Nepal’s Political Crisis Deepens as Dispute Over Parliament Dissolution Blocks Interim Government Formation

Gen-Z protest movement, President, Army, and political parties locked in negotiations as six former prime ministers face calls to retire

KalimNews | September 12, 2025 | Kathmandu : Nepal’s political transition remains stalled as efforts to form an interim government led by former Chief Justice Sushila Karki have reached a deadlock. At the heart of the dispute is whether the House of Representatives should be dissolved before Karki is sworn in as prime minister. The issue has sharply divided key stakeholders—including President Ram Chandra Paudel, the Nepali Army, established political leaders, and the Gen-Z protest movement—leaving the country’s governance in limbo.

Although a broad consensus has emerged on appointing Karki to head a transitional administration, tripartite talks involving President Paudel, Army Chief Ashok Raj Sigdel, and representatives of the Gen-Z movement have failed to produce a breakthrough. Both Karki and protest leader Sudhan Gurung insist that Parliament must first be dissolved to ensure the mandate of the ongoing protests against corruption and political mismanagement is respected.

The constitutional roadblock lies in the fact that Parliament can only be dissolved at the recommendation of a sitting prime minister and with presidential approval. Past attempts to dissolve Parliament in 2020 and 2021 by then–Prime Minister KP Sharma Oli were overturned by the Supreme Court, which reinstated the legislature. President Paudel, cautious of repeating such constitutional controversies, has argued that the process must remain within a legal and institutional framework.

“The process must remain within the constitutional framework,” a source close to the president confirmed. Yet Karki has made clear she will not assume office without Parliament being dissolved first. Negotiations continue over two possibilities: whether Paudel should dissolve the House immediately before Karki’s swearing-in, or whether Karki should take office first and then recommend dissolution herself.

The deadlock comes against the backdrop of the resignation of KP Sharma Oli earlier this week, who stepped down from Baluwatar amid mounting public protests. Oli’s departure has accelerated calls for political renewal. The Gen-Z protest movement, which has led nationwide demonstrations, demands an interim government under Karki and a fresh electoral process.

In parallel, a significant internal debate is unfolding within Nepal’s major political parties. Second-generation leaders of the Nepali Congress, CPN-UML, Maoist Centre, and Unified Socialist are pressing for the formal retirement of six veteran prime ministers who have dominated the country’s political landscape for decades: KP Sharma Oli, Sher Bahadur Deuba, Pushpa Kamal Dahal Prachanda, Madhav Kumar Nepal, Jhalanath Khanal, and Dr. Baburam Bhattarai.

According to party insiders, preparations are underway for these leaders to issue a joint statement announcing their retirement from active politics, thereby opening the way for younger leadership. Some of the six have reportedly responded positively. Jhalanath Khanal is said to be ready to step back, while Dr. Baburam Bhattarai has also shown support for the initiative. Within the Nepali Congress, informal discussions suggest a willingness to adopt the proposal—provided leaders of other parties also agree.

Amid this push for generational change, President Paudel has intensified consultations with party leaders, constitutional experts, and the judiciary. His proposal reportedly includes invoking Article 61(4) of the Constitution to appoint Sushila Karki as prime minister, followed by the announcement of elections through a newly formed cabinet. According to officials at Shital Niwas, Paudel argues that once elections are declared, Parliament would automatically stand dissolved, thus resolving the procedural deadlock. Before floating this proposal, the president consulted with the Chief Justice, the Speaker, and the Chairman of the National Assembly.

However, this compromise formula has not yet gained traction. Both the Army and the Gen-Z protest movement remain firm that explicit dissolution must precede any new appointment. Gurung, representing the protestors, has publicly reiterated that his group will not negotiate directly with presidential advisors or legal experts, insisting instead on face-to-face talks with President Paudel himself. “We are not here to negotiate behind closed doors. Our demand is clear: dissolve Parliament first, or the old leadership will simply return,” he declared.

Sushila Karki has also stood her ground, refusing to accept the premiership without prior dissolution. “The people’s mandate is clear: Parliament must be dissolved, a new prime minister appointed, elections declared, and then the government must proceed with its duties,” she is reported to have said.

As the standoff deepens, the Nepali Army has warned that prolonged government paralysis could threaten national security. Military officials have conveyed to the president that if the deadlock is not resolved urgently, the Army may have no choice but to recommend the imposition of emergency rule. “Peace and security cannot be maintained without a functioning government. If the vacuum continues, emergency measures will be unavoidable,” a senior military official said.

On Tuesday, after Oli’s resignation, political leaders had floated a proposal to avoid both direct involvement in government and parliamentary continuation. This was immediately rejected by the protest movement. Since then, discussions have ranged from appointing Karki as a Member of Parliament to enable her premiership, to sequencing dissolution and election announcements. But the precise order—whether dissolution comes first or follows election declaration—remains the most contentious obstacle.

Nepal today stands at a political crossroads. The path forward hinges on whether its leaders can reconcile constitutional procedure with the street mandate of the Gen-Z movement, while avoiding a slide into emergency rule. Until then, the interim government remains on hold and the nation’s political uncertainty continues to deepen.