If internal reform is impossible, Nepal should consider a completely independent Financial Crimes Commission to investigate grand corruption, revenue fraud, policy capture, and misuse of public resources
Nepal is in an unusually fragile political moment. The dissolution of the House of Representatives, the formation of an interim government with a narrow mandate, and a powerful youth-led uprising have collectively exposed deep cracks in our democratic system. The expectation that the country would quickly return to constitutional order and hold timely elections is steadily fading. What is seen instead is a government reluctant to address the demands of the younger generation, political parties absorbed in mistrust, and a social climate increasingly defined by frustration and fatigue. Unless the political establishment urgently corrects course, Nepal risks sliding into a cycle of prolonged instability that could invite extra-constitutional temptations.
The youth-led demonstrations of Bhadra 23-24 were not a random outburst nor the product of a conspiracy, as some leaders hastily suggested. They marked a generational confrontation with a political culture that has been unresponsive for far too long. These young citizens spoke against the entrenched practices of patronage, power sharing, and elite dominance that have shaped our political order since the 1990s. Their message was unmistakable: democracy must be rooted not in deals struck among party leaders but in accountability, transparency, and equal opportunity.
This movement shattered three myths that had long been treated as political truths. First, it revealed that popular trust in the democratic system has eroded far more than leaders are willing to acknowledge. Second, it showed that the existing mechanisms for accountability have become hollow and ineffective. And third, it demonstrated that political power has concentrated in the hands of a few individuals and networks, leaving the majority population, especially the youth, feeling excluded. To dismiss this awakening as foreign-inspired or politically engineered is to ignore the accumulated social, economic, and political pressures that brought it to the surface.
The aspirations of the new generation extend far beyond the call for elections.
They are seeking systemic transformation, an end to the concentration of power and resources, stricter action against corruption, transparent decision-making, and equal access to opportunities. They want governance shaped by merit, not by who are close to power. And they want a democracy that is more than a ritual of voting every five years. For them, democracy is a relationship of trust between state and citizen, grounded in justice, fairness, dignity, and equality.
This is a profound political shift. For the first time since 1990, the youth are not merely observing politics; they are demanding ownership of it. The political establishment can either accept this new reality or resist it at the country's expense.
Reinstating the Parliament remains legally possible, but politically it would be another mistake. The protesters' demand itself centers on dissolving the old Parliament, which they believe no longer reflects public will. Restoring it now would undermine the movement's legitimacy and deepen public anger. At the same time, early elections cannot be held responsibly within the narrow time frame available to the interim government.
This leaves Nepal with a single viable path: a structured transition accompanied by political reform. The President, as the guardian of constitutional stability, must facilitate consensus among political parties, protest groups, and civil society. The country needs a clear agreement either to extend the interim government's mandate with a defined reform agenda, or to form a national consensus transitional government that includes major parties, youth representatives, civic voices, and groups with genuine public backing. Whichever option is chosen, it must include a fixed commitment to hold elections with adequate time for it.
A transitional period without reform would accomplish nothing. Nepal's political and governance failures are systemic, and the response must be equally systemic. A high-level Constitutional Reform Commission – representing political parties, youth, civil society, experts, and marginalised communities – should examine key areas such as federalism, judicial appointments, the electoral system, power distribution, and the independence of constitutional bodies.
Corruption, now deeply embedded at every level, requires structural rethinking. The Commission for the Investigation of Abuse of Authority (CIAA) must be depoliticised and its leadership appointment made transparent. If internal reform is impossible, Nepal should consider a completely independent Financial Crimes Commission to investigate grand corruption, revenue fraud, policy capture, and misuse of public resources.
Judicial reform is equally urgent. Justice delayed is justice denied, and Nepal's courts suffer from delays, opaque appointments, and declining public trust. Strengthening judicial ethics, introducing technological transparency, and restructuring the lower courts are essential steps.
The economic dimension of the crisis must also be addressed. Youth unemployment, weak investment climate, and the mass outflow of workers have deepened the sense of hopelessness. Reforms in public spending, taxation, digital economy expansion, entrepreneurship incentives, and foreign employment safety are crucial for rebuilding confidence.
Nepal is standing at a turning point where repeating old habits will only lead to greater instability. The new generation's voice is reshaping the political landscape, and their demands cannot be postponed or diluted. The political establishment must understand that Nepal can no longer be governed through bargains among a handful of leaders.
If the country embraces reform – constitutional, institutional, economic, and moral – Nepal can find a path towards stability and prosperity. If not, the crisis will deepen, and the legitimacy of the entire political system will continue to erode.Nepal has entered an era of accountability. The question now is whether its leaders are ready for it.
Sharma is a Senior Advocate at the Supreme Court of Nepal and former Minister of Law, Justice and Parliamentary Affairs
