Three days ago, on March 5, Nepal concluded a peaceful election in which the Nepali Congress, UML, the Nepal Communist Party, the Madhesi parties, and several other traditional political forces were pushed to the margins. In contrast, the Rastriya Swatantra Party appears to have secured close to a two‑thirds majority so far, although vote counting is still ongoing. In simple terms, the communist parties have almost collapsed, the Congress has shrunk more than expected, and the Madhesi parties have lost significant ground.
The question of why Nepal’s traditional political parties were pushed aside in this election is not merely an explanation of electoral defeat. It is the cumulative outcome of more than three decades of repeated political behavior, governance patterns, and institutional weaknesses. For a long time, the country was governed through powersharing arrangements and networks of influence, which concentrated state resources in the hands of a few groups while the basic needs of ordinary citizens remained neglected. Parties showed concern for the public only during election periods, returning to the same old practices once the elections were over, and people were treated merely as a vote bank. From local committees to Singha Durbar, almost every state structure became heavily influenced by partisan interests and factional politics,weakening the neutrality, efficiency, and credibility of institutions. As a result, public trust in the old parties steadily eroded.
Malgovernance, persistent instability, and unfulfilled commitments created a widespread perception that the traditional parties were no longer capable of delivering meaningful change, even in the most remote villages. The repeated appearance of the same leaders in parliament and government for decades, the lack of opportunities for new leadership, and the dominance of entrenched factions made these parties appear tired and ineffective. Meanwhile, Nepal’s economy failed to become production oriented. Industries and factories were auctioned off under the banner of privatization. Foreign debt continued to rise, yet political leaders and their close networks grew wealthier. This deepened the public belief that the country was becoming poorer while political elites and public servants, who were supposed to be limited and accountable officers, were becoming richer beyond what citizens could imagine.
Similarly, Nepal’s education system suffered from nepotism, favoritism, internal politics, and financial influence, affecting institutions from schools to universities. Recommendations and personal connections became more important than merit and research, which fueled frustration among the younger generation. During moments of social crisis, such as cold waves, hunger, and shortages of essential medicines, the state’s slow and weak response made people feel abandoned. At the same time, political leaders continued to receive special privileges, including state- funded medical treatment abroad, which intensified the sense of inequality.
The growing criminalization of politics and the politicization of crime further weakened the moral foundation of the traditional parties. Individuals facing serious allegations were given party tickets, positions, and protection. Investigations were often absent, and impunity became normalized. The lack of good governance, limited transparency, and the absence of tangible improvements in daily life pushed voters to seek new alternatives.
Ultimately, all these factors, including power‑sharing politics, partisan capture of institutions, slow governance, economic mismanagement, nepotism, geopolitical insensitivity, corruption, and social inequality, combined to make the traditional parties appear unreliable, ineffective, and disconnected from the needs of the time. What made the situation even more alarming was the belief that judicial appointments were influenced by political recommendations and large sums of money. Many citizens came to feel that justice itself could be bought and sold, and that the independence of the judiciary had been compromised by political actors and brokers. This deepened the sense that the system was no longer fair or trustworthy. The accumulated frustration and disillusionment pushed voters away from the old political structures and toward new alternatives. As a result, the traditional parties found themselves marginalized in this election.
The reason the Rastriya Swatantra Party appears to have secured nearly a twothirds mandate in this election is largely rooted in the public’s longstanding dissatisfaction with the traditional parties. For almost 35 years, these parties were repeatedly given the responsibility to govern, yet many citizens felt that they failed to deliver meaningful reforms, good governance, or visible results. As a consequence, voters decided that this time they should give a new political force an opportunity, which led to a significant shift in voting behavior.
The new party also benefited from its effective use of modern communication tools and digital outreach, which helped it connect with a wide range of voters. In addition, many people believed that the previous government had treated Rabi Lamichhane unfairly during political controversies, which generated sympathy and increased support. The combination of frustration with the old parties and curiosity about a new alternative contributed to the party’s strong performance. In essence, the outcome reflects not only accumulated dissatisfaction but also a degree of spontaneous and emotionally driven public sentiment, a kind of political whim that shaped the final result.
In this political moment, it is truly painful to see individuals like Kulman Ghising and Rabindra Mishra lose. Both are regarded as capable, disciplined, and deeply committed to the public good in their respective fields. Rabindra Mishra in particular, a person known for his integrity,excellence in journalism, philanthropic spirit, and profound understanding of national issues and interests, failing to secure a place in Parliament feels not just like a personal loss but a loss for the country itself. It creates a genuine worry that the legislature may now lack a thoughtful, informed, and impactful voice.
Although this election has opened space for a new political force, I still feel concerned that the absence of experienced, honest, and nationally minded individuals could leave a gap in future policy debates and decision making. The emotional worry remains that without such principled figures, the quality of parliamentary discourse may suffer. In reality, just as chaff gets ground along with the grain, these individuals also ended up losing in the election.
At this critical moment for the country, the Rastriya Swatantra Party appears to be in a position where it may secure a two‑thirds majority, or come close to it, once the final results are announced. May the new government formed by this party fulfill the promises stated in its “CONTRACT PAPER.”
We will observe its work, decisions, and policies closely, and we will evaluate and analyze them as they unfold. On sensitive matters such as constitutional amendments, may the government give seriousness, transparency, and national interest the highest priority. On issues of geopolitics, national independence, and sovereignty, this party has not spoken clearly until now. May it now speak clearly, and may it make the protection of these matters its highest concern. May it remove the lack of transparency that is still seen within the party, and may it not repeat the carelessness or misuse of sensitive issues like citizenship, as the old parties did.
May the government be sensitive and responsible on matters related to nationalism. Even with a two thirds majority, may neither the party nor the government become authoritarian, and may the separation of powers and the balance of power among state institutions remain protected. May the authority to amend the constitution not be misused, and may unnecessary factionalism or internal conflict within the party not weaken the leadership. Most importantly, may the leadership remain patriotic toward the country and remain wise, responsible, and accountable to the people.
Keshav Gharti Magar
Comment