confidence’. What this means is that the President will have to have confidence that the prime minister appointed under Article 76 (5) is able to win the confidence vote within 30 days pursuant to Article 76 (4).In other words, regardless of the claims of a candidate to majority support at the time of application, the president’s concern would be to see if there is basis for the candidate winning a confidence vote within 30 days. As the defender of the Constitution and seeking stability for the polity, it would be natural for President Bhandari to see the verifiability of a claim to majority within the time frame of 30 days as stipulated in the Constitution. When there is no debate on the matter, there would be no questioning claims of a candidate of the support of MPs, whether numbering 149 or 153. They both are majority numbers.  But in the current instance, both applications to the President were contentious. Further, the president had been formally informed in writing that some MPs of the CPN (UML) and JSP have supported the application of another party, and that those two parties were to carry out disciplinary actions against those Members of Parliament.Given that the law on political parties stipulates clearly that the parliamentary procedure for the suspension or ouster of MPs can take no more than 15 days, it becomes clear that neither list before the President was likely to remain intact by the time the vote of confidence was sought within the 30-day stipulation. Thus, the president was unable to give her assent to either application.Can party MPs vote independently?It is important to understand here that while MPs may try to go outside the bounds set by their parties, the Constitution and law relating to political parties and associated regulations provide strong basis for the parties to keep their MPs in check and under party discipline. There is no existing law or constitutional provision that allows us to choose between what action by an MP attracts party disciplinary measures and what does not. There is no basis to the argument that the disciplinary action against MPs may not be applied selectively for certain clauses of the Constitution. In essence, the political parties are sovereign in their ability to ensure party discipline in Parliament under any and every circumstance.MPs must make a choice between party affiliation and independent vote, and choosing the latter course they have to be subject to discipline for defying the party whip. Voting outside the party decision can mean expulsion from the party, which would ipso facto mean vacating the parliamentary seat in the House. The Maoist Centre has already utilised this authority over its representatives by ousting several members in both the houses of the Federal Parliament and in provincial parliaments.According to the existing system, and as clearly spelt out in the Constitution and the law on political parties, MPs of nationally recognised parties are able to vote of their own volition only when electing the leader of their parliamentary party. Otherwise, in every sphere and activity, MPs are bound by his/her party’s decisions and directives. This principle was seen applied clearly during the proceeding of the just-dissolved HoR last year, when MP Sarita Giri’s seat was instantaneously revoked when she defied her party whip.The process of disciplinary action leading to expulsion is fairly simple. If a request has been formally made by a party to revoke an MP’s membership in the House, the parliamentary secretariat may take no more than 15 days to implement that notice. It should also be noted that other than cases filed in the courts on corruption and specific criminal offences, disciplinary actions against MPs are the prerogative of their parties.Difference between JSP and UML 'independents'Given that the JSP has a structure with two chairpersons, decisions to support or to take action under the party’s constitution require the agreement of both and hence may not be immediately implementable. For this reason, Deuba may get the benefit of doubt. JSP's case here is exactly like that of the erstwhile NCP, about which the Election Commission could not take decisions because of the party's statute requiring consensus between its two chairpersons. The JSP independents therefore may weigh in for Mr. Deuba.However, there would be no confusion in the case of the CPN (UML) dissidents. The President was officially informed before she took her decision that the chair and parliamentary party leader of the CPN (UML) was in a position to act immediately against the MPs who had gone against the party’s decision. This referred to the fact that UML's 26 MPs who supported Deuba's application had already breached their party whip on 10 May by abstention during the vote of confidence Prime Minister Oli had sought.Breach of party whip is one of the several legal conditions for vacating the seat of an MP. Existing laws and party statutes provide this right to all political parties. It thus appears that the list presented by Deuba was clearly fragmented and his claim of majority would have fallen short within the 30-day stipulated timeframe. There was no reason to be confident that the number presented by Deuba would remain intact until the required vote of confidence on the floor of the House. Both claimants, or either one of them, could have thought he would win the vote of confidence after the president appointed him prime minister but before the disciplinary procedure of the relevant party was activated. Or, one or other candidate could have hoped to have the Speaker of Parliament show indulgence and ‘good office’ towards himself in terms of handling the disciplinary proceedings. Such in-party and inter-party conspiracies are necessarily outside the consideration of the president, who will be concerned only with what is written in the law and Constitution.Should the President have verified both lists?The dissident MPs of the UML and JSP supporting Deuba's application are working as minority groups within their individual parties. They have their own claims of legitimacy still to be proven before the competent law. The provisions relating to breakup of parties and related aspects are clearly attracted by the application of both candidates, given that the party decisions of the UML and JSP are on one side while the minority groups of both parties have gone to the other side. Under such circumstances, it is not correct legally or on principle to demand that the President verify the lists of MPs provided by the two applicants. The law as it relates to political parties has set a specific process for the breakup of parties, which also allows minority groups to be sufficiently heard which often becomes a long-drawn process. The president’s office is not the place to utilise certain numbers or groups to divide up parties, it is meant to promote unity among the political parties and the nation generally. The place to decide majority and minority through a counting exercise is the Parliament.  It also goes against the principle of multiparty system of governance to lay claim to dissident minority of members of another political party as ‘independents’. Article 74 of the constitution clearly spells out: ‘The form of government of Nepal shall be multi-party, competitive, federal, democratic, republican, parliamentary form of government based on pluralism.’Both claimants who approached the President should have chosen a different path rather than put her office in a position of controversy. MPs wanting to support one among the two aspirants for the post of prime minister while going against their own party whip should have done so either after completing the party division process, or being able to establishtheir independent status. This would have been the only proper procedure. Even though the House membership of said MPs were intact at the time that the claimants approached the President, given the imminent action by both parties leading at the very least to the expulsion of a number of MPs, it becomes clear why the claims by both candidates did not carry credible ‘basis’ as required for the President’s decision under Article 76 (5).It is evident that the President has taken her decision based not only on immediate or short-term considerations, but with a concern for the future workings of Parliament. Take for instance a situation where because a party’s disciplinary proceedings is delayed for whatever reason and the MPs’ defiance of party whip is recognised, as a result of which one claimant wins the vote of confidence. Such MPs will still be a subject to party action, however, and when that happens the newly formed government will immediately go into minority. Constitutionally, the opposition cannot bring a motion of no-confidence until two years after a new prime minister is elected even if the government is in minority. Under such a situation, the government will not be able to adopt its policies and programs, neither the budget, nor get passage of bills in Parliament – a situation similar to that faced by current Prime Minister KP Sharma Oli. The goal of Parliament is not to create a minority government, or an even weaker one. Instead, the goal of the Constitution is to provide stability rather than weaken the system through repeated election of minority prime ministers. Therefore, the claims of majority placed before President Bhandari by the two aspirants were like blocks of ice under the sun, bound to diminish over time.Either claimant should have been able to present rock-solid majorities and outside of controversies, which would have been according to the spirit of the Constitution. Hence, on the basis of constitutionalism and the principles of parliamentary democracy, President Bhandari denied both applications. Tika Dhakal is Press Adviser to President Bidya Devi Bhandari. The views expressed here are his own.

