Over the past few weeks, Rajendra Lingden, chairperson of the Rastriya Prajatantra Party (RPP), has been under immense stress and anxiety as individuals outside his party attempted to hijack the leadership of the pro-monarchy movement. RPP remains the only significant party advocating for the restoration of the monarchy and Hindu state. As the party was preparing to launch a series of spring street protests, party member Nava Raj Subedi abruptly left to lead a separate pro-monarchy front—one informally led by businessman turned monarchy champion Durga Prasai. This unexpected move placed Lingden under pressure from both within his party and royalist sympathizers to align with the Prasai-led movement.
Senior party leaders Dhawal Shumsher Rana and Rabindra Mishra openly defied Lingden by joining Prasai, believing his approach offered a more forceful means to restore the monarchy and Hindu state. Although Lingden himself did not participate in the March 28 protests, he did not stop his cadres from doing so. As Lingden and his loyalists scrambled to uncover the architects behind the Subedi-Prasai alliance, suspicion grew within the RPP that former king Gyanendra Shah had covertly backed these non-political figures to undercut RPP’s influence. Despite being displeased with the actions of Rana and Mishra, Lingden chose not to escalate the issue, fearing it might lead to a party split.
Recently, Lingden breathed a sigh of relief after Shah invited him and other party leaders for a meeting, clarifying his preference for Lingden at the helm of the pro-monarchy campaign. According to RPP insiders, the former king also denied any role in the March 28 protests or contact with Prasai, despite a viral video showing Prasai exiting the former king’s residence. The former king reportedly clarified to Lingden that the Subedi-led committee had not been his initiative. His statements, along with the visible decline in momentum following the March 28 protests, suggest that RPP has regained control of the monarchist narrative.
Subedi is now under unofficial house arrest, and Jagman Gurung has replaced him as the leader of the movement. However, Gurung’s leadership has failed to gain traction. With Prasai in police custody, his largely non-ideological base has fractured, and his supporters have vanished from the streets. RPP continues to stage protests, but their size is diminishing. While the party insists that more demonstrations are coming, it appears unlikely that RPP will generate the kind of momentum necessary to compel the government into negotiations—at least in the short term.
Lingden remains under pressure from former king Shah to consolidate the growing base of monarchist supporters. Yet, there is a risk that other royalist factions may refuse to rally behind him. While the government has released Rana on health grounds, RPP is pushing for the release of Mishra as well. Meanwhile, Rastriya Prajatantra Party-Nepal, led by Kamal Thapa, has remained absent from the streets, though Thapa offers moral support to the movement.
Internal dynamics of RPP
Within the RPP, there are starkly divergent views on how to pursue the restoration of the monarchy and Hindu state. Lingden and his close allies advocate a pragmatic approach: acknowledging the party’s limited strength, they favor patience and calculated engagement. They argue that while street demonstrations can elevate the party’s visibility, they are unlikely to succeed without significant popular support.
On the other hand, leaders like Rana and Mishra believe the party must act decisively and launch full-fledged protests, even if they risk violence. During the March 28 protest, they tried to incite the crowd to march toward Singhadurbar or the airport, asserting that mere symbolic protests would not suffice. Despite his personal opposition, Lingden was reluctant to prevent his cadres from joining on moral grounds. Rana and Mishra have long expressed dissatisfaction with Lingden’s cautious leadership, believing that only an assertive street campaign can restore the monarchy.
A senior RPP leader said: “We don’t support figures like Prasai, but as a royalist party, we face a moral obligation to lend support to any group advancing our core agenda.” This moral quandary partly explains why both Rana and Mishra actively participated in the Prasai-led protests. Currently, RPP holds 14 parliamentary seats and, while it has accepted the 2015 constitution, it continues to advocate for a return to the monarchy. Still, many RPP leaders privately concede that restoring the monarchy is an uphill task and that the party should instead focus on reviving the Hindu state agenda.
Lessons for former king
In recent years, former king Shah has made visible efforts to reassert his relevance, frequently traveling both domestically and internationally. Though he has refrained from publicly endorsing any political party, there were reports of him meeting Prasai just prior to the March 28 protest—a claim he later denied in a meeting with RPP leaders. Within RPP, there is suspicion that Gyanendra may have played a role in setting up the Subedi-led committee, although both Shah’s secretariat and Subedi insist this was not the case.
Some in the RPP interpret these developments as a deliberate attempt by the former King to sideline their party. In hindsight, the March 28 protests have offered a critical lesson for Shah: aligning with volatile, unelected figures like Prasai can harm the monarchy’s reputation. In the aftermath of the violence, which included arson and fatalities, political parties and the government alike held the former king partially responsible. Shah has since expressed sorrow over the events.
A movement lacking clarity
While pro-monarchy protests seek the restoration of the monarchy and Hindu state, the movement suffers from a lack of clarity. There are lingering questions about Shah’s legacy and his son Paras Shah’s suitability for the throne. Many supporters avoid defending Shah and Paras’ past actions, insisting instead on the general principle of monarchy restoration. Even Subedi, in multiple media appearances, has stated that Paras is unfit to be king.
Moreover, the movement lacks a clear vision for what kind of monarchy it envisions. The rhetoric suggests a desire to dismantle current democratic structures and revert to a centralized monarchical system. Kamal Thapa has proposed that Parliament should determine the monarchy’s future role and position. Meanwhile, Shah has begun speaking more openly, calling for structural change while still professing support for democracy—an apparent contradiction that underscores the movement’s ideological disarray.
Can the course be reversed?
A close analysis of the demands made by royalist forces reveals a desire to completely reverse Nepal’s political trajectory. However, achieving this through street protests seems nearly impossible. The hope of achieving it through dialogue also appears unrealistic. As one veteran political scientist put it: “They want to restore the monarchy by creating anarchy like on March 28, but that will only push the country toward another civil war.” He added that any major instability could provoke a massive counter-movement from citizens who support the current system.
To their credit, RPP appears uninterested in fostering violence. Since March 28, the party has organized two peaceful demonstrations in Kathmandu. Yet, the dwindling size of these gatherings reflects the public’s limited appetite for radical political change.
RPP’s future path
Following his meeting with former king Shah, Lingden seems rejuvenated. The RPP has held two protests, although turnout continues to decline. The party is now focused on strategy, especially after the former king indicated his preference for RPP leadership in the monarchist movement. Shah’s assessment is that support is rising and that the RPP should unify royalist forces under its banner.
However, unity remains elusive. For now, RPP views the protests more as a platform to build momentum for the 2027 national elections than as a genuine push to reinstate the monarchy via street activism. With Prasai unlikely to be released anytime soon, the pro-monarchy movement—briefly commanding national and international attention—is beginning to fade. Unless royalist forces unite behind a clear vision, their campaign may fade into political irrelevance.
