As the government prepares for the March 5 elections, a deep mistrust between the government and major political parties threatens to derail the electoral process. Prime Minister Sushila Karki’s government faces growing skepticism over its ability to ensure election security and fairness amid the multiple pressures of Gen-Z protesters’ demands, missing police weapons, and declining police morale.
With ongoing investigations targeting former prime ministers and rising fears of renewed violence, political parties remain divided over whether credible and safe elections can be held under the current leadership. The first-ever meeting between Prime Minister Karki and major political parties since the Sep 8–9 Gen-Z protests, which took place on Oct 22, was dominated by one central question: can the government guarantee security for the March 5 polls?
While no major party opposes elections in principle, all demand credible assurances of foolproof security. The CPN-UML has taken the hardest line, declaring outright that elections under the current administration are “impossible.” The Nepali Congress (NC) has adopted a more cautious stance, supporting elections but insisting that the environment is not yet conducive.
Several developments have deepened public and political suspicion. Most notably, the Nepal Police has yet to recover over 1,000 weapons looted by protesters on Sept 9, while more than 4,000 inmates who escaped during the unrest remain at large. Parties fear the looted weapons could be used to intimidate candidates or disrupt campaigns.
Adding to the anxiety, many police posts destroyed during the protests remain in ruins, forcing officers to work from temporary shelters. Police morale is reportedly at an all-time low, as many feel that both the public and political leadership abandoned them during the violence.
Compounding the tension, self-proclaimed representatives of the GenZ movement have issued open threats to senior party leaders, while political cadres have begun trading verbal attacks online and in local rallies. Many fear these confrontations could escalate into physical clashes during the campaign period.
The Election Commission has stated that it needs at least 120 days to conduct elections after all contentious issues are resolved. Meanwhile, some Ge-Z protesters continue to press for demands the government cannot meet, such as a directly elected president. UML leaders have also accused the Home Minister of intimidating political figures, further eroding trust in the government’s neutrality toward political parties.
Political leaders have expressed frustration that they still cannot move freely in public or hold gatherings without fear of attacks. The Madhes region, in particular, remains volatile and vulnerable to communal violence.
The government’s credibility has also taken a hit following the Home Ministry’s controversial directive not to arrest individuals involved in arson and vandalism during the GenZ protests. Despite this, police in several districts have continued detaining suspects linked to killings and property damage, creating confusion about the government’s actual stance.
Traditionally, Nepal employs a layered security approach during elections, with the Nepal Police, Armed Police Force (APF), and National Investigation Department (NID) coordinating operations, and the Nepal Army serving as the outer ring of defense. However, shortages of security equipment and logistical challenges mean the government may struggle to ensure a robust security plan for the polls. Officials have hinted at seeking foreign assistance, though it remains unclear whether such support will arrive in time.
Further straining the political climate, the government has launched investigations into the properties of former prime ministers Sher Bahadur Deuba, Pushpa Kamal Dahal, and KP Sharma Oli, as well as their family members. The opposition views these probes as politically motivated attempts to discredit rivals ahead of the elections.
Police have already raided the homes of Deuba’s relatives in search of hidden assets, though no official findings have been released. Even Maoist leaders, who have supported Karki’s government, have criticized the timing of the investigations, warning that such actions could “poison the election environment.”
The UML’s concerns are particularly acute. Its Oli faces a travel restriction imposed by the Gauri Bahadur Karki probe panel in connection with the killing of 19 students during the Sept 8 Gen-Z protests. Oli has denounced the Karki government as “unconstitutional” and vowed not to participate in elections under her leadership. Meanwhile, UML leaders and Home Minister Om Prakash Aryal have been trading accusations, each blaming the other for “spoiling the election environment.”
Parties also admit they are organizationally unprepared for national elections. Many of their central and district offices were destroyed during the protests, along with vital records and documents. Several leaders remain displaced, still searching for housing after their homes were burned down.
“It might sound like a small issue, but many of our members are still dealing with trauma. Under these circumstances, preparing for an election feels impossible,” said one Congress leader about the current situation. Some leaders suspect that they are being pushed into premature elections deliberately in order to weaken traditional parties and make room for new political forces emerging from the protest movements.
Meanwhile, the three major parties—NC, UML, and Maoist Center—have announced plans to hold their respective general conventions, which could further complicate their preparations for the polls. Prime Minister Karki’s administration harbors its own suspicions. Branded “unconstitutional” by the UML, Karki fears that major political parties might boycott the polls or demand her resignation, undermining both the election’s legitimacy and her government’s authority.
While Karki’s outreach to political parties is a positive step, her preference for meeting second- and third-tier leaders rather than party chiefs has raised doubts about her sincerity. Ultimately, it is the top leaders—Deuba, Dahal, and Oli—who will decide whether their parties participate in the elections. Karki also faces a delicate balancing act: if she appears too conciliatory toward the established parties, she risks alienating the Gen-Z movement, which remains vocal and politically influential.
Adding yet another layer of volatility, several groups, including businessman turned political activist Durga Prasai, are preparing mass rallies demanding the restoration of the monarchy. Large-scale street protests in Kathmandu in the coming days could further destabilize the already fragile pre-election environment.
