Kathmandu

Governance Graveyard

Referred to as the world champion of political instability, Nepal can map a road towards stability and development by encouraging a culture of inclusive governance.

By Gulnaz Nawaz | February 2025

GOVERNANCE GRAVEYARDNepal’s political landscape is characterized by ongoing governance crises, unstable coalitions, and frequent power shifts, reflecting an unusual degree of predictability. The recent collapse of a coalition government that lasted 15 months, spearheaded by Pushpa Kamal Dahal (Prachanda) and including the Communist Party of Nepal (Maoist Centre) alongside the Nepali Congress (NC), warrants a thorough analysis. This incident marks yet another development in the ongoing saga of Nepali politics, often defined by the enduring volatility of coalition governments and the regularity of reshuffles as typical occurrences. Nepal’s position as a global emblem of political instability stems from its ongoing systemic challenges, which both sustain and reinforce this viewpoint.

The political instability in Nepal is deeply intertwined with its intricate and tumultuous historical background. The Rana regime (1846–1951) solidified the principles of autocratic governance, whereas the Shah monarchy maintained centralized authority over several centuries. The 1950s marked a pivotal moment for Nepal as it embarked on a journey towards democracy. This transition initiated a phase of political experimentation that, instead of fostering stable governance, exposed significant divisions within the political framework. In 1960, King Mahendra took the decisive step of dissolving the government and instituting the Panchayat system. This political structure eliminated party participation and stifled political advancement until 1990, leading to a considerable regression in the democratic endeavor.

Although the 1990 People’s Movement signaled the start of a multi-party democracy, the environment was still typified by rampant corruption, poor institutions, and intense factionalism. From 1996 to 2006, the Maoist insurgency highlighted socio-economic inequities and caused a protracted civil war, resulting in the deaths of around 17,000 individuals, hence aggravating existing problems. The end of the monarchy in 2008 and the Epilogue of the insurgency in 2006 defined Nepal’s transition towards a federal democratic republic. Still, the 2015 Constitution, a noteworthy accomplishment, drew much debate and demonstrations from underprivileged groups, further aggravating the general unrest.

Coalition governments have become the hallmark of Nepali politics. The literal meaning of coalition—to grow together—is often lost as parties prioritize power over governance. Nepali coalitions are frequently built on fragile agreements with little focus on policy coherence or developmental goals. For instance, the current coalition includes the Maoist Centre, CPN-UML, Rashtriya Swatantra Party (RSP), and Janata Samajwadi Party (JSP), yet struggles with internal mismanagement and power-sharing conflicts. Such alliances often collapse under the weight of mistrust and competing interests, leading to a cycle of instability.

The drive for political survival often leads to alliances formed and broken with astonishing regularity. A notable example is Pushpa Kamal Dahal’s repeated shifts in allegiance—from partnering with the UML to forming a government with the NC and later switching allegiances again. Such betrayals erode trust among parties and undermine governance. These behaviors reflect a deep-seated political culture where personal and party interests eclipse national priorities.

Read More