original

674x448

610x380

500x500

400x266

400x240

400x203

301x200

1250x600

1084x550

Interpreting Article 76 (5) of Nepal’s Constitution

<img width="1574" height="658" src="https://superdesk-pro-c.s3.amazonaws.com/sd-nepalitimes/20221109111152/636b86aa9c7e80680e067869jpeg.jpg" alt=""/>In response to President Bidya Devi Bhandari’s call for the formation of a government under Article 76 (5) of the Constitution, the Leader of the Opposition Sher Bahadur Deuba and Prime Minister KP Sharma Oli submitted <a href="https://www.nepalitimes.com/latest/2-ex-pms-vie-to-be-nepal-pm/" data-saferedirecturl="https://www.google.com/url?q=https://www.nepalitimes.com/latest/2-ex-pms-vie-to-be-nepal-pm/&amp;source=gmail&amp;ust=1622281099084000&amp;usg=AFQjCNEhPxVkCQEg7_nSphiFjbuMNCda9Q">separate claims on 21 May</a> to her of commanding a majority of parliamentarians. Deuba had the claim of support of 149 MPs while PM Oli had 153.  It is not possible that there would be two majorities in the House of Representatives (HoR), and with the President <a href="https://www.nepalitimes.com/latest/nepal-sets-elections-in-middle-of-pandemic/" data-saferedirecturl="https://www.google.com/url?q=https://www.nepalitimes.com/latest/nepal-sets-elections-in-middle-of-pandemic/&amp;source=gmail&amp;ust=1622281099084000&amp;usg=AFQjCNG_RvqaIUUq6AhnG_0i6F90-QNx7A">rejecting both claims</a>, the main question right now rests on the interpretation of Article 76 (5). While the basis on which the Head of State reached the conclusion is a matter of her judicial discretion which cannot be questioned in court, it is nevertheless important to interpret and understand Article 76 (5) holistically, given the national importance of a prime minister’s election.In order to fully grasp the basis of the President’s decision, it is important to go into the text of Article 76 (5): ‘In case where the Prime Minister appointed under Clause (3) fails to obtain a vote of confidence under Clause (4) and any member under Clause (2) presents the ground on which he or she can obtain a vote of confidence in the House of Representatives, the President shall appoint such member as Prime Minister.’Under the Constitution, therefore, this article requires four preconditions to be clearly fulfilled before a decision is made:FIRST, the results from the application of Clause (4). While applying this clause, PM KP Sharma Oli sent a written letter to the President stating that as he did not have the numbers to obtain vote of confidence under existing circumstances, he recommended issuing the call under Clause (5) for the formation of new government. With the Prime Minister's recommendation following from his Cabinet's decision, the President had no choice but to make the call.  The opposition parties in the HoR initially criticised the recommendation of the Prime Minister and demanded he should rather have gone for a floor test. But then the leader of the opposition Deuba laid claim to government with 149 members under the President’s call under 76 (5) as recommended by the Prime Minister. PM Oli then also laid claim to government, saying he had the support of 153 members.What we see thus is a majority in HoR recognising activation of Clause (4) by default and the prime minister’s inability to gain confidence of the House. If that were not the case, there would not have been the condition for the claims of both candidates to be considered under Article 76 (5). Thus, there we see unanimous acceptance of the fact that the Supreme Court’s 23 February 2021 decision requiring the House to proceed through the application of Clauses (1), (2), (3), (4) and (5) had been followed to the letter. The political parties have themselves resolved the debate around this matter by participating in the call by the president. SECOND, the candidature for prime ministership under Article 76 (5) should be of a member of the HoR under Clause (2). This clause specifies, ‘any member of the House who can get a majority with the support of two or more than two parties’ may present the basis for obtaining the House of Representatives' vote of confidence.When read in the context of Article 76 (5), any House member, not necessarily the parliamentary party leaders of larger parties, who presents basis for gaining vote of confidence can be appointed prime minister. Under the process guided by these constitutional provisions, there can be no doubt that the support of political parties to such a candidate is a necessity.This aspect is evident in Deuba’s claim being supported by the Nepali Congress and CPN (Maoist Centre) along their party lines. In the case of PM Oli’s claim, however, the support of both the CPN (UML) party which he leads as well as the Janata Samajbadi Party is divided, denting his claim. His claim of majority is therefore subject to disapproval. THIRD, the prime question is whether the signatures or support of MPs during the process under Article 76 (5) that go against the decision of their parties are to be given validity. While the Deuba’s claim is based on an independent position taken by 38 MPs of the UML and JSP combined, the President appears to have accorded recognition to all members of the House.The president could have rejected the application at the first instance, using her privilege of office. Deuba’s claim was allowed to be registered following due process by the president herself.It was not possible to reject the application by Prime Mnister Oli because his claim included the decision of the parties concerned and the name-list of MPs by party. It was not unnatural for the two sides to place applications, given that the JSP as a party which had earlier decided to remain neutral had changed its decision at the last minute and to participate in the process under 76 (5). FOURTH, the application under Article 76 (5) made before the President for appointment as prime minister requires placing ‘the basis (आधार) to be able to win a vote of confidence’. What this means is that the President will have to have confidence that the prime minister appointed under Article 76 (5) is able to win the confidence vote within 30 days pursuant to Article 76 (4).In other words, regardless of the claims of a candidate to majority support at the time of application, the president’s concern would be to see if there is basis for the candidate winning a confidence vote within 30 days. As the defender of the Constitution and seeking stability for the polity, it would be natural for President Bhandari to see the verifiability of a claim to majority within the time frame of 30 days as stipulated in the Constitution. When there is no debate on the matter, there would be no questioning claims of a candidate of the support of MPs, whether numbering 149 or 153. They both are majority numbers.  But in the current instance, both applications to the President were contentious. Further, the president had been formally informed in writing that some MPs of the CPN (UML) and JSP have supported the application of another party, and that those two parties were to carry out disciplinary actions against those Members of Parliament.Given that the law on political parties stipulates clearly that the parliamentary procedure for the suspension or ouster of MPs can take no more than 15 days, it becomes clear that neither list before the President was likely to remain intact by the time the vote of confidence was sought within the 30-day stipulation. Thus, the president was unable to give her assent to either application.Can party MPs vote independently?It is important to understand here that while MPs may try to go outside the bounds set by their parties, the Constitution and law relating to political parties and associated regulations provide strong basis for the parties to keep their MPs in check and under party discipline. There is no existing law or constitutional provision that allows us to choose between what action by an MP attracts party disciplinary measures and what does not. There is no basis to the argument that the disciplinary action against MPs may not be applied selectively for certain clauses of the Constitution. In essence, the political parties are sovereign in their ability to ensure party discipline in Parliament under any and every circumstance.MPs must make a choice between party affiliation and independent vote, and choosing the latter course they have to be subject to discipline for defying the party whip. Voting outside the party decision can mean expulsion from the party, which would ipso facto mean vacating the parliamentary seat in the House. The Maoist Centre has already utilised this authority over its representatives by ousting several members in both the houses of the Federal Parliament and in provincial parliaments.According to the existing system, and as clearly spelt out in the Constitution and the law on political parties, MPs of nationally recognised parties are able to vote of their own volition only when electing the leader of their parliamentary party. Otherwise, in every sphere and activity, MPs are bound by his/her party’s decisions and directives. This principle was seen applied clearly during the proceeding of the just-dissolved HoR last year, when MP Sarita Giri’s seat was instantaneously revoked when she defied her party whip.The process of disciplinary action leading to expulsion is fairly simple. If a request has been formally made by a party to revoke an MP’s membership in the House, the parliamentary secretariat may take no more than 15 days to implement that notice. It should also be noted that other than cases filed in the courts on corruption and specific criminal offences, disciplinary actions against MPs are the prerogative of their parties.Difference between JSP and UML 'independents'Given that the JSP has a structure with two chairpersons, decisions to support or to take action under the party’s constitution require the agreement of both and hence may not be immediately implementable. For this reason, Deuba may get the benefit of doubt. JSP's case here is exactly like that of the erstwhile NCP, about which the Election Commission could not take decisions because of the party's statute requiring consensus between its two chairpersons. The JSP independents therefore may weigh in for Mr. Deuba.However, there would be no confusion in the case of the CPN (UML) dissidents. The President was officially informed before she took her decision that the chair and parliamentary party leader of the CPN (UML) was in a position to act immediately against the MPs who had gone against the party’s decision. This referred to the fact that UML's 26 MPs who supported Deuba's application had already breached their party whip on 10 May by abstention during the vote of confidence Prime Minister Oli had sought.Breach of party whip is one of the several legal conditions for vacating the seat of an MP. Existing laws and party statutes provide this right to all political parties. It thus appears that the list presented by Deuba was clearly fragmented and his claim of majority would have fallen short within the 30-day stipulated timeframe. There was no reason to be confident that the number presented by Deuba would remain intact until the required vote of confidence on the floor of the House. Both claimants, or either one of them, could have thought he would win the vote of confidence after the president appointed him prime minister but before the disciplinary procedure of the relevant party was activated. Or, one or other candidate could have hoped to have the Speaker of Parliament show indulgence and ‘good office’ towards himself in terms of handling the disciplinary proceedings. Such in-party and inter-party conspiracies are necessarily outside the consideration of the president, who will be concerned only with what is written in the law and Constitution.Should the President have verified both lists?The dissident MPs of the UML and JSP supporting Deuba's application are working as minority groups within their individual parties. They have their own claims of legitimacy still to be proven before the competent law. The provisions relating to breakup of parties and related aspects are clearly attracted by the application of both candidates, given that the party decisions of the UML and JSP are on one side while the minority groups of both parties have gone to the other side. Under such circumstances, it is not correct legally or on principle to demand that the President verify the lists of MPs provided by the two applicants. The law as it relates to political parties has set a specific process for the breakup of parties, which also allows minority groups to be sufficiently heard which often becomes a long-drawn process. The president’s office is not the place to utilise certain numbers or groups to divide up parties, it is meant to promote unity among the political parties and the nation generally. The place to decide majority and minority through a counting exercise is the Parliament.  It also goes against the principle of multiparty system of governance to lay claim to dissident minority of members of another political party as ‘independents’. Article 74 of the constitution clearly spells out: ‘The form of government of Nepal shall be multi-party, competitive, federal, democratic, republican, parliamentary form of government based on pluralism.’Both claimants who approached the President should have chosen a different path rather than put her office in a position of controversy. MPs wanting to support one among the two aspirants for the post of prime minister while going against their own party whip should have done so either after completing the party division process, or being able to establishtheir independent status. This would have been the only proper procedure. Even though the House membership of said MPs were intact at the time that the claimants approached the President, given the imminent action by both parties leading at the very least to the expulsion of a number of MPs, it becomes clear why the claims by both candidates did not carry credible ‘basis’ as required for the President’s decision under Article 76 (5).It is evident that the President has taken her decision based not only on immediate or short-term considerations, but with a concern for the future workings of Parliament. Take for instance a situation where because a party’s disciplinary proceedings is delayed for whatever reason and the MPs’ defiance of party whip is recognised, as a result of which one claimant wins the vote of confidence. Such MPs will still be a subject to party action, however, and when that happens the newly formed government will immediately go into minority. Constitutionally, the opposition cannot bring a motion of no-confidence until two years after a new prime minister is elected even if the government is in minority. Under such a situation, the government will not be able to adopt its policies and programs, neither the budget, nor get passage of bills in Parliament – a situation similar to that faced by current Prime Minister KP Sharma Oli. The goal of Parliament is not to create a minority government, or an even weaker one. Instead, the goal of the Constitution is to provide stability rather than weaken the system through repeated election of minority prime ministers. Therefore, the claims of majority placed before President Bhandari by the two aspirants were like blocks of ice under the sun, bound to diminish over time.Either claimant should have been able to present rock-solid majorities and outside of controversies, which would have been according to the spirit of the Constitution. Hence, on the basis of constitutionalism and the principles of parliamentary democracy, President Bhandari denied both applications. Tika Dhakal is Press Adviser to President Bidya Devi Bhandari. The views expressed here are his own.

