Hamro avaaj dabaaun sakinna”, which translates to “our voice can’t be suppressed”, was among the popular slogans raised during the Gen Z protests in Nepal. The demonstrations have left 19 people dead and over 100 injured, most of them young.
While Nepal is no stranger to protests and demonstrations against the government, never before have they been led by a certain age group like Gen Z. The United Nations and some foreign missions in Nepal have released statements mourning the deaths and condemning violence and the use of excessive force by the State.
What was supposed to be a peaceful demonstration against the government ban on 26 social media platforms, including popular apps such as Facebook, X, and WhatsApp, turned violent. And now, Prime Minister KP Sharma Oli’s government is being called the Hatyara Sarkar or Killer Government. Home Minister Ramesh Lekhak has resigned on moral grounds.
Although the government removed the social media ban on Tuesday, the protests have only intensified. Protesters have torched the houses of Oli, President Ram Chandra Poudel, and information minister Prithvi Subba Gurung in Lalitpur. They also pelted stones at the residence of Deputy Prime Minister and Finance Minister Bishnu Paudel.
In a latest development, Oli has also resigned from office.
Why the ban?
On 28 August, the government asked social media platforms to register with the telecom authority of Nepal under the Directive on Regulating the Use of Social Media, 2023, with a one-week deadline. None of the major platforms paid heed to the directions, and on 4 September, the government decided to put a blanket ban on their operations in Nepal. Open source data reveals that Nepal has 16.5 million active internet users. In a country of 30 million, the government’s decision to ban it was seen as a form of censorship and restriction of access.
As economies become closely interlinked to digital transformations, social media has become a way to earn extra income, irrespective of age limit. Nepal has seen a rise in social media influencers, many of whom are Gen Z. With millions of Nepalis settled abroad, social media is also the tether that connects them to their families. These apps are not without problems, but their positive impact outweighs the negatives. They empower voices that would otherwise go unheard. Nepali Gen Z see the Oli government’s attempts to restrict digital platforms as a dictate to silence their voices, sparking a movement demanding freedom of expression and transparent governance.
However, away from the axis of the government’s social media ban, there is an underlying story explaining why Oli has been so keen on banning the apps. If social media companies were to register in Nepal, they would have to comply with the local laws and regulations. While this is par for the course across countries, the Nepal government’s ban stems less from its desire to control and censor social media.
Also read: Bangladeshi Hindus are celebrating CAA extension. It’s their lifeline
KP Oli’s leadership
Prime Minister KP Sharma Oli’s governance style has been called ‘dictatorial’. The misuse of power and government institutions has also been a major allegation against him. What is also seen as problematic is Oli’s inability to face criticism. In the ongoing Gen Z protests, the youth are accusing the government of corruption, which has been rampant in recent years. Because social media empowers anyone to express their unhappiness with the government freely, these attacks are often taken personally by the leadership, which then wishes to curtail them. This has been a classic trait of Communist leadership globally, and it’s no surprise that Oli employed the same.
Therefore, if the social media platforms were to register in Nepal, the government could use them to censor and control user activities. It is reported that Elon Musk’s X, in a letter to Nepal’s Ministry of Communication, refused to register, citing ‘corruption and lack of transparency in the country’.
In 2015, Nepal came up with a new constitution, which led to protests in the southern Madhesh region, where the people share ancestry with India. The Madheshi people alleged that their political representation had been marginalised, and many were left without citizenship.
Oli has held a strong position on constitutional reforms with regard to the Madhesi representation and citizenship issues, and the issue of constitutional amendments continues to be a matter of political bargain while forming coalition governments. Within his own party, the Communist Party of Nepal (Unified Marxist-Leninist) or CPN-UML, he is known for not letting the new leadership take over.
Just a few months ago, former President of Nepal, Bidya Devi Bhandari, attempted to contest for the post of Chairman of CPN-UML—a position Oli has held for over a decade. Bhandari, who was Oli’s preferred choice for the largely ceremonial presidency, became Nepal’s first female and second-ever president since the country became a democracy in 2008. Her decision to run for party Chairman after completing her presidential term was seen as a direct challenge to Oli’s dominance, upsetting the internal power balance.
In response, the party abruptly cancelled her membership, effectively blocking her candidacy. This move clearly exposed Oli’s determination to cling to power and his unwillingness to allow any rival, even from within the ranks of his own party, to rise. The power quest has always been a problematic feature in his leadership.
Also read: Revival of India-China trade through Lipulekh brings hopes, concerns for border traders
Political instability
Nepal’s collective leadership across political parties has seemingly failed electoral mandates, making political instability prominent since the dawn of democracy in the country. Since the first democratic elections in 2008, no government has been able to complete a five-year term in office. In the last 17 years, Nepal has seen over a dozen prime ministers.
While elections are held every five years, almost all new governments are formed in a coalition with other parties. All these years, Prachanda, Oli, and Nepali Congress leader Sher Bahadur Deuba have continued to form convenient alliances that suit their needs but often do not represent the original electoral mandate.
For instance, Prachanda’s Communist Party of Nepal (Maoist Centre) came third in the 2022 general elections. Yet, he was made prime minister after he joined hands with the top two parties: the Nepali Congress and CPN-UML. While there is nothing wrong with forming a coalition as per constitutional mandates, a junior party without a central mandate leading the government puts the morals of democracy in question.
In the last three years, there have been three governments. An ageing leadership has barely allowed youth to come and take up key roles in the government. Meanwhile, political instability has paralysed the country’s institutions, policy framing, and development.
There is no doubt that Nepal faces significant challenges in employment and industrial growth as a landlocked country. Limited market access, poor infrastructure, and import dependence hinder industrial development and job creation. However, what is more worrying is the lack of planning to address such issues—and Gen Z might not be ready to tolerate it any longer.
The ongoing protests clearly reflect governance failures, rampant corruption, a leadership vacuum, and a blatant disregard for democratic values. Not very long ago, youth had taken to the streets in neighbouring Bangladesh against Sheikh Hasina, forcing her to resign and flee to India. Is the same happening in Nepal right now, with protestors entering the president’s house and vandalising it? In such a charged environment, the Nepali Congress might withdraw support from the government.
Those following the situation closely are left with two questions: Is this Nepal’s Arab Spring moment, and will it mark the rise of a new generation of leadership? The answers will likely unfold in the time to come.
Rishi Gupta is a commentator on Global Affairs. Views are Personal.
(Edited by Prasanna Bachchhav)