Submit your Article

Nepal has made one of the fastest leaps to electric mobility anywhere in the world. Customs data of fiscal year 2024-25 show that electric cars, jeeps and vans accounted for around 73 percent of all newly-imported four-wheeler passenger vehicles, placing Nepal among the global frontrunners in EV market share for new imports. More than 13,500 EVs got imported in the country that year alone, reflecting not a niche trend but a mainstream consumer shift. The momentum is driven as much by economics as by environmental goals: competitive pricing from international manufacturers, preferential tax structures and a national grid powered over 90 percent by domestic hydropower have combined to make going electric the logical and cost-efficient choice for many Nepali households.

Nepal’s advantage is structural. With roughly 90 percent of electricity coming from hydropower, most EV kilometers run on domestic renewable energy. Installed capacity reached more than 3,600 MW by mid-July 2025, almost all from clean sources. This alignment of energy and transport strengthens energy security, eases the import bill, and turns decarbonization into a practical development strategy.

Nepal’s EV journey has deep roots. The Kathmandu trolleybus launched in 1975, offering an early template for electric public transport. In the 1990s, battery-powered Safa Tempos entered the scene and by 1999 the government phased out diesel three-wheelers in the valley, accelerating the switch to cleaner electric three-wheelers. Today’s momentum stands on these foundations.

Across South Asia, progress is uneven. In India, EVs reached 4.1 percent of new passenger vehicle sales in May 2025, up from 2.6 percent a year earlier, strong growth but still below Nepal’s current pace. Bangladesh has only a small, registered EV car base, yet millions of electric rickshaws operate informally, revealing latent demand. Pakistan remains at an early stage for passenger EVs, with policy targets of 30 percent of new car sales by 2030 and 90 percent by 2040, while charging infrastructure expands from a low base. Sri Lanka’s adoption stalled during its 2020 to early 2025 vehicle import ban and is now easing. Bhutan’s push has focused on public fleets and taxis, in line with its carbon neutral policies. 

Clean electricity is no longer a distant dream for Nepal; it is already moving across borders. The 25-year power trade agreement with India, signed in January 2024, set a target of 10,000 MW of exports within the next decade, giving long-term certainty to Nepal’s hydropower sector. That commitment was reinforced in June 2025 when Nepal exported its first 40 MW of electricity to Bangladesh through India’s transmission network, marking a historic tripartite breakthrough in regional energy trade.

The road ahead is clear. First, heavy transport: buses and trucks need targeted financing and dependable high-capacity charging to electrify at scale. Second, infrastructure depth: reliable public charging in cities and along highways will sustain consumer confidence beyond early adopters. Third, policy stability: clear, multi-year signals on tariffs, standards and incentives will de-risk private investment across vehicles, charging and grid upgrades. With a hydro-dominant grid and one of the world’s highest EV shares for new four-wheelers, Nepal is well-positioned to convert today’s momentum into durable economic, environmental and strategic dividends.

Looking ahead, Nepal should move from adoption to systems design. Set clear multiyear targets with public reporting, mobilize concessional finance for buses and freight, and build corridors charging on every major highway. Grow local assembly, components, battery second life and recycling to anchor jobs and cut import exposure, while smart charging and time of use tariffs keep the grid stable. Pilot vehicles to grid, electrify public transport in secondary cities, and green logistics. With disciplined execution and regional power trade, Nepal can set South Asia’s playbook for clean mobility.

Nepal has shown that clean mobility is possible today. The task now is to make it routine by setting clear yearly targets, supporting buses and trucks with affordable finance, expanding reliable charging, and encouraging local assembly and battery reuse. Through smart policies and consistent execution, Nepal can turn its early momentum into a lasting national advantage and a model for the region.

Nepal’s Supreme Court  has begun  preliminary hearings on more than a dozen writ petitions challenging the formation of the interim government led by Sushila Karki and her subsequent decision to dissolve the House of Representatives (HoR) before the end of its term.

The Constitutional Bench of the Supreme Court will hear a total of 16 writ petitions. Chief Justice Prakash Man Singh Raut has already given his consent to forward all cases to the bench. The petitioners have argued that Karki’s appointment as interim prime minister is unconstitutional, as Nepal’s 2015 Constitution does not allow non-members of Parliament to assume the prime ministerial position.

Furthermore, while appointing her as prime minister, no specific constitutional article was cited. The Office of the President has argued that Karki was appointed under Article 61 of the Constitution, which relates to the president’s duty to safeguard the Constitution. However, in 2015, all provisions related to the formation of government were clearly outlined under Article 76. Karki was appointed interim head following the GenZ protests on Sept 12.