<figure><img width="960" height="640" src="https://superdesk-pro-c.s3.amazonaws.com/sd-nepalitimes/20221109111148/636b86329c7e80680e067839jpeg.jpg" alt=""/><figcaption>All photos: AMIT MACHAMASI</figcaption></figure>An alliance of five political parties and factions opposed to Prime Minister K P Oli’s <a href="https://www.nepalitimes.com/latest/nepal-sets-elections-in-middle-of-pandemic/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">dissolution of the House and call for early elections </a>have approached the Supreme Court with a writ petition to have the move overturned. The five who went to the Supreme Court on Monday included the Nepali Congress (NC), Maoist Centre (MC), the Yadav-Bhattarai faction of the Janata Samajbadi Party (JSP) and dissidents from Oli’s own UML, as well as the 146 signatories.PM Oli's UML immediately evicted 11 rebel members including Madhav Kumar Nepal, Jhalnath Khanal and Bhim Rawal from the party, and asked 12 others for a clarification within 24 hours. The writ petition asks the Court to rule that since Sher Bahadur Deuba of the NC had <a href="https://www.nepalitimes.com/latest/2-ex-pms-vie-to-be-nepal-pm/">staked his claim</a> to form the new government with a majority in Parliament, he should be appointed prime minister. It also asks that since the House dissolution was un-constitutional, it should be reinstated. All signatories from the five groups were present at the Court to register the petition, led by Deuba, MC Chair Pushpa Kamal Dahal, UML’s Madhav Kumar Nepal and JSP’s Upendra Yadav, and Durga Poudel of the Janmorcha. However, only 23 of the 26 who were originally with the Nepal faction signed. <img width="960" height="640" src="https://superdesk-pro-c.s3.amazonaws.com/sd-nepalitimes/20221109111148/636b86359c7e80680e06783ajpeg.jpg" alt="">Meanwhile, the main JSP led by Mahanta Thakur and Rajendra Mahato has decided to join K P Oli’s election government after being assured of seven ministerial portfolios. The party took the decision after the Cabinet got President Bhandari’s seal of approval on an ordinance passing a bill that would grant citizenship by descent to children of Nepali parents — a long-standing demand of the Mahdesi community.Although Oli and his party had vehemently opposed the bill last year, saying that it would allow Indians to marry Nepalis and for their children to be citizens, it appears that he has agreed to it now to save his government. The other JSP demand for the release of MP Resham Chaudhary, who has been detained for the massacre of policemen Tikapur in August 2015, has not yet been met.The latest political crisis in Nepal in the middle of a raging Covid-19 second wave started when President Bidya Devi Bhandari gave parties in Parliament 21 hours on Wednesday to stake their claim to form the next government because Prime Minister Oli said he could not get majority support from MPs.  <img width="720" height="480" src="https://superdesk-pro-c.s3.amazonaws.com/sd-nepalitimes/20221109111148/636b86389c7e80680e06783bjpeg.jpg" alt=""><img width="640" height="427" src="https://superdesk-pro-c.s3.amazonaws.com/sd-nepalitimes/20221109111148/636b863a9c7e80680e06783cjpeg.jpg" alt=""><img width="960" height="641" src="https://superdesk-pro-c.s3.amazonaws.com/sd-nepalitimes/20221109111148/636b863c9c7e80680e06783djpeg.jpg" alt=""><img width="750" height="500" src="https://superdesk-pro-c.s3.amazonaws.com/sd-nepalitimes/20221109111148/636b86409c7e80680e06783ejpeg.jpg" alt=""><img width="720" height="480" src="https://superdesk-pro-c.s3.amazonaws.com/sd-nepalitimes/20221109111148/636b86429c7e80680e06783fjpeg.jpg" alt="">However, after the NC, MC and the JSP and UML factions collected 149 signatures, Oli rushed to Shital Niwas to put forward support of all members of his UMl and the JSP, even the ones who had sides with the opposition coalition. This was seen by many as a violation of the constitution.President Bhandari on Saturday 2AM dissolved Parliament and called fresh elections in November, because she said neither side had fulfilled the requirement to form a new government.In the past two days, the prime minister and president have come under blistering attack from not just the opposition, but a cross section of civil society and media commentators. The student wing of the NC has been staging small protests in the capital despite the lockdown, burning Prime Minister Oli and President Bhandari in effigy.  <figure><img width="960" height="637" src="https://superdesk-pro-c.s3.amazonaws.com/sd-nepalitimes/20221109111148/636b86449c7e80680e067840jpeg.jpg" alt=""><figcaption>A student group trying to burn the prime minister and president in effigy were apprehended by police on Sunday. Photo: Amit Machamasi</figcaption></figure>Nepali Times discussed recent political developments with Nepal’s politicians. <img width="113" height="164" src="https://superdesk-pro-c.s3.amazonaws.com/sd-nepalitimes/20221109111148/636b86479c7e80680e067841jpeg.jpg" alt=""><h2>"There was no choice but to dissolve parliament" Niru Pal, CPN (UML)</h2> PM Oli was not able to get a vote of confidence per article 76 (4) of the constitution, and as such, Parliament was not able to come up with a solution. The opposition had been setting up constant roadblocks against PM Oli, all the while failing to establish a majority to form a government. Consequently, a government could not be formed as per Article 76 (5) of the Constitution either. We got word that MPs from our party had signed in favour of Sher Bahadur Deuba to become prime minister as if this were an independent political system. However, 11 of them have issued a statement alleging misuse of signatures. Therefore the government had no choice but to dissolve Parliament.I find some absurd and unnecessary criticism of PM Oli. Those critics are also well aware that the President is not an executive, and had no grounds to block the recommendation of the caretaker Prime Minister. The President would have made the same decision even if it were Sher Bahadur Deuba in PM Oli’s position. She has decided based on the spirit of the constitution. <h2>"An Oli-led election will self-destruct" Ganesh Shah, Maoist Centre</h2> PM Oli’s loyalists and his opponents have become polarised. The opposition was unable to take unified and effective action against PM Oli’s unconstitutional move, which is the result of his ambition and arrogance. The first parliament dissolution was a blow to our Constitution, but this dissolution might be its death knell.  <img width="172" height="248" src="https://superdesk-pro-c.s3.amazonaws.com/sd-nepalitimes/20221109111148/636b86489c7e80680e067842jpeg.jpg" alt="">Civil society and the backers of the Constitution and democracy must fight against this political regression with a unified front. The legal process will not be enough — Parliament must be re-established through political initiative. The chances of an election taking place are slim. Moreover, an election under Oli’s leadership will be self-destructive. Any election at this point must be held only after a re-instated Parliament elects a new Prime Minister. <img width="170" height="246" src="https://superdesk-pro-c.s3.amazonaws.com/sd-nepalitimes/20221109111148/636b86499c7e80680e067843jpeg.jpg" alt=""><h2>"The PM always wanted to dissolve parliament" Rachana Khadka, CPN (UML)</h2> PM Oli always wanted to dissolve parliaments and he did — twice.  Even after the Supreme Court reinstated the lower House in January, all of his recent political moves showed he was going to do it again. The decision to dissolve a Parliament in which he once held a majority is ironic. It goes against the spirit of the Constitution.Moreover, the legitimacy of the President’s office has also come into question. We have a system of checks and balances to ensure that our political institutions hold one another accountable if mistakes are made. As such, the office of the President does not exist to do the prime minister’s bidding.Hundreds of Nepalis are dying due to Covid-19 every day. The primary focus at this time should have been to save lives. Dissolving the parliament at a time like this is like dancing over the pyres of Nepalis. The state elections in India contributed to the spread of the virus over there. We should have learned our lesson from our neighbours. <h2>"Parliament dissolution is constitutional" Ashok Vyanju, President, Municipal Association</h2> This is the result of the inability of a democratically elected institution to facilitate nation-building, inter-political coordination and balance. The dissolution of Parliament and announcement of elections came after it was not possible to form a government constitutionally. The decision is therefore absolutely constitutional. The election will  make it possible to pursue a fresh mandate after our political problems are resolved. <img width="149" height="215" src="https://superdesk-pro-c.s3.amazonaws.com/sd-nepalitimes/20221109111148/636b864a9c7e80680e067844jpeg.jpg" alt="">Some have wrongly questioned the possibility of an election during a pandemic. India, South Korea, Japan, and other countries successfully conducted elections in the middle of the pandemic. We must be able to combat the virus and resolve our political problems simultaneously. <img width="176" height="250" src="https://superdesk-pro-c.s3.amazonaws.com/sd-nepalitimes/20221109111148/636b864b9c7e80680e067845jpeg.jpg" alt=""><h2>"Legal and political measures must be followed" Dila Sangroula, Nepali Congress</h2> The incumbent Prime Minister had to take a vote of confidence within 30 days or resign as per article 76 (3) of the constitution. Even then, the NC, MC, and JSP coalition along with the Nepal faction of the UML had collected 149 signatures to form a new government following the president’s directive.However, the signatures to appoint Sher Bahadur Deuba the Prime Minister were considered illegitimate. The subsequent decision to dissolve parliament at midnight was unconstitutional, undemocratic and reactionary. Legal and political countermeasures must be pursued to undo it.The announcement of mid-term elections during a pandemic, when Nepalis are dying due to a scarcity of oxygen and ventilators, is nothing but a political drama staged by Oli in an attempt to hold on to power.  Why are we enabling this instead of trying to save lives? <h2>"A free and fair election must be ensured" Mohan Shrestha, RPP</h2> The two major Communist parties failed to deliver on the promises made when they were elected into government. NC and RPP are not to blame for their failure. As such, it is better to go to the polls than to continue like this. All of our political parties should establish an understanding as we move forward, and a free and fair election must be ensured. <img width="117" height="168" src="https://superdesk-pro-c.s3.amazonaws.com/sd-nepalitimes/20221109111148/636b864c9c7e80680e067846jpeg.jpg" alt="">We are in favour of the election, and an official statement from the RPP will come soon. However, we have no involvement in the polarised politics on both sides, and will not participate in any anti-Oil protests. West Bengal and the United States conducted elections during the pandemic. We must follow all safety protocols pertaining to the pandemic and do the same.  <img width="318" height="376" src="https://superdesk-pro-c.s3.amazonaws.com/sd-nepalitimes/20221109111148/636b864d9c7e80680e067847jpeg.jpg" alt=""><h2>"We must form a new party" Asta Laxmi Shakya, CPN (UML)</h2> After the Supreme Court overturned the NCPO, we came back to UML. But (PM Oli) did not give us any importance. He is still ignoring us. We cannot rely on Oli, we have to forge a new path. We have to form a new party, and not prolong this uncertainty.

