Political turmoil in Nepal has reached a boiling point, marked by sweeping government action and a crisis of public trust as the country heads toward pivotal parliamentary elections in March 2026. In a dramatic move on September 28, 2025, Nepal’s interim government imposed a travel ban on former Prime Minister KP Sharma Oli and four high-ranking officials, all under investigation for their roles in the deadly suppression of the recent Gen-Z protests. The government’s decision, announced after a cabinet meeting at Singha Durbar, bars the former leaders not only from foreign travel but also from leaving the Kathmandu Valley without official approval.
The travel restrictions—recommended by a committee led by former justice Gauri Bahadur Karki—target former Home Minister Ramesh Lekhak, Home Secretary Gokarna Mani Duwadi, then-Chief of the National Investigation Department Hutaraj Thapa, and former Kathmandu Chief District Officer Chhabi Raj Rijal, alongside Oli. The commission, established to probe the events of September 8 and 9, 2025, concluded that these individuals must remain available for questioning at any time as the inquiry into the suppression of the Gen-Z movement continues, according to reporting from ANI.
The Gen-Z movement, which erupted in early September, was marked by unprecedented violence and state response. On September 8, police opened fire on demonstrators marching from Maiti Ghar to New Baneshwar, resulting in the deaths of 21 young protesters. The following day, chaos intensified as enraged crowds attacked major government buildings—including Parliament, Singha Durbar, and the Supreme Court—as well as the President’s Office, Prime Minister’s residence, and private homes of political leaders. The violence left a trail of arson and property destruction across Kathmandu. Businesses and the homes of prominent industrialists were not spared, underscoring the depth of public anger.
By the time order was restored, 74 people had lost their lives, most to bullet wounds in the head and chest, according to postmortem reports. Although police are authorized to fire below the knee to control crowds, the fatal injuries indicated a far more lethal response. The Home Ministry, according to sources cited by ANI, had instructed security forces to prevent protesters from breaching restricted zones near Parliament “at any cost,” and the Chief District Officer issued a direct order to shoot, following ministry instructions. One Home Ministry official, speaking anonymously, confirmed, “It was not only the Home Ministry and the Chief District Officer who were aware of the use of lethal force. The Prime Minister also was apprised about the situation and was aware about the situation.”
In the aftermath, the government unraveled quickly. Home Minister Ramesh Lekhak resigned on September 8, and Prime Minister KP Sharma Oli stepped down the following day, only to be whisked away by the army to a secure location. For several days, the whereabouts of some implicated officials remained a mystery. Yet, on September 27, Oli resurfaced at a party event in Bhaktapur, after about ten days out of the public eye. His remarks, reported by ANI, struck a defiant tone: “I am hearing about various gossip that is going on from the government. Blocking the passports, what have they thought of (me)? The government of publicity, that we will hand over this country and flee abroad, what are they thinking? We have to make this country. We have to make this country a constitutional, democratic country and bring politics back on track. We will bring the rule of law in the country.”
Oli further distanced himself from the violence, claiming ignorance of the true extent of the bloodshed. “KP Oli was in Baluwatar inquiring about the situation, (instructing to) avoid casualties, protect the properties and lives. After hearing about the news of firing, I had inquired about the situation that reached to the situation of firing the bullets. I was reported that only the rubber bullets were fired, not others. Later, I got to know that 14 people had died. I had asked them where they were shot? Head and chest. The Police had the instruction to shoot below the knee but were fired on the head, I was asking how they were shot on the head? How can we stop it? I had that mindful thinking about measures to prevent the bloodshed and unfavorable situation in the nation. Those who are liable for the incidents then they would blame it on KP Oli,” he said, attempting to portray himself as a leader committed to restraint.
The collapse of the Oli-led government set the stage for a new political chapter. On September 12, 2025, a new interim government took shape under the leadership of former Chief Justice Sushila Karki, with the Nepal Army playing a key role in brokering the transition. Karki wasted no time, recommending the dissolution of Parliament and calling for fresh elections on March 5, 2026. The move was widely seen as an attempt to restore order and legitimacy after weeks of unrest and government paralysis.
Yet, as Nepal prepares for elections, a deeper crisis of confidence is brewing—this time over the integrity of the electoral system itself. The country’s proportional representation (PR) system, introduced in 2006 to ensure greater inclusivity, has come under fire for being co-opted by political elites. According to Nepal News, the 275-member House of Representatives is split between 165 directly elected seats and 110 chosen through PR, but critics say the system has been abused to reward loyalists, relatives, wealthy individuals, and losing candidates.
Analysts and activists argue that the PR system, intended to empower marginalized groups, has instead entrenched the power of entrenched factions. The same names—often tied to party leaders—reappear on PR lists, fueling public cynicism. Industrialist Binod Chaudhary, Nepal’s only billionaire, has twice entered Parliament via PR, once with the UML and later with the Nepali Congress. “The problem arose because internal party democracy is weak. Leaders are not accountable for their choices, which has led to misuse of proportional representation,” Chandrashekhar Parajuli, Director of Nepal’s Democratic Resource Center, told Nepal News.
This pattern is not unique to one party. In the Nepali Congress, figures like Arzu Rana Deuba, wife of party president Sher Bahadur Deuba, and spokesperson Prakash Sharan Mahat have repeatedly entered Parliament through PR after losing direct elections. The Communist Party of Nepal (UML) has seen similar maneuvers, with MPs like Eknath Dhakal and Amritlal Rajbanshi switching parties but still securing PR seats. Ganesh Bishwakarma, secretary of Nepal’s Unified Socialist Party, lamented to Nepal News, “Only in the first Constituent Assembly was proportional representation used properly. After that, loopholes were exploited.”
The misuse of PR has not only undermined the system’s credibility but also contributed to the very unrest that toppled the government this fall. Protesters in the Gen-Z movement accused parties of blocking grassroots voices and perpetuating rule by elites. Observers warn that unless major parties recommit to using PR as intended—to represent women, marginalized groups, and excluded communities—Nepal risks further instability and deepening public disillusionment. With elections just months away, the stakes for Nepal’s democracy have rarely been higher.
As the dust settles from a season of upheaval, Nepal stands at a crossroads, its future shaped by the choices of both its leaders and its people. The coming months will reveal whether the country can break free from old patterns and chart a more inclusive, accountable path forward.