Another argument raised by the petitioners concerns Article 132(2) of the Constitution. Lawyers Bipana Sharma and Ayush Badal contend that a former chief justice cannot hold any government office except within the National Human Rights Commission (NHRC). Article 132(2) states: “No person who has once held the office of Chief Justice or a Judge of the Supreme Court shall be eligible for appointment to any government office, except as otherwise provided in this Constitution.”

This means that, except for roles in the NHRC, former chief justices and Supreme Court judges cannot assume any other government positions. However, those in power argue that the current government emerged from the GenZ revolution, and therefore, its constitutionality and legality should not be judged through the lens of “normal times.”

Nepal had faced a similar situation in 2013, when then–Chief Justice Khil Raj Regmi led an interim government. His appointment was also challenged in the Supreme Court, but the court delayed its hearing until after Regmi stepped down upon completing the elections. Later, Supreme Court judges were divided over the verdict. Interestingly, current Prime Minister Karki, who at the time was serving as a senior justice, had expressed that Regmi’s appointment went against the spirit of the interim constitution. Now, legal observers are keen to see how Karki will defend her own appointment.

Karki faces three major constitutional challenges: A non-parliamentarian assuming the office of prime minister; the lack of any cited constitutional article in her appointment by President Ramchandra Paudel; and the restriction under Article 132(2), which bars former justices from holding government office.

Similarly, several writs have been filed against the dissolution of the House of Representatives. Shortly after taking office, Karki recommended to President Poudel that Parliament be dissolved. Reports suggest that Karki believed she could only serve as prime minister after Parliament’s dissolution. Media sources also claim she faced pressure from Kathmandu Mayor Balendra Shah to dissolve Parliament immediately. Legal experts, however, argue that Karki’s appointment was justified under the “doctrine of necessity.”

Still, constitutional experts point out that, under Article 76(7), the prime minister can recommend dissolution of Parliament only after all attempts to form a new government have failed. On this very basis, the Supreme Court in 2020 and 2021 had reinstated the Parliament dissolved by then Prime Minister KP Sharma Oli, ruling that the House could still produce a new government. The current House of Representatives, elected in 2022, is set to complete its term in 2027.

As the Supreme Court prepares to begin hearings on the 16 petitions, the prospects of the March 5 elections look increasingly uncertain. Dialogue between the government and political parties has begun, but it has not helped rebuild trust. Political leaders continue to raise concerns about security, saying they still fear openly holding meetings and rallies. Nepal Police has yet to recover the 1,200 weapons looted during the Sept 9 protests, and more than 4,000 escaped inmates remain at large and reportedly involved in criminal activities.

Party leaders claim they are still receiving threats. In this context, if elections do not take place on March 5, the interim government may lose its legitimacy, creating a new political vacuum. Senior leaders of the Nepali Congress and CPN-UML argue that the only way to preserve the current Constitution is for the Supreme Court to reinstate Parliament.

They contend that restoring Parliament would provide a legitimate institution to address the demands of the GenZ protesters, including ending corruption, ensuring systemic reform, and curbing nepotism. NC and UML leaders also say that, as their party offices have been destroyed and many leaders have lost their homes, the current environment is not conducive to holding elections.

Devraj Ghimire, Speaker of the dissolved House of Representatives, is also strongly advocating for Parliament’s restoration. He is currently consulting with legal experts to create a constitutional and political pathway for the reinstatement of the House.

As the GenZ-led protests of Sept 8–9 exposed deep public frustration with corruption, unemployment, and government overreach, the country’s oldest democratic party, the Nepali Congress (NC), found itself at a crossroads. In this interview with ApEx, NC leader and former minister, Minendra Rijal reflects on the lessons from the GenZ movement, the legacy and impending transition of Sher Bahadur Deuba’s leadership, and the urgent need for renewal within the party. 

How do you assess the Nepali Congress’s response to the recent youth-led, particularly GenZ, protests across the country?

Nepali Congress has always been a party of the people—not just by history, but by temperament and conviction. The recent youth-led protests, spearheaded largely by GenZ and triggered by the ill-advised social media ban in Sept 2025, revealed not only widespread frustration with governance but also a generational demand for accountability, inclusion, and transparency. It would be disingenuous to deny that these protests reflected disenchantment with all mainstream political forces, including ours.

At the time, even though our party, Nepali Congress, was the largest party in the governing coalition, I immediately opposed the ban and publicly expressed my opposition to the government’s decision in a full-length interview published in a respected national daily. In that interview, I tried to explain that the government’s approach was more focused on attacking the messenger than on addressing public frustration or understanding the people’s message. The government’s move appeared more like an attempt to control dissent than to regulate misuse of technology. In a democracy, one cannot legislate away public frustration—it must be addressed through dialogue, trust, and reform.