Political ball now in Nepal’s Supreme Court

<figure><img width="960" height="640" src="https://superdesk-pro-c.s3.amazonaws.com/sd-nepalitimes/20221110131124/636cee429c7e80680e09ae16jpeg.jpg" alt=""/><figcaption>All photos: AMIT MACHAMASI</figcaption></figure>An alliance of five political parties and factions opposed to Prime Minister K P Oli’s <a href="https://www.nepalitimes.com/latest/nepal-sets-elections-in-middle-of-pandemic/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">dissolution of the House and call for early elections </a>have approached the Supreme Court with a writ petition to have the move overturned. The five who went to the Supreme Court on Monday included the Nepali Congress (NC), Maoist Centre (MC), the Yadav-Bhattarai faction of the Janata Samajbadi Party (JSP) and dissidents from Oli’s own UML, as well as the 146 signatories.PM Oli's UML immediately evicted 11 rebel members including Madhav Kumar Nepal, Jhalnath Khanal and Bhim Rawal from the party, and asked 12 others for a clarification within 24 hours. The writ petition asks the Court to rule that since Sher Bahadur Deuba of the NC had <a href="https://www.nepalitimes.com/latest/2-ex-pms-vie-to-be-nepal-pm/">staked his claim</a> to form the new government with a majority in Parliament, he should be appointed prime minister. It also asks that since the House dissolution was un-constitutional, it should be reinstated. All signatories from the five groups were present at the Court to register the petition, led by Deuba, MC Chair Pushpa Kamal Dahal, UML’s Madhav Kumar Nepal and JSP’s Upendra Yadav, and Durga Poudel of the Janmorcha. However, only 23 of the 26 who were originally with the Nepal faction signed. <img width="960" height="640" src="https://superdesk-pro-c.s3.amazonaws.com/sd-nepalitimes/20221110131124/636cee449c7e80680e09ae17jpeg.jpg" alt="">Meanwhile, the main JSP led by Mahanta Thakur and Rajendra Mahato has decided to join K P Oli’s election government after being assured of seven ministerial portfolios. The party took the decision after the Cabinet got President Bhandari’s seal of approval on an ordinance passing a bill that would grant citizenship by descent to children of Nepali parents — a long-standing demand of the Mahdesi community.Although Oli and his party had vehemently opposed the bill last year, saying that it would allow Indians to marry Nepalis and for their children to be citizens, it appears that he has agreed to it now to save his government. The other JSP demand for the release of MP Resham Chaudhary, who has been detained for the massacre of policemen Tikapur in August 2015, has not yet been met.The latest political crisis in Nepal in the middle of a raging Covid-19 second wave started when President Bidya Devi Bhandari gave parties in Parliament 21 hours on Wednesday to stake their claim to form the next government because Prime Minister Oli said he could not get majority support from MPs.  <img width="720" height="480" src="https://superdesk-pro-c.s3.amazonaws.com/sd-nepalitimes/20221110131124/636cee469c7e80680e09ae18jpeg.jpg" alt=""><img width="640" height="427" src="https://superdesk-pro-c.s3.amazonaws.com/sd-nepalitimes/20221110131124/636cee489c7e80680e09ae19jpeg.jpg" alt=""><img width="960" height="641" src="https://superdesk-pro-c.s3.amazonaws.com/sd-nepalitimes/20221110131124/636cee4a9c7e80680e09ae1ajpeg.jpg" alt=""><img width="750" height="500" src="https://superdesk-pro-c.s3.amazonaws.com/sd-nepalitimes/20221110131124/636cee4c9c7e80680e09ae1bjpeg.jpg" alt=""><img width="720" height="480" src="https://superdesk-pro-c.s3.amazonaws.com/sd-nepalitimes/20221110131124/636cee4f9c7e80680e09ae1cjpeg.jpg" alt="">However, after the NC, MC and the JSP and UML factions collected 149 signatures, Oli rushed to Shital Niwas to put forward support of all members of his UMl and the JSP, even the ones who had sides with the opposition coalition. This was seen by many as a violation of the constitution.President Bhandari on Saturday 2AM dissolved Parliament and called fresh elections in November, because she said neither side had fulfilled the requirement to form a new government.In the past two days, the prime minister and president have come under blistering attack from not just the opposition, but a cross section of civil society and media commentators. The student wing of the NC has been staging small protests in the capital despite the lockdown, burning Prime Minister Oli and President Bhandari in effigy.  <figure><img width="960" height="637" src="https://superdesk-pro-c.s3.amazonaws.com/sd-nepalitimes/20221110131128/636cee519c7e80680e09ae1djpeg.jpg" alt=""><figcaption>A student group trying to burn the prime minister and president in effigy were apprehended by police on Sunday. Photo: Amit Machamasi</figcaption></figure>Nepali Times discussed recent political developments with Nepal’s politicians. <img width="113" height="164" src="https://superdesk-pro-c.s3.amazonaws.com/sd-nepalitimes/20221110131128/636cee549c7e80680e09ae1ejpeg.jpg" alt=""><h2>"There was no choice but to dissolve parliament" Niru Pal, CPN (UML)</h2> PM Oli was not able to get a vote of confidence per article 76 (4) of the constitution, and as such, Parliament was not able to come up with a solution. The opposition had been setting up constant roadblocks against PM Oli, all the while failing to establish a majority to form a government. Consequently, a government could not be formed as per Article 76 (5) of the Constitution either. We got word that MPs from our party had signed in favour of Sher Bahadur Deuba to become prime minister as if this were an independent political system. However, 11 of them have issued a statement alleging misuse of signatures. Therefore the government had no choice but to dissolve Parliament.I find some absurd and unnecessary criticism of PM Oli. Those critics are also well aware that the President is not an executive, and had no grounds to block the recommendation of the caretaker Prime Minister. The President would have made the same decision even if it were Sher Bahadur Deuba in PM Oli’s position. She has decided based on the spirit of the constitution. <h2>"An Oli-led election will self-destruct" Ganesh Shah, Maoist Centre</h2> PM Oli’s loyalists and his opponents have become polarised. The opposition was unable to take unified and effective action against PM Oli’s unconstitutional move, which is the result of his ambition and arrogance. The first parliament dissolution was a blow to our Constitution, but this dissolution might be its death knell.  <img width="172" height="248" src="https://superdesk-pro-c.s3.amazonaws.com/sd-nepalitimes/20221110131128/636cee559c7e80680e09ae1fjpeg.jpg" alt="">Civil society and the backers of the Constitution and democracy must fight against this political regression with a unified front. The legal process will not be enough — Parliament must be re-established through political initiative. The chances of an election taking place are slim. Moreover, an election under Oli’s leadership will be self-destructive. Any election at this point must be held only after a re-instated Parliament elects a new Prime Minister. <img width="170" height="246" src="https://superdesk-pro-c.s3.amazonaws.com/sd-nepalitimes/20221110131128/636cee569c7e80680e09ae20jpeg.jpg" alt=""><h2>"The PM always wanted to dissolve parliament" Rachana Khadka, CPN (UML)</h2> PM Oli always wanted to dissolve parliaments and he did — twice.  Even after the Supreme Court reinstated the lower House in January, all of his recent political moves showed he was going to do it again. The decision to dissolve a Parliament in which he once held a majority is ironic. It goes against the spirit of the Constitution.Moreover, the legitimacy of the President’s office has also come into question. We have a system of checks and balances to ensure that our political institutions hold one another accountable if mistakes are made. As such, the office of the President does not exist to do the prime minister’s bidding.Hundreds of Nepalis are dying due to Covid-19 every day. The primary focus at this time should have been to save lives. Dissolving the parliament at a time like this is like dancing over the pyres of Nepalis. The state elections in India contributed to the spread of the virus over there. We should have learned our lesson from our neighbours. <h2>"Parliament dissolution is constitutional" Ashok Vyanju, President, Municipal Association</h2> This is the result of the inability of a democratically elected institution to facilitate nation-building, inter-political coordination and balance. The dissolution of Parliament and announcement of elections came after it was not possible to form a government constitutionally. The decision is therefore absolutely constitutional. The election will  make it possible to pursue a fresh mandate after our political problems are resolved. <img width="149" height="215" src="https://superdesk-pro-c.s3.amazonaws.com/sd-nepalitimes/20221110131128/636cee579c7e80680e09ae21jpeg.jpg" alt="">Some have wrongly questioned the possibility of an election during a pandemic. India, South Korea, Japan, and other countries successfully conducted elections in the middle of the pandemic. We must be able to combat the virus and resolve our political problems simultaneously. <img width="176" height="250" src="https://superdesk-pro-c.s3.amazonaws.com/sd-nepalitimes/20221110131128/636cee589c7e80680e09ae22jpeg.jpg" alt=""><h2>"Legal and political measures must be followed" Dila Sangroula, Nepali Congress</h2> The incumbent Prime Minister had to take a vote of confidence within 30 days or resign as per article 76 (3) of the constitution. Even then, the NC, MC, and JSP coalition along with the Nepal faction of the UML had collected 149 signatures to form a new government following the president’s directive.However, the signatures to appoint Sher Bahadur Deuba the Prime Minister were considered illegitimate. The subsequent decision to dissolve parliament at midnight was unconstitutional, undemocratic and reactionary. Legal and political countermeasures must be pursued to undo it.The announcement of mid-term elections during a pandemic, when Nepalis are dying due to a scarcity of oxygen and ventilators, is nothing but a political drama staged by Oli in an attempt to hold on to power.  Why are we enabling this instead of trying to save lives? <h2>"A free and fair election must be ensured" Mohan Shrestha, RPP</h2> The two major Communist parties failed to deliver on the promises made when they were elected into government. NC and RPP are not to blame for their failure. As such, it is better to go to the polls than to continue like this. All of our political parties should establish an understanding as we move forward, and a free and fair election must be ensured. <img width="117" height="168" src="https://superdesk-pro-c.s3.amazonaws.com/sd-nepalitimes/20221110131128/636cee599c7e80680e09ae23jpeg.jpg" alt="">We are in favour of the election, and an official statement from the RPP will come soon. However, we have no involvement in the polarised politics on both sides, and will not participate in any anti-Oil protests. West Bengal and the United States conducted elections during the pandemic. We must follow all safety protocols pertaining to the pandemic and do the same.  <img width="318" height="376" src="https://superdesk-pro-c.s3.amazonaws.com/sd-nepalitimes/20221110131128/636cee5a9c7e80680e09ae24jpeg.jpg" alt=""><h2>"We must form a new party" Asta Laxmi Shakya, CPN (UML)</h2> After the Supreme Court overturned the NCPO, we came back to UML. But (PM Oli) did not give us any importance. He is still ignoring us. We cannot rely on Oli, we have to forge a new path. We have to form a new party, and not prolong this uncertainty.

