Spread the love

By Our Political Analyst

The government’s push to hold elections on March 5 and the parallel effort by major parties to revive the House of Representatives have placed Nepal’s politics in a tight corner. Two tracks are running at the same time and they point in opposite directions. On one side, Prime Minister Sushila Karki is calling for cooperation to return the mandate to the people. On the other, the Nepali Congress, the CPN UML, and smaller parties are strengthening their legal case at the Supreme Court to undo the House dissolution. This dual approach has deepened confusion and weakened trust.

The numbers explain the unease. A total of 143 lawmakers have now signed petitions against the dissolution, crossing the 138-mark needed to show majority strength in the 275-member House. The Congress submitted 65 signatures, with support from the Janamat Party, JSP Nepal, and an independent lawmaker. The UML had already lodged signatures of all its lawmakers, said to be 75. While party chiefs were talking elections with the prime minister, chief whips were at the court. A government minister summed it up bluntly, saying, “On one hand, the government is preparing for elections; on the other, parties are knocking on the Supreme Court’s door for House reinstatement.”

The Nepali Congress has kept its position carefully balanced. Publicly, it says elections must be held on time, but it is also betting on reinstatement as a safer political route. At the all-party meeting, NC Deputy General Secretary Mahendra Yadav warned the government against creating friction with parties. “Elections cannot be conducted by creating hostility toward political parties,” he said, adding that the environment must improve for polls to be free and fair. He also objected to ordinances issued without consultation, stressing, “Political parties are the backbone of democracy.”

The UML has taken a sharper line. While backing reinstatement at the court, it has questioned the credibility of elections under the current framework. UML Secretary Mahesh Basnet objected to the recent ordinance on election symbols, saying it crossed legal limits. “The government is repeatedly issuing ordinances that go against the democratic spirit,” he said. He argued that changing rules tied to past election results had no legal basis and warned, “Elections cannot happen by excluding old parties.” For the UML, reinstatement appears less about principle and more about regaining ground lost after dissolution.

Meanwhile, the Nepali Communist Party has rejected this cautious approach. It has drawn a clear line around the constitutional timeline. NCP leader Barshaman Pun said there would be no backing away from elections, warning, “If elections are not held on time, the reinstatement of the HoR will be decided from the streets.” The message is direct. Delay elections and the conflict shifts outside institutions.

Caught between these positions, Prime Minister Karki has tried to reclaim the moral ground. She urged parties to look beyond power struggles and remember their purpose. “The ultimate sovereigns of this country are the people,” she said. “Political parties exist to serve them.” She also acknowledged the pressure on her government, noting criticism from all sides and the burden of past mistakes.

The bind is clear. Elections without consensus risk boycott and disorder. Reinstatement without clarity risks prolonging instability. Until parties choose one path and commit to it, uncertainty will continue to shape every move of the government.