True reform requires improving the style of governance, ensuring transparency in policymaking, and using public resources more effectively.
Dr. Hom Nath Gaire
Nepal’s political economy has long been trapped in deep structural challenges. The internal dynamics of political parties, the functioning of the state bureaucracy, and the entrenched nexus between political actors, intermediaries, and administrative elites in exploiting public resources have gradually eroded citizens’ trust in the state. As public frustration reached a peak, the youth-led civic uprising of Bhadra 23 (the Gen-Z movement) marked a turning point in Nepal’s contemporary political economy. With the results of the recent parliamentary elections, the country appears to have entered an important new phase of political transition.
That movement sent a clear message: citizens no longer want merely electoral promises and rhetorical commitments—they demand genuine good governance and accountable public institutions. At the heart of the movement was a strong call to confront the institutionalized corruption that has permeated political parties and state structures. The peaceful completion of the recent parliamentary elections under the civic government formed in the aftermath of the movement, and the emerging results, suggest that the reform process initiated by the youth is now roughly halfway through its journey. Yet critical institutional reforms—such as dismantling patronage networks within political parties and bureaucratic structures, restoring transparency in governance, and ensuring bureaucratic accountability—remain incomplete.
Public anger and citizen expectations are not limited to changing the leadership of government or replacing one political party with another. What the country requires is a deeper transformation in the culture of governance itself. Establishing legal frameworks in the name of anti-corruption is not sufficient; their impartial implementation, institutional autonomy, and public accountability are equally essential. Unless the entire policy cycle—from policy formulation to implementation—becomes transparent and results-oriented, the goal of good governance will remain elusive. The results of the recent election clearly reflect the electorate’s lack of trust in the reform commitments of traditional political parties that failed to undertake genuine self-correction.
In a democracy, political parties are the primary vehicles of transformation. However, if they fail to demonstrate transparency, internal democracy, and ethical political culture, efforts to reform state institutions will remain weak. Ensuring financial transparency within parties, democratizing leadership selection processes, and strengthening citizen participation in policy formulation are therefore essential. The inability of traditional parties to embrace such reforms has contributed to their political decline and has created space for the emergence of new political forces such as the Rastriya Swatantra Party (RSP). Yet the same structural weaknesses that undermined older parties could also threaten new political actors if they repeat similar mistakes.
Reforming political parties alone is not sufficient. A fundamental restructuring of the bureaucracy—the administrative backbone of the state—is equally necessary. Linking the administrative system with the principles of social justice, introducing performance-based evaluation systems, strengthening incentives and sanctions, expanding digital transparency, and ensuring accountability in public service delivery are essential reforms. Only visible improvements in these areas can restore citizens’ confidence in emerging political leadership. Good governance is not the achievement of a single movement or government change; it is the result of continuous ethical practice, behavioral transformation, and institutional commitment to the rule of law.
The recent electoral mandate has entrusted the RSP with the responsibility of rebuilding this governance ecosystem through appropriate legal instruments, institutional arrangements, and an enabling environment. At the same time, the rise of this new political force brings with it heightened expectations for transparency and accountability. The party cannot afford to be carried away by the euphoria of a two-thirds majority. Nepal now stands at a critical juncture—not of changing the political system, but of transforming the condition of governance itself. The questions raised by youth and the broader public dissatisfaction represent an opportunity to strengthen and reform the democratic system rather than weaken it. To translate this opportunity into meaningful transformation, collaboration between political leadership, the administrative apparatus, and civil society will be essential.
Nepal’s political economy has deteriorated to such an extent in terms of integrity and governance that meaningful transformation cannot occur within a few months or even a few years. Nevertheless, the movements of Bhadra 23 and 24 opened a window of opportunity for reform. Political parties both in government and opposition must treat this signal seriously and continue the reform journey if the country is to achieve meaningful progress in controlling corruption, establishing good governance, and promoting inclusive economic development. Otherwise, the transformative movement initiated by young citizens—many of whom sacrificed their promising futures for a better nation—risks remaining incomplete.