<figure><img width="960" height="640" src="https://superdesk-pro-c.s3.amazonaws.com/sd-nepalitimes/2022111011114/636ccd739c7e80680e08bc7ejpeg.jpg" alt=""/><figcaption>Photo: AMIT MACHAMASI</figcaption></figure>Nepal’s Supreme Court on 23 February <a href="https://www.nepalitimes.com/latest/nepal-supreme-court-restores-house/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">reinstated the House of Representatives</a> and <a href="https://www.nepalitimes.com/here-now/supreme-court-puts-nepal-politics-back-on-track/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">ordered Parliament to convene</a> within 13 days. The President, on the recommendation of Prime Minister KP Oli, will now decide when and how within the next 10 days Parliament will come into session. In the UK, any government that <a href="https://www.nepalitimes.com/latest/president-endorses-parliament-dissolution/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">dissolves the House of Representatives </a>becomes a caretaker government, and as such, the prime minister in such a circumstance is deemed  to have resigned. However, the right to dissolve the House of Representatives is no longer constitutional either in the UK or in Nepal. The steps that President Bhandari takes in the upcoming days will depend on whether she considers PM Oli a caretaker prime minister or the preceding prime minister. If it is the former, the president, as per the provisions of Article 76 of the Constitution, must immediately begin the process of forming a new government by appointing a new Prime Minister in consultation with the leaders of all parliamentary parties in the House. During this process, the caretaker Prime Minister, like the leaders of other parliamentary parties, is entitled to form a new government as the leader of their party.If, however, the president considers KP Oli a preceding prime minister, she may direct him to take a vote of confidence in the House of Representatives under Article 100 of the Constitution, which provides that the prime minister may table a motion at any time, if he deems it necessary or appropriate, to make it clear that he has the trust of the House.If the president agrees, the prime minister can continue the government with a vote of confidence in the House. Article 76 will only apply if the prime minister fails to obtain a vote of confidence.If the prime minister chooses not to follow either of those paths, Article 100 (4) of the Constitution allows one-fourth of the members of the House of Representatives who are present in Parliament to table a motion of no-confidence in writing.<a href="https://www.nepalitimes.com/latest/calm-before-another-storm-in-nepal/">Calm before another storm in Nepal</a>, Nepali TimesHowever, the process might be politically challenging as the motion must include the name of the next proposed prime minister. If the no-confidence motion is passed by a majority in the House of Representatives, the Prime Minister will be relieved of his post.In this political climate where the ruling NCP is <a href="https://www.nepalitimes.com/banner/dahal-nepal-hold-anti-oli-rally/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">bitterly divided</a>, the Dahal-Nepal faction is demanding that Oli resign on moral grounds. The Election Commission has also not decided which faction of the NCP is the main party and which is the breakaway faction, while PM Oli maintains that he is the party chairman until the NCP general convention. As such, no party in the House of Representatives is in a position to form a unanimous government, and the next prime minister will have to form a coalition with two or more parties.It remains to be seen how much support Pushpa Kamal Dahal will get from his co-chair Madhav Kumar Nepal or Jhala Nath Khanal in his bid to become prime minister. Even with their support, chances of him forming a coalition government are unlikely if the Nepali Congress (NC), the second-largest majority in the House of Representatives, refuses to participate in the process.If NC President Sher Bahadur Deuba is to take the lead in forming a coalition government, then the Dahal-Nepal faction will need to justify its opposition to Prime Minister Oli on other grounds.The NC itself is in a dilemma over which faction of the NCP it should support. If the NC chooses to support the Oli faction, it could move towards forming a coalition with the current government. And even if it becomes part of a coalition government, the NC might not consider the premiership to be the endgame and choose instead to focus on the election. There are other strategies in which the NC might decide not to join the Oli-led coalition but to support his government from the outside, or choose to form a government led by Sher Bahadur Deuba while seeking support from the Oli faction. The challenge for the NC now is to decide what is constitutionally sound while being in the party’s best interests long-term.At this point, unity within the NCP leadership is unrealistic, and either faction will require a 40% agreement from the Central Committee and the Parliamentary Party should Oli or Dahal choose to register a new party.The only way to avoid a period of political turmoil is the unlikely scenario that ageing leaders in both factions realize that such instability is not in the national interest and hand over the reins to a new generation of young leaders.                   Bipin Adhikari, PhD, is an expert on constitutional law. <img width="82" height="109" src="https://superdesk-pro-c.s3.amazonaws.com/sd-nepalitimes/2022111011114/636ccd769c7e80680e08bc7fjpeg.jpg" alt="">Read also: <a href="https://www.nepalitimes.com/editorial/house-of-cards/">House of cards</a>, Editorial

