Spread the love

By Our Reporter

Prime Minister Sushila Karki’s first 100 days in office sit between guarded hope and lingering doubt. The defining test of her government is clear but demanding to deliver a credible election on time while managing the national affairs with robust administration. When she took charge on September 12, fear shaped public life, trust in the state had eroded, and authority appeared scattered.  Nearly 14,000 detainees had escaped after looting police weapons. Police posts were damaged or destroyed. Officers lacked arms and even uniforms. Many citizens openly questioned if the state still existed beyond official notices. In such conditions, announcing a general election for March 5, 2026 sounded unrealistic. For many, it appeared more like a statement of intent than a workable plan, and that skepticism reflected the reality on the ground.

One hundred days later, the picture has shifted, though pressure remains. Karki’s strength does not come from party arithmetic but from a single promise, restore order and return the country to the ballot. On restoring basic stability, her government has performed better than expected. Yet the election road is far from secure. Even as the government speaks of preparations, major political parties, especially the Nepali Congress and the UML, have moved the court seeking reinstatement of the dissolved House.

If the House is revived, elections will not take place as planned. The Karki government would have to step aside, and the revived House would decide the next government. This legal push has deepened uncertainty. The UML and others openly doubt that the March election will happen at all. This contradiction, visible election work on one side and legal resistance on the other, defines the present political moment.

Judged purely by administrative steps, election preparation has moved ahead. Voter registration has progressed. Political parties have completed registration. Election symbols have been distributed, and the process is moving toward nominations. In stable times, these steps would draw little notice. In a country recently shaken by disorder, they carry weight. Karki’s 100-day address helped reinforce public belief that the election date is not merely symbolic.

The PM’s 100-day address reflected honesty but also misjudgment. She acknowledged that some demands of the Gen Z movement remain unmet and explained why quick solutions are not always possible. That openness worked in her favor.

At the same time, highlighting Melamchi water supply figures and added megawatts as 100-day gains felt misplaced. These are long-running state efforts, not outcomes shaped by her short tenure. Meanwhile, daily governance continues to test public patience. Hospitals remain overstretched. Government offices stay crowded and slow. Middlemen still thrive. Many feel that while order has returned at the top, daily life has not changed much. This gap steadily erodes goodwill.

Karki herself has largely stayed above factional fights. She has maintained workable ties with political parties without appearing captive to them. That balance has protected her so far. The real pressure now rests on her ministers to show through action why expertise matters.

After 100 days, Karki appears aware of her limits. Her record will be judged by one outcome alone. If elections happen on time, her tenure will be seen as a stabilizing bridge. If not, early gains will fade quickly.