I firmly believe that social media, like any other public space, contains both positive and negative elements. But today it functions as a civic space for young Nepalis who often feel excluded from formal politics. Suppressing that space risks alienating an entire generation. The protests, therefore, were not merely a reaction to a single policy but an outpouring of deeper disillusionment—with corruption, unemployment, and the perceived distance between politics and people’s lives.

Our party’s initial hesitation in responding decisively was a missed opportunity to show moral clarity and courage. But it has since sparked a necessary introspection. Nepali Congress must reimagine its engagement with youth—not as an electoral strategy but as a democratic responsibility. Listening to young people, learning from their impatience, and incorporating their aspirations into policy are the only ways to rebuild trust. In that sense, the protests were not a crisis to be managed but a message to be heeded.

Sher Bahadur Deuba has led the party for over a decade. How would you evaluate his leadership and its impact on the party’s direction and performance?

Sher Bahadur Deuba’s political journey spans nearly six decades—from his beginnings as a student activist to serving five times as Prime Minister of the country and twice as President of Nepali Congress. Over that long career, he has navigated multiple turning points in Nepal’s political evolution and in the life of our party, often under extraordinary national circumstances.

Parts of his prepared remarks delivered in person at the outset of our ongoing Central Working Committee meeting carried a reflective tone—almost like a valedictory statement—as he sought to place his major political milestones within the broader sweep of Nepal’s democratic history. This, understandably, has prompted a wave of commentary evaluating his leadership and its imprint on both the party and the country. What drew my closer attention, however, was his announcement to hand over leadership following our forthcoming 15th General Convention and his decision to designate an Acting President due to health reasons in the aftermath of the September protests.

Having known and worked closely with him for five decades—through periods of both collaboration and divergence—I have seen his resilience, political acumen, and characteristic approach to managing the party’s affairs in demanding times. Yet, this is also a moment of profound transition — not only for Nepali Congress but for the nation’s political landscape more broadly. In such a fluid environment, any definitive evaluation of his legacy may risk being misunderstood or viewed through the prism of current tensions.

Therefore, I believe it would be both fair and prudent to reserve a full, candid, and balanced assessment of his leadership until after the conclusion of our upcoming General Convention. That will be the appropriate moment to reflect on his contributions with the necessary perspective—acknowledging his achievements, recognizing the limitations of the period, and situating his tenure within the larger trajectory of our party’s evolution and Nepal’s democratic journey.

The party is currently undergoing a leadership transition. What challenges do you foresee in ensuring a smooth and effective handover?

Leadership transitions in a party as large and historically significant as Nepali Congress are always complex because they carry both institutional memory and generational expectation. Nepali Congress is indeed in a period of transition, as the mandate of our 14th General Convention is set to expire by mid-Dec 2025. To convene the 15th General Convention on schedule, we should have already begun the process from the grassroots level upward. Our active membership roster should have been finalized long ago, and the election of new leadership at the lower levels should already have been underway.

Even to finalize the active membership roster, we must first complete the renewal of existing memberships and promptly launch an open and transparent drive to recruit fresh members. Unfortunately, while occupying the highest positions of political power, our leadership failed to devote the minimum necessary attention to these fundamental organizational responsibilities. There is ample room for debate about who among the leadership bears the most responsibility for this negligence.

Now, we find ourselves in the midst of increasingly polarized internal discussions regarding the timing of the General Convention and how this task can be carried out. Recent developments—particularly the dissolution of the federal House of Representatives and the scheduling of fresh general elections for 5 March 2026—have further complicated matters. There are two schools of thought within the party: one argues for completing the General Convention as scheduled, to renew our legitimacy before the elections; the other believes that we should invoke a clause in our party statute to defer the General Convention, allowing us to focus on preparing for the upcoming general elections and stabilizing the political environment. Both views have merit. However, we cannot continue to live in a state of confusion and uncertainty and risk undermining our prospects in the forthcoming general election. We should reach a decision fairly quickly during the ongoing Central Working Committee meeting regarding the date and mode of our party’s General Convention. What matters most is that our decision be anchored in broad consensus and transparency.

Leadership change must re-energize the organization from within. This is also a time to demonstrate that internal democracy in Nepali Congress is not a ritual but a living principle. If we can turn this transition into a genuine process of renewal—one that blends youthful energy with institutional wisdom—then the outcome will strengthen both the party and the political system. Otherwise, we risk not remaining Nepal’s largest and most vibrant mainstream party, but becoming merely a legacy political institution.