Legal path to new Nepal government

In the very first page of the first chapter of Nepal 2043: The Road to Prosperity are two maps. The first places Nepal right at the epicentre of Asia, and in the second the Kathmandu is at exactly the midpoint between Mumbai and Beijing. With his trademark optimism, author Sujeev Shakya says Nepal is not land-locked but land-linked to three billion people in China and India. We just need those two economic engines to pull us in the same direction. ‘With China and India becoming the two largest economies in the world in the next two decades … Nepal is the most valuable piece of real estate in the world,’ Shakya writes. For one thing, Nepal does not look beyond India and China for tourism — with the right policies it can attract millions of tourists just from those two countries. Nepal is set to graduate from a low- to a middle-income country by 2026 and to a high-income country in 2043 — hence the name of the book. The year 2043 in the Bikram Sambat calendar is also 2100 — a new Nepali century. The book delves into the past, present and future of Nepal and analyses enablers including hydropower, a fundamental transformation of which will drive the 2043 goal. The commoditisation of electricity will be the biggest transformation. Nepal can deploy ‘Cyber Gurkhas’ to attract foreign investors with the management of data centres with climate friendly renewable energy. Access to technology such as precision agriculture, a data-driven approach to farming to improve food production, reduce environmental impact and enhance profitability could be Nepal’s strategy into 2043 and beyond. ‘Earlier, we needed ploughs and strong hands in agriculture. Now, you need a computer and strong fingers,” Shakya writes, citing a neighbour’s son who inspects his crops from drone cameras. A farmer in an Ilam teashop tells the author he asks AI questions in Nepali, and it answers promptly. The biggest enabler of all is Nepal’s young demography with 62% of the population in the active 15-60 age bracket, while 28% are younger than 14. Nepal’s dependency ratio has dropped to the lowest in history with 100 Nepalis having to support 62 dependents. But this demographic dividend window is closing. Nepal’s total fertility rate declined from 2.62% in 1981 to 0.92% in 2021 — below replacement level. We have less than 30 years left to make the best use of the youth, many of whom are currently studying and working abroad. Nepal’s biggest resource, therefore, is its diaspora spread across the world who send home $20 billion a year. Migration is not just a necessity but an aspiration for many Nepalis, and they are an important source of contacts, investment and soft power. This young and educated group has taken advantage of connectivity and digitisation in all arenas of national life. TikTok and Instagram have become e-commerce platforms, or mobile app-riven digital services. Nepal’s software companies exported over $1 billion worth of IT products last year. Next we need a change in the bureaucratic mindset to eliminate paper and manual processes, which would also contribute to reducing corruption. Shakya comes up with many revelations: 81% of Nepalis live in houses they own, much higher than most other South Asian countries which means higher disposable income. Nepal has the highest tax-to-GDP ratio in South Asia. The banking sector is twice the size of Bangladesh despite Nepal having just one-fifth of its population. In 2021, 12.62% of the population had demat accounts in Nepal, while India had only 5.32%. For every five male investors, there are four women in Nepal while it is 10:1 in India. With such figures and prospects, how come Nepal just went through a violent uprising that took the shortest time to topple a democratically-elected government in modern history? One early chapter of 2043 is actually dedicated to how Nepalis have always thrived on chaos. When people faced up to 20 hours of power cuts a day, people worked around the load-shedding schedule, woke up at ungodly hours to cook and stock up on inverters. They did not put up a fight, or even protest. ''Generally, Nepalis are used to taking things lying down, and perhaps this also needs to change,' says Shakya, writing that line before last month’s uprising. ‘On the one hand, some of these issues speak volumes about the average Nepali’s patience and perhaps optimism that things will change in the long run. On the other hand, one is also forced to wonder how much longer they will be able to put up with unfavourable conditions if things don’t change.’ It does seem Nepali had enough with corruption, governance failure and political apathy to the concerns of ordinary people. The final chapter lists the non-negotiables to realise the 2043 Nepal Roadmap: democratic values and freedom of speech, a capitalist welfare state and socio-political transformation to tackle corruption and impunity. The book notes, ‘Countries transitioning to democratic rule experienced a 20% increase in GDP over a 25 year period compared to what they would have achieved under authoritarian regimes. After the end of the Shah rule in 2006, Nepal’s GDP rose from US$10 billion to US$44 billion by 2024.’ The government’s Vision 2030 document projects Nepal’s GDP at US$100 billion, and the Vision 2043 estimates that it will be a US$423 billion economy with a per capita of US$12,100. However, it will need more than optimism and practical action to make these projections real. China and India loom large throughout the book with examples of small city states like Singapore which have taken advantage of their strategic location. Despite the tension between India and China, the two will have to collaborate given the inherent advantages. China has replaced the United States as India’s biggest trading partner. Sujeev Shakya is a great admirer of former Singaporean diplomat and author Kishore Mahbubani, and he has written a blurb for the book. He quotes Mahbubani saying that for the past 2,000 years, apart from the last two hundred, Asian countries have dominated the world, and it is quite natural that the world’s economic centre is returning to Asia. And Nepal is strategically placed to make the most of it because of its location between two of the world’s fastest growing economies. We just have to get our politics right, and have a strategy for equitable growth in the new Nepali century.  <figure><img src="https://publisher-publish.s3.eu-central-1.amazonaws.com/pb-nepalitimes/swp/asv65r/media/20251016091052_78b2d1495d59cd492a17693e0e770b65230c7cb749393ac6643f4676b73832ef.jpg" data-media-id="editor_0" data-image-id="20251016091052_78b2d1495d59cd492a17693e0e770b65230c7cb749393ac6643f4676b73832ef" data-rendition-name="original" width="1136" height="702" loading="lazy" alt="Sujeev Shakya book details NT"></figure>

Retrofitting Nepal for future shocks

In the aftermath of the GenZ protests last month, as new PM Sushila Karki chose the first members of her Council of Ministers, youth collectives urged that it reflect the country’s diversity by including women, youth and people from various ethnic and socio-cultural backgrounds.&nbsp;
It took another couple of weeks for Karki to include &nbsp;bureaucrat and public health expert Sangeeta Mishra as &nbsp;Health Minister in her next tranche of ministers. Almost immediately, people dug up a video of Mishra calling herself “Nepali, but a native Indian”.
She was telling it like it was: Mishra is a naturalised Nepali citizen. But there was outrage in the ultra-nationalistic cybersphere. Mishra’s name was withdrawn from the list of ministers, with government officials citing an ongoing investigation at the CIAA.&nbsp;
With her Cabinet still incomplete a month after taking office, Prime Minister Karki was preparing to induct GenZ as ministers. A leak in the media floated the names, one of which was of Tashi Lhazom, a climate activist and filmmaker from Humla’s Limi Valley.&nbsp;
Almost immediately, social media erupted with discriminatory, xenophobic and misogynistic epithets against her: that she supported a separatist movement, that she was a foreign agent, that her citizenship was disputed, that she did not ‘look’ or ‘speak’ like a Nepali.&nbsp;
Political figures like Gyanendra Shahi, a prominent voice calling for the restoration of a Hindu monarchy, added fuel to the fire by making bigoted and false remarks about her heritage.
The former Commissioner of the National Human Rights Commission, Mohna Ansari, wrote on social media that it was shameful to question Lhazom’s identity: ‘Ms Tashi Lhazom is as Nepali as you are. Our society’s ugliest face and biggest flaw is doubting our own. Real patriotism embraces diversity — fake nationalism must end.’
Ansari, a human rights lawyer and activist, has also often been subject to Islamophobic and derogatory comments on digital platforms. &nbsp;
In response, the Indigenous GenZ Collective released Lhazom’s Nepali citizenship certificate to debunk the mistruths spreading on digital as well as mainstream media.
What makes a Nepali? What does a Nepali look or sound like? Who is a Nepali?
‘Had my name been Tashi Poudel, Thapa, Bhattarai or Ghimire, this would not have happened,’ Lhazom said in an interview with Kantipur following an avalanche of bigotry against her. ‘They questioned me because I do not look Nepali, or speak Nepali like a Khas. Because it is not my mother tongue.’
It is an indictment of Nepali society that indigenous Nepalis have to present proof, at the slightest inconvenience of mostly the dominant groups, of being a citizen of this nation simply because they might not fit into an imagined idea of Nepali nationhood by virtue of physical appearance, speech, geography, or faith.
And while we celebrate the successes of Nepal-born naturalised foreign citizens (some now hold elected office in the US) we refuse to afford the same respect to naturalised Nepali citizens, and those born in Nepal to excluded groups, nor do we expect them to work in the national interest if they are given responsibility to govern. And women are singled out twice as much for scrutiny.
Then cyber Nepal went into a tizzy when videos appeared of a biker’s group clad in black t-shirts emblazoned with the acronym ‘TOB’ which was interpreted to stand for ‘Tibetan Original Blood’ and linked to the Free Tibet movement.
The accusations snowballed into disinformation, xenophobia, and even calls for violence against Nepalis of Tibetan heritage and the Tibetan community in Nepal.&nbsp;
In the aftermath of the September protest, the hope was that politics and the bureaucracy would finally be rid of orthodox political actors. But first, we as a nation need to collectively examine the biases and bigotry that exist in Nepal’s socio-cultural space.&nbsp;
Otherwise, Nepal’s multiculturalism will be limited to just words in the Constitution and political tokenism.
No one who is in government now or in future can be expected to be completely free of subjective opinions, ideology, affiliation to a cause, or prior activism. And such criticism falls disproportionately on activists, advocates, and members from underserved and underrepresented communities.&nbsp;
One cannot be apolitical and hope to participate in politics, and as we move forward to rebuild the system it must not just reflect diverse communities, but also celebrate diversity of thought and beliefs.&nbsp;
Resorting to ethnocentrism, racism and chauvinism with conspiracy theories and discriminatory dog-whistling about fellow citizens is a disservice to Nepali nationhood. It is Nepal’s diversity that makes us strong.&nbsp;
Shristi Karki

What makes a Nepali?

