As I stepped into the United States at the end of Dec 2024 to pursue my Master’s in Law, I saw the key differences between student politics in Nepal and the United States. Having served as an executive member of the Free Students’ Union (FSU) at Nepal Law Campus, I was eager to explore how student representation worked in my new academic home. What I discovered was a system that prioritizes student welfare over political agendas, a refreshing contrast to what I had experienced back in Nepal.
In Nepal, the FSU is deeply intertwined with national politics. Student leaders often serve as bridges between students and senior political leaders, rather than focusing solely on campus issues. The election process, while democratic in appearance, is heavily influenced by political parties. Candidates are nominated by these parties, not by the students themselves, which often leads to a disconnect between student representatives and the actual needs of the student body. The focus shifts from addressing campus concerns to advancing political agendas, and transparency in fund management remains a recurring issue.
In contrast, American universities typically have Student Councils or Student Governments. These bodies, known by various names like The Associated Students of Stanford University (ASSU) or Harvard’s Undergraduate Council (UC), operate quite differently from their Nepali counterparts. Here, candidates nominate themselves independently, and the focus is primarily on bridging students and campus administration. Political party affiliations are not prominently displayed on campus, and there’s a greater emphasis on addressing student concerns within the university context.
The differences between these systems became apparent soon after my arrival in the U.S. At my law school, we have a Student Bar that serves as a liaison between students and the administration, without the overt political connections I was accustomed to in Nepal. In Nepal, student politics often spills over into national issues, sometimes resulting in campus lockdowns or talabandi over relatively minor disputes. This practice is virtually unheard of in American universities, where student representatives tend to concentrate on campus-specific matters.
While both systems have their merits, I believe the Student Council model offers several advantages. It allows for the development of leadership skills without direct political party interference, keeps the focus on student welfare and campus issues, and promotes a more inclusive environment for independent candidates. For Nepal’s educational institutions, adopting aspects of the Student Council system could lead to a more study friendly environment. This doesn’t mean completely dismantling the current structure, but rather refocusing it on student needs and campus governance.