Maintaining unity amid transition is always challenging, especially when external pressures—public skepticism, media scrutiny, and the rise of new movements—are intense. Yet, our history gives reasons for confidence. Time and again, through crises and ideological divides, we have relied on dialogue, compromise, and collective wisdom to move forward. If we can summon that same spirit now, we will not only ensure a smooth handover but also reaffirm our commitment to democratic norms at a time when they are being tested.

Beyond a change in leadership, what reforms should the Nepali Congress prioritize to stay relevant and responsive to public aspirations?

Leadership renewal must be accompanied by institutional and ideological reforms. A mere change of personalities without a shift in culture and accountability will not suffice. It is abundantly clear that people are less concerned with who leads and more with how they lead, and for whose benefit.

First, inclusivity must be made substantive, not procedural. Nepali Congress has a proud record of promoting social justice, but today’s electorate expects more than representation by identity—they expect participation in decision-making. We must build mechanisms that ensure meaningful roles for young leaders, women, Dalits, Janajatis, Madhesis, and other marginalized communities not as tokens, but as equal partners in policy and strategy.

Second, our organizational reform must aim at efficiency, merit, and accountability. Over the years, the party’s structure has become dense and hierarchical. We need leaner, more agile decision-making bodies where responsibility is clearly defined. Moreover, the raison d’être and mandates of our extensive network of sister and well-wisher organizations need careful re-examination. Not only should governance within the party improve, but it should also project confidence to the public that we can reform the state in the same spirit.

Third, the fight against corruption must begin at home. Nepali Congress should lead by example, instituting internal mechanisms for transparency—regular financial audits, public disclosure of funding, and swift disciplinary action in cases of misconduct. People are weary of rhetoric; they want proof of integrity. Only when we hold ourselves accountable can we credibly demand accountability from others.

Fourth, our policy agenda must resonate with the emerging priorities of a young, globally connected citizenry. Employment, entrepreneurship, climate resilience, and digital innovation are no longer peripheral issues; they are central to national transformation. We must articulate policies that link economic growth with fairness—promoting green energy, supporting small enterprises, investing in technology, and modernizing education to match global standards.

Finally, reform must be institutionalized. We have had moments of renewal before, but they often faded for lack of follow-through. This time, we should create dedicated reform task forces empowered to translate commitments into actions. The goal is not to reinvent Nepali Congress but to rediscover its essence—a democratic, progressive, and inclusive force capable of leading Nepal into a new era of accountability and hope.

Given the growing public frustration with established parties, how confident are you that the Nepali Congress can retain its place as Nepal’s leading political force?

I have strong reasons for confidence, though not for complacency. Nepali Congress’s strength lies in its proven capacity to adapt without abandoning its principles. For over eight decades, we have guided Nepal through every major political transformation—the 1950 revolution against autocracy, the 1990 People’s Movement that restored multiparty democracy, the 2006 Jana Andolan II that ended monarchy, the post-2015 earthquake recovery, the promulgation of the 2015 Constitution, and the subsequent federal transition. In each phase, we faced crises of confidence and legitimacy, yet emerged renewed because we anchored ourselves in democratic values.

The events of Sept 2025 are part of that continuing test. They remind us that no political legacy, however illustrious, can substitute for responsiveness and reform. But they also reaffirm that our party’s greatest resource is its moral and institutional resilience. We have always been a bridge between tradition and change—and if we embrace that identity deliberately, we can once again lead Nepal through this period of uncertainty.

The forthcoming 15th General Convention will, therefore, be more than a procedural exercise; it will be a defining moment for our future. If we can ensure a democratic, transparent, and inclusive leadership selection process while committing to tangible reforms—from anti-corruption to job creation—we can demonstrate that Nepali Congress still has the vision and discipline to govern responsibly.

Continuity and change must coexist. Our heritage of resilience should inform, not inhibit, innovation. As Nepal navigates what some have called a “youthquake,” we must balance youthful dynamism with the steady hand of experience. If we can do so, Nepali Congress will not just survive this transition—it will re-emerge as the principal force of stability, progress, and democratic governance in the years ahead.

U.S. President Donald Trump said on Thursday he had agreed to reduce tariffs on China to 47% in exchange for Beijing resuming U.S. soybean purchases, keeping rare earths exports flowing and cracking down on the illicit trade of fentanyl, Reuters reported.

His remarks after face-to-face talks with Chinese President Xi Jinping in the South Korean city of Busan, their first since 2019, marked the finale of Trump's whirlwind Asia trip on which he also touted trade breakthroughs with South Korea, Japan and Southeast Asian nations.

"I thought it was an amazing meeting," Trump told reporters aboard Air Force One shortly after he departed Busan, adding that tariffs imposed on Chinese imports would be cut to 47% from 57%, according to Reuters.