We were used to getting stuck in Kathmandu’s notorious traffic with gas fumes and horns blaring. We are still stuck in traffic, but now it is mostly the quiet hum of EVs, and street-level air is noticeably cleaner. Alongside Norway, Nepal has the highest combustion-to-EV conversion rates in the world. And we are not even a middle-income country yet. How did we get here?&nbsp; For the first time in Nepal’s history, 2025 saw an unprecedented turn of events: two back-to-back auto shows a week apart in August, independent of each other. This was timed for the warm up to the Dasain season. &nbsp;&nbsp; The first auto show 6-11 August was the <a href="https://naimanepal.org/mobility-expo" target="_blank">NAIMA Mobility Expo 2025 </a>by the newly established Nepal Automobile Importers and Manufacturers Association which saw 35 new models, many of them EVs with 50 participating brands like Toyota, BYD, Hyundai, Kia, MG, Mahindra, Omoda &amp; Jaecoo, Proton and Leapmotor.&nbsp;  <figure> <img src="https://publisher-publish.s3.eu-central-1.amazonaws.com/pb-nepalitimes/swp/asv65r/media/2025101711108_d8c03f5141f0086814d866543af4d95310f340a7191363e4705aedda8e4b73d0.jpg" data-media-id="editor_1" data-image-id="2025101711108_d8c03f5141f0086814d866543af4d95310f340a7191363e4705aedda8e4b73d0" data-rendition-name="original" width="1770" height="1097" loading="lazy" alt="Electric cars in Nepal NT"> </figure>  The exhibition had a strong focus on two-wheelers aimed at affordable and easy mobility in a town now known for long traffic jams (see report). NAIMA attracted a record 100,000 visitors in six days.&nbsp; The second one was the Nepal Automobile Dealer’s Association Auto Show 2025 (<a href="https://youtu.be/emSd0mUuMjU" target="_blank">NADA</a>) to address the growing demands for cars and two-wheelers. It was a natural expression of new market forces at work, on one hand, and popular taste, on the other — one influencing the other.&nbsp; This year’s NADA Auto Show was its 17th iteration, and carried a hefty legacy: exhibiting a contemporary lineup from manufacturers such as Tata, Suzuki, Xpeng and Nammi, but also classics for vintage car lovers like the 1928 Ford Model A and a rare 1955 Austin Princess Dm4 sedan.&nbsp;  <figure> <img src="https://publisher-publish.s3.eu-central-1.amazonaws.com/pb-nepalitimes/swp/asv65r/media/2025101711108_dda7d264ddb12448cc10d9b1cb699632eee975741fc4c56055e4df904579c34f.jpg" data-media-id="editor_3" data-image-id="2025101711108_dda7d264ddb12448cc10d9b1cb699632eee975741fc4c56055e4df904579c34f" data-rendition-name="original" width="1381" height="848" loading="lazy" alt="Electric cars in Nepal NT"> </figure>  It also showcased the Deepal eVTOL (a 2-seater drone), and a humanoid robot with dog. Curious onlookers at Bhrikuti Mandap thronged the show with footfall crossing 170,000.&nbsp; Earlier this year, I had traveled to attend India's largest auto show, the <a href="https://youtu.be/OgIIvXx6yOM?si=zNmMgklzCJpagTye" target="_blank">Bharat Mobility Global expo</a> in January in New Delhi. It was part of a <a href="https://youtu.be/GT6LBKiJvyg?si=r7YaxahjSAnsIfBY" target="_blank">roadtrip</a> from one capital to another with BYD Nepal on a Dolphin. The journey took three days through Bhairawa and then the Lucknow-Agra Expressway, covering a distance of 1200km one way.&nbsp; The drive through the horrid Narayanghat-Butwal corridor alone was testimony that EVs are no longer fragile and could handle a beating. And while both Nepal's economy pales in comparison to India, it was evident that the private passenger segment is well on its way to electrification. More than 70% of all vehicles sold in Nepal last year were electric. Sales representatives are unanimous: inquiries for EVs are at an all-time high and overshadow demand for ICE (Internal Combustion Engine) vehicles. Besides four-wheelers, a fast-growing proportion of scooters were also electric.  <figure> <img src="https://publisher-publish.s3.eu-central-1.amazonaws.com/pb-nepalitimes/swp/asv65r/media/20251017111016_e4cd988ca915ddd283a86d48fac332f22f98ff776b3d22391e10156ad56d7a1a.jpg" data-media-id="editor_6" data-image-id="20251017111016_e4cd988ca915ddd283a86d48fac332f22f98ff776b3d22391e10156ad56d7a1a" data-rendition-name="original" width="1389" height="863" loading="lazy" alt="Electric cars in Nepal"> </figure>  I have spent the last two years <a href="https://youtu.be/256YQa37Ol8?si=Sv1wQ8EdvgMCiTM_" target="_blank">reviewing</a> many of these EVs. The days of batter-powered cars being small toy cars, with sub-par build quality and the range of golf carts have long gone.&nbsp; Fit and finishing in both Chinese and Indian EVs are comparable to established brand names even in Japanese and European markets. But most significantly for us in Nepal, battery technology and range have made inter-city travel on our highways imaginable. The media sometimes portrays Nepal as a prime testing/dumping ground for EVs due to lack of regulation and the proximity to the world’s largest EV exporter (China) and our tough geographical conditions. That is just a part of the story. What actually stands out is the incredible appetite for risk among Nepali buyers.&nbsp; Since the Covid pandemic charging infrastructure has spread across the country. My early trips between Kathmandu and Pokhara saw the possibility of topping up with just one charging gun at the <a href="https://rsr.com.np/" target="_blank">Riverside Springs Resort in Kurintar</a> – and I would have to wait in line, or the charger simply would not be working.&nbsp; These days, by the time I cross Kurintar from Koteswor in my Kona, I will have passed at least 10 charging stations with multiple guns. &nbsp; On my <a href="https://www.youtube.com/@casuallyannoyeddriver" target="_blank">YouTube reviews</a>, people from across the globe ask about range and handling EVs on poor road conditions like ours. The occasional skeptics also leave comments like: ‘If this works in the higher altitudes and mountainous roads of Nepal, then it should be a breeze down here in the flats of Australia and/or hills around Auckland!’  <figure> <img src="https://publisher-publish.s3.eu-central-1.amazonaws.com/pb-nepalitimes/swp/asv65r/media/20251017111016_8b4fbe59884538849be6428eb2ce9249627a8970ed9ef4cd3c792682bf26dbed.jpg" data-media-id="editor_10" data-image-id="20251017111016_8b4fbe59884538849be6428eb2ce9249627a8970ed9ef4cd3c792682bf26dbed" data-rendition-name="original" width="1139" height="787" loading="lazy" alt="Electric cars in Nepal"> </figure>  SATURATION? However, both the NAIMA and NADA auto show also confirmed that we could be hitting a peak EV. From having just one car in one budget segment, there are now multiple alternatives stretching from the entry of below Rs3 million to the premium and high-end Rs 10 million price point.&nbsp; Furthermore, the price wars on EVs that started in China a year ago have also trickled across to Nepal. Models such as the <a href="https://youtu.be/3wFN2I81Tq0?si=T6L4SAfRpoyNNvYC" target="_blank">MG S5</a>, Nammi Vigo, BYD Atto 2 (and 1) and <a href="https://youtu.be/y214kWbWTc4?si=bIevanDZEPQdkEs4" target="_blank">Deepal S05</a> saw aggressive pricing schemes and discounts that disrupted pre-existing quotas. Consumers can suddenly afford a lot more cars, and travel a lot further for a considerably smaller price tag.&nbsp;  <figure> <img src="https://publisher-publish.s3.eu-central-1.amazonaws.com/pb-nepalitimes/swp/asv65r/media/2025101711108_276afec1bdbd37497572939a4eada4bef74c9d075cd5851892c4dd1985edb9c5.jpg" data-media-id="editor_13" data-image-id="2025101711108_276afec1bdbd37497572939a4eada4bef74c9d075cd5851892c4dd1985edb9c5" data-rendition-name="original" width="1953" height="1107" loading="lazy" alt="Electric cars in Nepal NT"> </figure>  However, booking numbers at both auto shows did not necessarily translate into actual deliveries. The fact remains that almost 80% of registered vehicles in Nepal are still two-wheelers, and GDP per capita stands at just $1500 — among the lowest in the world.&nbsp; This means that early first-adopters are first-time buyers, and the remaining customers in the market are more skeptical and less willing. But there are also those that are unlikely to consider the EV suitable to travel to off-road rural areas. For the average Nepali family, upgrading or purchasing a new car is no small decision. It happens in five years or more with resale values being a big determinant. The EV boom may be reaching saturation.&nbsp; Both NADA and NAIMA shows drove home the message that Nepal’s transport sector is on an electric fast-track, but the road ahead will be bumpy.&nbsp; Soon after the shows, the glacial debris flow on the Bhote Kosi knocked out the Rasuwa-Kerung border with China, and earlier landslides had already blocked the Koradi checkpoint. Manufacturers are now using the less convenient Korala border in Mustang. BYD, Leapmotor and Omoda &amp; Jaecoo have begun rerouting their vehicles to make up for delivery deadlines.&nbsp;  <figure> <img src="https://publisher-publish.s3.eu-central-1.amazonaws.com/pb-nepalitimes/swp/asv65r/media/2025101711108_62fd70a476656062005959c247b38178d8efabf8570c73929295c0a103ff4013.jpg" data-media-id="editor_14" data-image-id="2025101711108_62fd70a476656062005959c247b38178d8efabf8570c73929295c0a103ff4013" data-rendition-name="original" width="1438" height="1031" loading="lazy" alt="Electric cars in Nepal NT"> </figure>  Although the distance from the capital to the Korala border (470km) is four times longer than from Rasuwa (128km) &nbsp;and Tatopani (112km), it is still considered faster and more cost effective than shipping via India using sea routes.&nbsp; And then Nepal was engulfed in turmoil after the youth-led protests of 8-9 September and its aftermath. Many automobile showrooms around Thapathali including Tata, Hyundai and CG were vandalised and torched.&nbsp; Sushila Karki leads a caretaker government till elections are held in March, and the unsettled situation will affect the economy and investment climate as well as the automobile sector. Arnav Upadhyay reviews automobiles and promotes road safety under the handle Casually Annoyed Driver on <a href="https://www.youtube.com/@casuallyannoyeddriver" target="_blank">Youtube</a>, <a href="https://www.tiktok.com/@casuallyannoyeddriver" target="_blank">Tiktok</a> and <a href="https://www.instagram.com/casuallyannoyeddriver/" target="_blank">IG</a>, and this monthly column Drive Line in Nepali Times.

