As the Nepal Army initiates formal talks with representatives of the Gen-Z protest movement, pressure is mounting on President Ram Chandra Poudel to find a solution within the framework of Nepal’s 2015 Constitution. The recent upheaval has raised profound questions about the durability of the current republican system and the path forward for a deeply divided society.
Following the unprecedented violence that erupted on September 9, political parties, civil society, and their affiliated organizations remained largely silent. Dozens of political leaders were targeted, with protestors torching homes and launching violent attacks that sent many into hiding. The security situation has now begun to stabilize under the command of the Nepal Army, which has taken full control of national security.
In the aftermath, key political forces including the Nepali Congress, CPN-UML, and CPN (Maoist Center) have issued coordinated press statements urging all parties to seek a resolution within the bounds of the 2015 Constitution. They have made it clear that they do not seek to lead or claim stakes in the upcoming interim government; their primary concern, they say, is the preservation of the constitutional order and the republican system established after 2006.
Ousted Prime Minister KP Sharma Oli, currently residing under army protection in Shivapuri, issued a public appeal emphasizing his commitment to the current political system. “This constitution gave the youth freedom of speech, movement, and the right to question authority,” Oli said. “It is my responsibility to protect this system. I am hopeful that there will be no compromise against the republic.”
Pushpa Kamal Dahal, Chairman of CPN (Maoist Center), echoed similar sentiments, noting that the demands of the Gen-Z movement are not aimed at dismantling the political system, but rather at ensuring accountability and change within it. “We must listen to the young generation,” he said, “but within the framework of the constitution.”
The largest parliamentary party, Nepali Congress, also expressed support for the protestors’ concerns but insisted that any political transition must honor the 2015 Constitution. On Thursday, student wings of major parties staged a symbolic protest in Kathmandu, defending the existing federal and secular democratic system.
A coalition of civil society organizations has also weighed in, calling on President Ram Chandra Poudel to act as a neutral guardian during the transitional process. In a joint statement, they said: “The newly formed civilian government must prioritize anti-corruption efforts and good governance—but this must happen within the current constitutional framework.” They also emphasized that the President should be directly involved in all negotiations and peace-building efforts.
The Nepal Army, now the central mediator in the crisis, is playing a critical role in brokering discussions. After preliminary talks with Gen-Z protest leaders, the Army plans to facilitate a final round of negotiations in the presence of President Poudel, who himself is now under Army protection.
While the formation of a new interim government appears imminent, significant uncertainty looms. Speculation is growing that the incoming administration may dissolve Parliament and commit to fresh elections within a year. However, whether this will happen within constitutional limits remains a key question.
If the new government respects the 2015 Constitution, a legal and relatively smooth transition through elections is possible. But if a new constitution is pursued, the process will be fraught with challenges. The current constitution was a hard-won compromise among diverse political forces, including the Madhesi and Janajati communities, following years of civil conflict and negotiation.
Some royalist factions are pushing to dismantle the current system—particularly federalism and secularism—in favor of a return to monarchy or centralized governance. However, this would likely provoke fierce resistance from historically marginalized groups who see the existing constitution as a symbol of their hard-earned inclusion.
As Nepal stands at a critical crossroads, the path ahead is both uncertain and complex. The political vacuum must be filled carefully. Without the support of major political parties—who still command significant power in local governments—the new government could face significant obstacles in governance, legitimacy, and long-term stability. Nepal’s 2015 Constitution, once hailed as a progressive step forward, now hangs in the balance.
