Gen Z Uprising and Internal Power Bloc Interests

– Prem Darshan Sapkota and Srishti Adhikari
26^th September 2025

In response to the two days of Gen Z led protests, Nepal appointed Sushila Karki as Prime Minister of the interim government on September 12, entrusting her with conducting elections following the dissolution of the House of Representatives. Her appointment marks the third instance within the past two decades that Nepal has turned to an interim leadership to navigate a political transition and ensure elections. This comes against the backdrop of persistent instability—Nepal has witnessed 14 changes in government over the last 20 years—sparking debates on whether the current electoral framework can deliver. In her Constitution Day address, Prime Minister Karki made it clear that the government’s major focus was managing the transition and handing over responsibility to an elected government through the elections of the House of Representatives. She further reaffirmed her commitment to have the actions of her government aligned with the spirit of the constitution. The celebration of Constitution Day itself served as a symbolic affirmation of her government’s adherence to the foundational republican order.

Despite Karki’s reassurance, political divisions and uncertainty remain. The major influential power blocs, including the Gen Z protest groups, have varied and at times contradictory interests. Some political groups, including the UCPN (Maoist) leader Prachanda, have raised the agenda of a directly elected prime minister, while monarchist factions remain dissatisfied, having sought to capitalize on the protests to push for a return of the monarchy and challenge the major parties that shaped republican Nepal through the Constituent Assembly.  At this point, while all positions are unclear, we have endeavored to outline the existing positions and potential stances of the major power players from the Gen Z protest groups, traditional parties, monarchists and the emerging parties and independent leaders from the last elections in Table 1.

Since the Gen Z movement is rooted in anger against corruption, corrupt political leaders, and the nexus of power that sustains them, the interim government faces the added responsibility of addressing these concerns within its limited mandate. Equally pressing is the need to investigate the violence and killings that occurred during the protests, ensuring justice for the families of those who lost their lives and for those who were injured. Beyond these immediate political and moral obligations, the government must also focus on restoring security and public order while fostering an environment where businesses can operate without fear. This is particularly urgent given that, by the second day of demonstrations, much of the unrest escalated into attacks on private property, businesses, and key government buildings across the country.

Political stability and inclusive democracy have been major concerns for Nepal, both during times of transition and during routine governance. The current trajectory has once again brought us to a point where diverse stakeholders, each with their own interests, are vying to position themselves as the nation’s saviors. Monarchists are the most visible challengers to Nepal’s republican democracy. The violence exhibited during the pro monarchy demonstration in March 2025 is an example of how far they are willing to push to make their demands credible again. Traditional parties, criticized by the younger generation over their failure to deliver on their promises of good governance and their reluctance to relinquish power have shown little inclination to reform and have denounced the dissolution of parliament as unconstitutional. The Gen Z protesters that have rested their hopes and dreams on the shoulders of this interim government are bound to be disappointed to a certain degree because the constitutional changes they have demanded are beyond the purview of this government.

The protests that toppled the government within two days were marked by two defining characteristics: the first day resulted in the highest single-day death toll in Nepal’s protest history while the second day saw the most extensive destruction of property across the country.  The interim government now has the responsibility to uncover the truth and provide justice to those killed and wounded during the protests, while maintaining law and order amid the chaos and violence perpetrated in the name of Gen Z protests. On one hand, the state must be held accountable and on the other, so too must the very protesters or mobs who made this change possible. While justice is paramount, this government also needs to be cognizant of fact that revenge does not feature in handling the grievances on either side.

With the scale of loss of life and property within two short days, it would be easy to lose sight of what this movement is truly about. Nepali citizens, youngsters in particular, want good governance and no corruption from their elected representatives and governments. At first glance and majorly, the protests were a call for anti-corruption and accountability, however, careful observations of the videos on social media and interactions with some young protesters reveal deep resentment towards economic inequality. The scale of damage to property and looting on the second day and the reactions to the destruction of the political leaders’ properties seen across social media hint at anger towards entrenched inequality. The “Nepobaby” trend that ruled social media in the weeks preceding the protests clearly shows that the lifestyles showcased and in some cases flaunted on social media by those related to political families have not only made the inequality more visible but also germinated seeds of discontent and anger in the younger generation, who now have the access to view the lifestyle but cannot afford it.

