In the volatile environment of Nepali politics, an old trend has resurfaced: projecting the 'face of the prime minister' before the election. As the upcoming general election on March 5 approaches, the major parties are seeking votes by making not only the party flag but also the person a 'brand'. The CPN (UML) has put forward KP Sharma Oli, while the Nepali Congress has presented Gagan Thapa as the future prime minister. Similarly, the Rastriya Swatantra Party (RSP) is playing political tricks by projecting Balen Shah as the prime minister. Although this trend looks like the American presidential system, in Nepal's parliamentary practice, there is always a fear that such election promises will change once the power equation alters. To understand the game of showing one face before the election and handing over power to another after winning, one must look at the 1999 election. At that time, there was a sharp dispute within the Nepali Congress between Girija Prasad Koirala and Krishna Prasad Bhattarai. Koirala adopted a clever strategy to sway public opinion in his favour. He announced that if the Congress won a majority, saintly leader Krishna Prasad Bhattarai would become the prime minister. The people gave a clear majority to the Congress due to Bhattarai's clean image and honesty. But less than 10 months after the election results, Koirala surrounded the party and forced Bhattarai to resign. Koirala ousted Bhattarai without even giving him an opportunity to go to France on a state visit. Bhattarai's resignation has become the biggest example of 'undermining' in Nepal's parliamentary history. The current situation is different from 1999 but more challenging. Due to the popular uprising of 2025 and the increasing political interference of the 'Gen-Z' generation, the parties have been forced to put forward new faces. But the structure of the 2015 Constitution of Nepal is such that it is difficult for any single party to win a majority. In a system with 40 per cent proportional representation, a coalition is almost inevitable. In such a situation, the prime ministerial candidates announced before the election face two major risks after the election: Coalition pressure: If a party, even if it is large, cannot secure a majority, the smaller parties can set 'conditions' for power sharing. They can say: 'We will come to the government, but we will not accept the person you have nominated as the prime minister.' In such a situation, the party leadership can easily sideline its 'future prime minister' for power. Internal strife: Just as Koirala used Bhattarai as a means to attract votes, the current established leaders are also in danger of using Balen and Gagan as election 'poster boys'. When presenting a prime ministerial candidate before the election, the party has made a pact with the people. If the people voted for Gagan or Balen because of their vision, removing them after the election and bringing the old leaders to power will be a betrayal of the voters. This is a bigger test, especially for new parties like the Rastriya Swatantra Party (RSP). They came into politics with the slogan of 'changing the old'. If they also bargain with their candidates in the power game, their political future may be in danger. Kathmandu former Mayor Balen is the biggest 'X-factor' of the current election. Balen has a large support base of 'Gen-Z' and disillusioned urban voters. But the challenge for the RSP, which is promoting him, is 'parliamentary arithmetic'. If the decisive seat does not come in favour of the RSP, will the party make a deal with the old parties to make Balen the prime minister? If not, he will be limited to just an 'opposition' face. In today's environment, voters have not forgotten the history of 1999 while mentioning the names of Gagan or Balen. The current electoral system (mixed electoral system) is more complex. In a situation where the possibility of any party getting a clear majority is low, the prime ministerial candidate announced before the election is certain to fall victim to 'post-election bargaining'. After the 'Gen-Z' rebellion of 2025, Nepali voters, especially the younger generation, have become more aware than before. They will no longer vote just by looking at the 'faces', but will be looking for a 'guarantee' that will bring that face to power. If the old faces are to enter Singha Durbar again by taking votes in the name of Balen or Gagan, it will completely destroy the people's faith in democracy. The 2082 BS election has provided an opportunity to bring stability to Nepal. If the parties use the prime ministerial candidate only as a 'bait' to attract votes, it will further increase the people's distaste for democracy. Will the fate that Kishunji suffered in 1999 repeat itself or will public opinion be respected this time? The answer to this question will be given by the power equation after the election. Winning elections in Nepal is one thing, but keeping the promise made to the people is another challenge. Announcing a prime ministerial candidate in Nepal is a positive practice, if it carries accountability. However, our history is full of 'deception'.