The mandate given by voters cannot be ignored. Citizens have clearly signaled their desire for change in the recent parliamentary elections. This mandate represents not merely the victory of one party or leadership, but a collective demand for a transformation in political culture. Voters have expressed their dissatisfaction with corruption, structural inefficiency, and the culture of impunity that has characterized traditional political practice. If this mandate is reduced to a mere exercise in forming a government, it will fail to meet citizens’ expectations.
True reform requires improving the style of governance, ensuring transparency in policymaking, and using public resources more effectively. Elections in a democracy are not only a mechanism for changing power—they are also a golden opportunity to reform governance systems. Corruption and governance failures are not limited to visible individual irregularities; they are deeply embedded in the structures of the state itself. Therefore, the party entrusted with governing authority must lead by example in transparency, internal democracy, and ethical political culture if it is to deliver the reforms promised in its manifesto.
The Imperative of Economic Reform
Alongside political reform, economic reform is equally essential. Nepal’s economy has long been constrained by low productivity, limited industrialization, heavy import dependence, and labor market imbalances. Rural areas face severe labor shortages as youth migration abroad continues to accelerate, weakening the country’s long-term economic potential. The government must therefore articulate a clear economic reform agenda. Prioritizing productive sectors—including the modernization of agriculture, tourism development, and the promotion of green and digital economies—while creating an investment-friendly environment is essential. Policy stability, transparent regulatory frameworks, and productive infrastructure development are necessary to convert economic potential into tangible outcomes.
Revitalizing the Private Sector
Nepal’s economic transformation cannot occur without the active participation of the private sector. In recent years, private businesses have been weakened by regulatory uncertainty, financial constraints, and administrative complexity. The government must view the private sector not merely as a source of tax revenue but as a key partner in economic development. Simplifying investment procedures, introducing digital transparency in business registration and operations, and aligning the financial system with productive sectors can help restore confidence in the private sector.
Bold Administrative Reform
Administrative reform is indispensable for improving the effectiveness of state institutions. Nepal’s bureaucratic system has long been criticized for excessive procedural complexity, delays, and weak accountability. To build an agile and competitive civil service, reforms such as performance-based evaluation systems, digital governance, and clearly defined institutional responsibilities are essential. Only by making the administrative system efficient, results-oriented, and citizen-centered can trust in the state be rebuilt.
Rebalancing the Federal Structure
Federalism represents a major achievement of Nepal’s political transformation. However, its implementation still faces significant challenges. Decision-making remains overly centralized at the federal level, provincial structures often appear underutilized, and local governments continue to struggle with limited resources and capacity. To make federal governance effective, the current “inverted pyramid” structure must be transformed into a genuine pyramid: local governments should serve as the primary centers of service delivery and development, provinces should coordinate development management, and the federal government should focus on policy and strategic leadership.
The Question of Truth and Justice
The events surrounding the Bhadra 23–24 movement also raise critical questions about the relationship between the state and citizens. Allegations of excessive use of force, including the killing of students in school uniforms and retaliatory acts of arson and destruction, must be addressed. The recommendations of the Karki Commission established to investigate these incidents should be implemented seriously. In a democratic state, dissent and protest must not be treated as criminal acts. If the state’s response to civic movements lacks transparency and accountability, public trust in democracy will inevitably weaken. Ensuring truth, justice, and accountability is therefore fundamental to democratic stability.
Conclusion
The Gen-Z movement of Bhadra 23 and 24 opened the door to change. Yet crossing that threshold toward lasting transformation remains a long journey. The immediate challenge is to convert the progress achieved halfway through this transition—marked by successful elections—into a complete and sustainable transformation. This responsibility does not lie with the government alone. It is a shared obligation of political leadership, the administrative system, the private sector, and civil society.
Comments
Post a Comment