In the wake of Nepal’s Gen Z movement and the government’s announcement of parliamentary elections slated for March 5, 2026, the country’s political landscape is experiencing a seismic shift. The surge in new party registrations, combined with controversy over the neutrality of the interim government, has set the stage for what could be one of the most consequential elections in recent memory.
According to the Election Commission (EC), 23 new parties have applied for registration since the Gen Z movement gained momentum. This movement, which galvanized the nation’s youth and demanded sweeping reforms, has left a lasting imprint on Nepal’s political consciousness. As of November 12, 2025, only three of these parties—Shram Sanskriti Party led by Harka Sampang, Gatisheel Loktantrik Party led by Dinesh Raj Prasai, and Nagarik Unmukti Party Nepal led by Kabir Sop—have managed to complete the rigorous registration process and receive their official certificates. With these additions, the total number of recognized political parties in Nepal has reached a staggering 126, as reported by Republica.
But the proliferation of new parties hasn’t come without challenges. The EC’s procedural requirements are stringent: parties must submit a clear statute, a manifesto, regulations, and at least 500 supporter signatures from individuals who are not members of any other political party. At least 21 central committee members must authenticate the party’s leadership. Joint spokesperson Prakash Neupane told Republica that the commission meticulously reviews all submitted documents and sends supporter signatures to their respective districts for verification. For many aspiring parties, gathering 500 verified signatures and completing the necessary paperwork has proven a formidable hurdle.
The Ujyalo Nepal Party (UNP), for example, was asked by the EC on October 29 to provide additional documentation in accordance with the Political Parties Act, 2017. Other parties, such as the Rastriya Gen-Z Party Nepal and the Communist Party Nepal (Netra Bikram Chand ‘Biplav’), have also struggled to meet requirements like submitting central committee signatures, commitment letters, and detailed supporter lists. The EC has set November 16 as the deadline for parties to complete all procedures, warning that those who fall short will be barred from contesting the upcoming elections.
This surge in party registrations is widely seen as a reflection of growing political awareness and a hunger for alternative politics, especially among Nepal’s youth. Yet, as the deadline looms, it remains uncertain how many of these new parties will actually make it onto the ballot. "Most new parties have struggled to meet these requirements. Many could not gather 500 verified supporter signatures, while some lacked complete statutes or the required number of central members, stalling their registration," Republica reported, highlighting the procedural bottlenecks that have become a defining feature of this election cycle.
Amid this backdrop of political ferment, questions about the neutrality of Nepal’s interim government have come to the fore. The government, formed in the aftermath of the Gen Z uprising and led by former chief justice Sushila Karki, was intended to be a technocratic caretaker administration tasked solely with overseeing the transition to new elections. However, controversy erupted when Energy, Water Resources and Irrigation Minister Kulman Ghising was revealed to be politically backing the newly formed UNP, even though he is not formally listed in the party’s structure.
Ghising’s involvement has sparked a debate about the moral and ethical obligations of interim ministers. Critics argue that his behind-the-scenes support for the UNP undermines the perceived neutrality of the citizen government. Geja Sharma Wagle, a political analyst, minced no words: “The Gen Z movement where at least 76 people sacrificed their lives, was not to put someone affiliated to a political party in the government. It is not moral for a person still in the government to form a political party with a plan to contest the upcoming election,” Wagle told The Kathmandu Post.
Supporters of Ghising, however, maintain that it’s premature to judge his intentions. Ashutosh Yadav, representing the Digital Dastak faction of the Gen Z alliance, called for pragmatism. “It is true that the Gen Z movement and the subsequent government did not want any political party in the government,” Yadav said. “But, unless Ghising’s name is on paper, it would be unwise to comment on him.”
Officially, the UNP is led by former energy secretary Anup Kumar Upadhyay, who has stated that Ghising will resign from his ministerial post before the election code of conduct takes effect and will actively participate in the election. At present, Ghising heads three ministries: Energy, Water Resources and Irrigation; Physical Infrastructure and Transport; and Urban Development. Upadhyay has argued that the resignation of one minister will not disrupt the electoral process, emphasizing that “the primary responsibilities for the election lie with the Prime Minister’s Office, the Ministry of Home Affairs, and the Election Commission. Since the administrative mechanisms supporting these bodies will remain active, the departure of one minister will make no difference.”
The situation is further complicated by the fact that, at the time of forming the interim government, it was generally understood that none of its members would contest in the upcoming elections. However, a source close to Ghising told The Kathmandu Post that he was considered an exception due to his expertise in the energy sector and his initial reluctance to join the government. The source claimed that Prime Minister Karki herself suggested Ghising not resign immediately and consult about party registration before the UNP was formally established.
Prime Minister Karki, who pledged to keep her Cabinet lean with just 10 ministers, now finds herself in a delicate position. Her chief advisor, Ajaya Bhadra Khanal, acknowledged the absence of any legal provision barring members of an election government from contesting polls but conceded that “linking a representative of a citizen government to a political party may raise moral questions.” Former home secretary Umesh Mainali echoed this sentiment, stating, “The citizen government was formed to hold the elections, and it was not expected that its members would also contest, and it would not be moral to step down just ahead of the vote.”
The debate over Ghising’s political role underscores a broader tension in Nepal’s evolving democracy: how to balance the desire for technocratic neutrality with the reality of political ambition and public scrutiny. As the election approaches, the choices made by ministers like Ghising—and the response from the public and political establishment—could set important precedents for future transitions.
With the deadline for party registrations fast approaching and the interim government’s neutrality under the microscope, Nepal stands at a crossroads. The coming months will test the resilience of its democratic institutions and the ability of its leaders to navigate the complex interplay of principle and pragmatism.