The protests were a direct result of rampant corruption at every state institution but the bringing together of generation particularly on the second day was also fueled by the language of hate that has permeated Nepali politics in the last decade. While the protests were a culmination of deep-seated frustration with government corruption, that frustration has not subsided. In the post protest environment, distrust and disillusionment with political parties remain palpable, particularly among the younger generation. Even more so, there is undeniable hostility towards what the Gen Z have termed Jholeys – the political party followers blind to the misdeeds of their political leadership because they reap benefits from their political association. More than a week into the protests, there are clear indications that the networks of the same political patronage remain strong. However, this aversion to political parties, particularly considering the upcoming election, is a major concern because in a parliamentary democracy, there are no alternatives to political parties. Furthermore, the categorization of all political party cadres as “jholeys” strips these individuals of their agency and their right to pluralistic thoughts and ideals- both essential components of democracy.

The change we have witnessed in Nepal in the span of two days is unheard of in both national and international circles. Therefore, it is unsurprising that in the weeks following the revolt, multiple conspiracy theories have made the rounds in social media as well as smaller informal group conversations.  Even the ousted Prime Minister has alluded to infiltration and possible outside hand in the number of casualties reported on the first day. Conspiracy theories on geopolitical interests from our neighbor to the south and even western powers have also been a major topic of discussion in smaller circles and social media chatrooms. However, there is a glaring lack of evidence to support such claims. Whether substantiated or not, conspiracy theories are certain to impact debates on future direction of the country. It is also important to ensure that these conspiracy angles do not detract attention from the anger and demands of the Gen Z movement. While infiltrators were acknowledged by the organizers themselves, it is indisputable that Nepalis turned up on the streets on September 8 and 9 and the protests erupted across the country. The rage against corruption, inequality and poor governance was very real.

Social media played a pivotal part in the Gen Z protests, from social media acting as a platform to organize the protests to the use of Discord in bringing youth together virtually to vote on who should lead the interim government. However, the use of social media comes with its share of misinformation. In the days following the protests, we have seen a wide range of misinformation, from false news to incite the masses, to tampered information to call for attacks and circulate conspiracy theories. Given the changes and the level of uncertainty, misinformation poses a significant risk as social media algorithms are likely to feed specific information to specific groups which will likely result in greater polarization of opinions and increased trust in misinformation. While some fact checking institutions have been working on busting misinformation, they have limited reach and capacity. Thus, in the days ahead, creating spaces for social dialogue both to clear up misinformation and build a bridge across polarized sections is going to be crucial.

The tasks ahead of the interim government are tall—besides providing justice to the affected during the two-day protests and holding elections within the six-month timeframe, it is also incumbent on this government to at least break the nexus of corruption between the political parties, businesses and the bureaucracy. The other glaring issue is the economy and how attacks on businesses are likely to impact both jobs in the immediate run and investments in the longer run. Since capital in a country like ours only flourishes in an environment of stability and security, the government needs to ensure that investors and businesses view this instability as an aberration and not the norm for the upcoming days.

Nepal’s political past provides both silver linings and warning bells as we move forward. Time and again we have witnessed warring factions make peace and become a part of the new political order, whether it be the way the Maoists made their way into mainstream politics after 2006 or the way political parties worked with a constitutional monarchy after the fall of the Panchayat system. Revenge has so far not featured as an inherent character of Nepali politics and this needs to be continue if we are to unleash the potential for change. However, our track record for justice leaves a lot to be desired. The September protests were not the first upheaval we have witnessed; truth seeking commissions have been formed in the past to account for the wrongdoings of both state and non-state actors. Despite nearing two decades since the Peace Agreement, the Truth and Reconciliation Commission has yet to deliver justice to the victims. In order to help those affected get closure, it is important that the probe committee formed to investigate the protest deaths do better.

Although political parties currently remain on the sidelines, a future for Nepal cannot be envisioned without the participation of political parties, both “traditional” and “new”. Given the broad political spectrum and the socio-ethnic diversity of the country, the demands placed on the interim government are going to varied and often contradictory.  Based on Nepal’s past experiences and the current scenario, the safest path forward would be to follow the constitutional principles of inclusivity, federalism and democratic republicanism. Any constitutional amendments, beyond those required for holding timely elections, are better off coming from a legitimately elected parliament in the spirit of the constitution made by the Constituent Assembly. Prolonging the transition risks inflicting lasting damage on Nepal’s inclusive democratic framework.