Politics is an important aspect of any country's governance. In Nepal, as in many parts of the world, young people are encouraged to participate in politics because they are seen as the future leaders of the nation. But when politics penetrates deeply into institutions where neutrality and fairness are essential, such as schools, universities, and government offices, it often creates more problems than solutions. From primary schools to universities, teachers, professors, staff and even students are often aligned with political groups. Even small tasks, such as assigning exam invigilators and experts, are influenced by politics. This is a major reason why the education system struggles to improve.

Even among highly educated professors, including those who have studied abroad, their attraction to political involvement remains strong. Instead of dedicating their skills and experiences to genuine reform, many are drawn into political competition for positions such as vice-chancellor, dean, or director. Social media is filled with self-promotional posts about minor achievements, while the actual quality of progress remains stagnant.

This culture of politicisation extends to the very top. Vice-chancellors are appointed politically, while the Prime Minister remains the chancellor. When leadership itself is decided through political bargaining rather than academic merit, the entire chain of command is compromised. Unsurprisingly, universities are often paralysed by strikes, padlocking, and protests. Just a few months ago, even the vice-chancellor of Tribhuvan University was forced to resign, reflecting the deep-rooted instability in the system. The situation has become such that if the vice-chancellor is aligned with one political party, student unions and teacher unions affiliated with rival parties immediately begin protests. On the surface, the agendas of these protests often appear logical. However, the reality is that most of these issues are politicised, and decisions are guided less by educational needs and more by whether the interests of major parties align.

Another major challenge lies in the unnecessary growth of administrative posts within universities. Too many deans, assistant deans, and campus chiefs are appointed simply to satisfy political groups and provide positions of influence to their members. Let us take an example of the University Service Commission (USC) of all the universities. In theory, the USCs were created to ensure transparent and merit-based hiring. In practice, however, these commissions have been slow, ineffective, and deeply disappointing. Some university commissions are seen as managing to conduct only one examination in four years, yet their members enjoy comfortable facilities and benefits, often without having to teach or make meaningful contributions. This creates frustration not only among young academics but also among students, who continue to suffer from a shortage of qualified teachers.

Because of these delays, universities often rely on the Dean's Office to recruit professors on a contract basis. While this fills immediate gaps, it has created a dual and confusing system. Permanent professors are recruited through the service commission, while contract professors are appointed by the Dean's Office. This inconsistency leaves many young scholars uncertain about their future. They question whether vacancies will ever be filled fairly, and some are even discouraged from applying for permanent posts because the process seems neither timely nor transparent.

The reasons behind the failure of USCs are many. Delays in the approval of permanent posts, frequent administrative deadlocks, and even office lockouts have paralysed the system. But whatever the cause, the outcome is the same: the overall performance of these commissions is unsatisfactory. A better and more efficient alternative would thus be to establish a single national university service commission for Nepal. This would streamline the process, save government resources, reduce duplication, and make recruitment more transparent and reliable across the entire country.

The impact of this politicisation is not limited to staff and administration; it reaches directly into the classroom. Students who join political groups are often given privileges, while those who remain neutral may be neglected or even harassed. In the name of student union elections, the college's academic activities are disturbed for several days while also hampering the campus's peaceful environment. Yet these elections rarely strengthen student leadership in meaningful ways. The contrast becomes clear when compared to institutions abroad. For example, in India's premier Indian Institutes of Technology (IITs), student elections are held regularly, but they never interfere with daily academic routines.

These elections are not tied to national politics, and campaigning is done entirely online through emails without posters, rallies, or class disruptions. Students contest for positions in academic and welfare councils, such as the senate, cultural committees, and the institute's counselling services. By doing so, they develop real leadership and management skills that will serve them in their future careers.

To break this cycle, Nepal needs strong rules that keep politics out of education. Recruitment should be fair and based on merit at every level, under one national university commission. The Prime Minister need not have to act as the university's chancellor, and vice-chancellors should be chosen for their skills, not political connections. Student and teacher unions should not be allowed to run political activities inside universities. Along with these changes, the culture of education needs to shift. Teaching, research, and innovation should be valued more than politics. Schools and universities should focus on their real purpose: preparing competent, creative, and responsible citizens who can help Nepal move toward a better future.

Neupane is Assistant Professor at Mid-West University, Nepal