Is Nepal reaching peak EV?

While the streets of Kathmandu were erupting violent GenZ protests that brought down the government, Nepal’s athletes were achieving different kinds of breakthroughs on Spain’s mountain trails and in the cricket qualifiers in the UAE.&nbsp; On 27 September, two weeks after the uprising back home, Nepal's cricket team stunned the sporting world with their first-ever victory against a full member nation — defeating two-time World Cup champions West Indies by 19 runs, then crushing them by 90 runs two days later to seal a historic 2-0 series victory. On that very day, 5,000km away in the Spanish Pyrenees Sunmaya Budha stood on a podium alongside American and European champions, clutching a silver medal from the 3rd World Mountain and Trail Running Championships. No Asian athlete had ever finished this high in the Long Trail competition at the World Championships. While youth back home showed they would not tolerate injustice and could carve their own future, young Nepalis were securing it on the global sports stage even in moments of national crisis.&nbsp; The Long Trail event at the 2025 World Championships was designed to break even the strongest athletes. Stretching 82km through the Spanish Pyrenees, the course features an unrelenting 5,413m of elevation gain and descent.&nbsp; Athletes faced everything from steep scree slopes to narrow ridge lines, from boulder fields requiring scrambling to precipitous descents demanding total concentration. One misstep could mean injury, one lapse in focus could cost precious minutes.  <figure> <img src="https://publisher-publish.s3.eu-central-1.amazonaws.com/pb-nepalitimes/swp/asv65r/media/2025101909108_81152b4754331c4858ed2d0d28204e6a92559faf089fea9ebc84156766ff228a.png" data-media-id="editor_0" data-image-id="2025101909108_81152b4754331c4858ed2d0d28204e6a92559faf089fea9ebc84156766ff228a" data-rendition-name="original" width="977" height="731" loading="lazy" alt="World Mountain and Trail Running Championships"> <figcaption>The Nepal team at the World Championships 2025 with the final four: Sangge Sherpa, Sunmaya Budha, Suman Kulung, Man Kumar Roka Magar. Photo: PREETI KHATTRI</figcaption> </figure>  WOMEN'S COMPETITION Katie Schide (USA) - Winner • Time: 9:57:59 • Average pace: 7:18 per km&nbsp; &nbsp; <a href="https://www.facebook.com/sunmaya.budha.942">Sunmaya Budha </a>(Nepal) - Silver Medal • Time: 10:23:03 • Gap behind winner: 25 minutes and 4 seconds • Average pace: 7:36 per km Most recreational trail runners need 18-24 hours to complete this course, if they can finish it at all. Budha's pace means she was running at a speed that most casual runners could not maintain on a flat course, let alone while constantly climbing and descending mountains. MEN'S COMPETITION Jim Walmsley (USA) - Winner • Time: 8:35:11 • Average pace: 6:17 per kilometer (10:07 per mile) &nbsp; <a href="https://www.facebook.com/runnersumankulung">Suman Kulung (Nepal)</a> - 32nd Place • Time: 10:06:25 • Average pace: 7:24 per km • Finished 1 hour 31 minutes behind the winner • Best performance by an Asian male athlete &nbsp; <a href="https://www.facebook.com/rokamagarmankumar764">Man Kumar Roka Magar (Nepal)</a> - 37th Place • Time: 10:10:53 • Average pace: 7:27 per km • Finished just 4.5 minutes behind Kulung <a href="https://www.facebook.com/Yetimannnnn">Sangge Sherpa (Nepal)</a> - 116th Place • Time: 12:33:09 • Average pace: 9:11 per km  <figure> <img src="https://publisher-publish.s3.eu-central-1.amazonaws.com/pb-nepalitimes/swp/asv65r/media/2025101909108_2255845b43e68b14d3b111099124f9c98898bbe9016299b9af278aca8b4377f7.png" data-media-id="editor_5" data-image-id="2025101909108_2255845b43e68b14d3b111099124f9c98898bbe9016299b9af278aca8b4377f7" data-rendition-name="original" width="977" height="904" loading="lazy" alt="World Mountain and Trail Running Championships"> <figcaption>Sangge Sherpa organising himself post gear check in Can-Franc.</figcaption> </figure>  The men's winner averaged about 6:17/km on a course where elite mountain runners were struggling. Kulung and Roka Magar maintained a 7:24-7:27/km pace—faster than many recreational runners' easy flat road pace. They were faster than dozens of European athletes who train in the Alps. Even Sherpa's 9:11/km average pace over 12+ hours represents an extraordinary feat of endurance, maintaining forward progress on some of the most challenging mountain terrain in competitive trail running. “What set Budha apart was her exceptional descending ability. She recorded the fastest downhill speed among all women in the competition—a skill honed through years of training on Nepal’s steep mountain trails,” said her team director Ryan S Blair.&nbsp; Sunmaya Budha, ranked world 8th for 100km category events and 17th in the world by the International Trail Running Association (ITRA), entered the race having recently recovered from injuries to both legs.&nbsp;  <figure> <img src="https://publisher-publish.s3.eu-central-1.amazonaws.com/pb-nepalitimes/swp/asv65r/media/2025101909108_38d8bee04beaa6443480ecf4765e6b34f91d2d105128f292f73702072a820d25.jpg" data-media-id="editor_6" data-image-id="2025101909108_38d8bee04beaa6443480ecf4765e6b34f91d2d105128f292f73702072a820d25" data-rendition-name="original" width="1600" height="1070" loading="lazy" alt="World Mountain and Trail Running Championships"> <figcaption>Sunmaya storming in 2nd position. Photo: WMTRC2025 CANFRAC </figcaption> </figure>  While American Katie Schide dominated from the front, Budha found herself in an intense battle for second place with Italy's Fabiola Conti, a specialised skyrace and mountain marathon runner. The two runners remained locked together through much of the course, running side-by-side at key checkpoints and pushing each other through the mountain wilderness. In ultra-trail racing, where climbs are often win by fractions of minutes, the ability to descend fearlessly and efficiently can make the difference between podium positions. Budha's technical prowess on the descents gave her a advantage over her European competitors. The decisive moment came in the final 20km. At the 65km mark, Budha held a 90-second lead over Conti. By 71.5km she had extended her advantage to eight minutes — a commanding gap she maintained to the finish. In a powerful display of national pride, she approached the finish wrapped in the Nepali flag, showing the world what Himalayan athletes can achieve on the global stage. Said Preeti Khattri, team lead for Nepal: "Standing right beside the USA and European peer. Proud. No Asian athletes have ever made it this far.” MEN, TOO While Budha captured headlines with her silver medal, the performances of Suman Kulung and Man Kumar Roka Magar were equally significant. Both athletes topped Asian athletes and numerous European competitors. Suman Kulung delivered a performance that demonstrated extraordinary mental toughness and racing intelligence. What makes his 32nd place finish even more impressive is that 1.5km he encountered a severe bottleneck on narrow technical trails.&nbsp; This critical delay pushed him back to around 92nd position—a devastating setback in a world championship race where every second counts. Many athletes would have been demoralised by such an early disaster.  <figure> <img src="https://publisher-publish.s3.eu-central-1.amazonaws.com/pb-nepalitimes/swp/asv65r/media/2025101909108_e2f358723ea8abaa262e749a4c6afb0a179cf9f3e0bb4eab1d973e25b9b00f09.png" data-media-id="editor_7" data-image-id="2025101909108_e2f358723ea8abaa262e749a4c6afb0a179cf9f3e0bb4eab1d973e25b9b00f09" data-rendition-name="original" width="668" height="445" loading="lazy" alt="World Mountain and Trail Running Championships"> <figcaption>Suman Kulung coming through 65km Assisted Checkpoint. Photo: DR SIGRID FOUNDATION</figcaption> </figure>  But Kulung showed why he is Nepal's top-ranked trail runner: he launched a spectacular comeback. By the 30km mark, he had charged through the field to reach approximately 20th position — recovering over 70 places in less than 30km.&nbsp; His final time of 10:06:25 placed him ahead of runners from traditional mountain running powers including Switzerland, Austria, and Germany, and was the highest-finishing Asian male athlete in the competition.

parliament-dissolution

Interpreting Article 76 (5) of Nepal’s Constitution

Interpreting Article 76 (5) of Nepal’s Constitution

Political ball now in Nepal’s Supreme Court

Political ball now in Nepal’s Supreme Court

Legal path to new Nepal government

Retrofitting Nepal for future shocks

What makes a Nepali?

Is Nepal reaching peak EV?

Nepali runners score breakthroughs