Submit your Article

Nepali Congress (NC), Nepal’s oldest democratic party, is witnessing one of its most consequential internal challenges. Youth leaders Gagan Kumar Thapa and Bishwo Prakash Sharma have launched an open revolt against the party’s entrenched leadership by calling a special general convention—a move that could fundamentally reshape the party’s future. The convention, scheduled for January 11–12 in Kathmandu, comes at a politically sensitive moment, when the country is immersed in election preparations. For decades, the party’s senior leadership—many of whom have alternated between power and opposition since 1990—has dominated decision-making and is often accused of organizational inertia, factionalism, and resistance to reform. Thapa and Sharma argue that without urgent structural and leadership change, the Nepali Congress risks irrelevance, particularly among young voters. The immediate trigger for this assertive move lies in the September 8–9 Gen Z–led protests, which exposed a deepening generational disconnect between political parties and Nepal’s youth. Since those protests, Thapa has consistently argued that contesting elections under the same leadership and organizational framework would amount to political self-sabotage. According to him, symbolic gestures are no longer sufficient; only radical internal reform can restore public confidence. Unsurprisingly, the party establishment—led by Party President Sher Bahadur Deuba—has strongly opposed the convention, even though he has already stated that he will not contest the party leadership again. Deuba appears to have forgotten that, as a youth leader, he himself had revolted against the party leadership two decades ago. Deuba and his allies, who have steered the party through multiple governments and internal power struggles, view the move as destabilizing and ill-timed, arguing that this is a moment to focus on election preparations rather than internal conventions. However, the youth faction remains defiant, framing the convention as a legitimate intra-party democratic exercise rather than a futile gathering. Whether the convention will immediately displace Deuba and other senior office-bearers remains uncertain. Leaders close to Thapa suggest that if the establishment faction engages constructively, the youth leaders may defer leadership change until the party’s regular general convention after the elections. If resistance continues, however, the special convention could be empowered to take decisions even on leadership restructuring. Crucially, the youth faction holds a strong legal footing. According to the Nepali Congress statute, a special general convention must be convened if 40 percent of elected general convention representatives demand it. Thapa’s camp has already secured the signatures of 54 percent of representatives—a figure expected to rise further before January 11—making the convention difficult to block without risking internal rupture. If the convention proceeds and the party remains united, the Nepali Congress could experience its most significant generational shift in decades. Such a transformation could also help the party reconnect with Gen Z voters, many of whom are openly demanding leadership change across major political parties. Party insiders say the convention could mark the birth of a “new Nepali Congress”—more responsive, inclusive, and future-oriented. Interestingly, cracks are already appearing within the establishment camp. Several senior leaders aligned with Deuba have begun expressing support for the special general convention, sensing the changing political mood. However, Shekhar Koirala, another senior leader and a declared contender for the party presidency, finds himself in an awkward position. While positioning himself as an alternative to Deuba, Koirala has yet to clarify his stance on the special general convention—an ambiguity that could weaken his claim to lead a reformist charge. As Nepal heads toward elections, the unfolding struggle within the Nepali Congress is no longer merely an internal power contest. It has become a broader test of whether one of the country’s most influential parties can reinvent itself—or remain captive to its past.