Power, protest and resignation: Nepal’s struggle for credible governance continues

The political turmoil of Nepal, the Himalayan nation perched between India and China, deepens as ministers resign following criticism and misuse of power and the suspension of parliamentary sessions. But the recent political disruptions of Nepal reflect a deeper recalibration of democratic accountability. Institutions are being tasted. The resignation of ministers also conveyed a strong message that the leadership should be accountable and public life should be clean.

Nepal's President Ramchandra Paudel recently suspended the session of both houses of Parliament that was scheduled for April 30, citing “special reasons" on the recommendation of the Nepal government. The session was suspended a day after Nepal’s Home Minister Sudan Gurung resigned, less than a month after his appointment, following criticisms over his alleged investment and share transactions with a controversial businessman. Gurung came into the spotlight after Nepal’s former prime minister KP Sharma Oli and former home minister Ramesh were arrested over their alleged role in the deaths of dozens of people during the Gen Z protests. The arrests came less than 24 hours after the new government was sworn into office.

More from Opinion

After the arrest, Gurung had posted on social media that no one is above the law. After his resignation, the Home Ministry is under Prime Minister Balendra Shah.

He posted his resignation on social media. He wrote on social media that ethics are greater than position for him and there is no power greater than public trust. He also clarified that he resigned from his post to ensure impartial investigations into the matters related to him.

He is the second minister to withdraw from the government which was formed after the deadly Gen-Z protest. On April 9, minister for labour, employment and social security Dip Kumar Sah was sacked from his post on the recommendation of the ruling Rastriya Swatantra Party (RSP). Shah had misused his position to ‌get ‌his wife appointed as a member of the board of directors of the Nepal Health Insurance Board.

Nepal’s democratic institutions have struggled to build credibility. Nepal has struggled with political instability for decades. Since 2008, the country has seen 14 different governments, not one of which has completed a full five-year term.

The power of the parliament lies not just in numbers but also in the quality of debates. But parliamentary debates in Nepal often focused heavily on power dynamics rather than public concerns.

The suspension of parliamentary sessions also signals that the legislative forum is no longer a passive arena. Disruptions are often framed as obstruction, but they are also a form of political signalling. People are exhausted by constant political drama and power dynamics without clear results.

The institutions need to respond with clarity, transparency and consistency. Resignations should not be a symbolic gesture. It must be followed by transparent investigations with timelines. Accountability loses meaning if it does not produce conclusions. Strengthening investigative bodies and ensuring their transparency and independence is essential.

Parliament must reclaim its role as a space for resolution and quality debates that address the public concerns. Procedural reforms can be helpful. Setting minimum debate hours, enforcing attendance, and creating mechanisms for fast-tracking urgent issues could make the institution more effective.

Communication needs to improve. One reason public frustration escalates is the lack of timely and credible information. Regular briefings, open data practices, and proactive engagement can reduce uncertainty.

There must be a deliberate effort to rebuild trust at the local level. Federalism has given Nepal an opportunity to bring governance closer to people. Local governments should deliver tangible results. Investing in local accountability mechanisms, such as public hearings and citizen audits, can create a more immediate connection between state and society.

Leaders must show that they understand the frustration and are willing to act on it. The recent Gen Z movement demanded good governance, transparency and accountability and the new government should work effectively to address them.

Critics argue that frequent resignations and parliamentary disruptions can weaken governance if they become routine. They can create uncertainty for investors, slow down decision-making, and reinforce the perception that politics is more about conflict. Not every disruption is meaningful, and not every resignation reflects genuine accountability.

But Nepal is at a point where public expectations are rising faster than institutional responses. That tension is uncomfortable, but it is also necessary for progress. The real question is what comes after. If resignations lead to transparency, if parliamentary clashes lead to reform, and if citizen fatigue leads to more engagement rather than withdrawal, then this moment will mark a turning point. Nepal’s current political turmoil may be frustrating, but it could also be the beginning of a more accountable political culture.

(The writer is a columnist. His articles have appeared in various publications like The Independent, The Globe and Mail, South China Morning Post, The Straits Times, etc. Views expressed in the above piece are personal and solely those of the author. They do not necessarily reflect Firstpost’s views.)