Nepal’s democratic journey has been shaped by periods of promise and turmoil, marked by the tensions between monarchical rule, political instability, and democratic progress. Since 1951, democracy has been both a tool for positive change and a system manipulated for vested interests. This essay examines the use and misuse of democracy in Nepal from 1951 to 2025, focusing on key events and trends.
In 1951, King Tribhuvan, with India’s support, ended the Rana oligarchy, marking the introduction of parliamentary democracy. A new constitution in 1959 established a constitutional monarchy and multi-party system. However, in 1960, King Mahendra dissolved the newly-elected parliament, citing instability, and took control, beginning a period of autocracy. This marked the misuse of democracy, as Mahendra ruled under the pretense of "guided democracy."
In 1961, King Mahendra introduced the Panchayat system, a party-less political system that allowed him to hold absolute power. This system undermined the democratic aspirations of the Nepali people by suppressing political freedom and eliminating opposition. The Panchayat regime saw violent repression of movements that sought multi-party democracy, and the ideals of liberty and equality were severely compromised. Despite the promises of democracy, the Panchayat era lasted until the early 1990s, entrenched by the King’s autocratic control.
In 1990, a popular movement known as the Jana Andolan (People's Movement) erupted against the Panchayat system. This movement, driven by widespread public dissatisfaction with autocratic rule, was supported by multiple political forces, including the Nepali Congress, communist factions, and civil society. After weeks of protests and strikes, King Birendra, the successor of King Mahendra, was forced to reinstate multi-party democracy and adopt a new constitution in 1990.
The Jana Andolan and the subsequent restoration of democracy were celebrated as a victory for the Nepali people. The 1990 constitution established a constitutional monarchy with a multi-party parliamentary system, and for the first time in decades, Nepal experienced a semblance of democratic governance. However, despite the return of democratic institutions, Nepal’s political system remained fragile. Corruption, political factionalism, and weak governance plagued the democratic system, leading to frequent changes in government and a lack of continuity in policymaking.
In 2001, Nepal was rocked by the royal massacre, in which King Birendra and most of the royal family members were killed by the crown prince, Dipendra, under unclear circumstances. This tragic event led to the ascension of King Gyanendra, who soon began to consolidate power and undermine the democratic system that had been established in the 1990s. In 2005, Gyanendra took the unprecedented step of dissolving the parliament and assuming direct control of the government, citing the failure of political parties to address the growing Maoist insurgency in the country.
King Gyanendra’s move to restore absolute monarchy was a grave misuse of democracy, as it disregarded the will of the people and sought to perpetuate autocratic rule under the pretense of national security. His decision to suspend political freedom, arrest political leaders, and crackdown on dissent further alienated the population. The political crisis deepened, and the Maoist insurgency, which had begun in 1996, gained significant momentum during this period.
The Maoist insurgency, which aimed to overthrow the monarchy and establish a communist republic, gained significant support, especially from rural areas. The decade-long conflict escalated into a civil war, causing widespread death and suffering. By 2006, after years of protests and internal unrest, King Gyanendra was forced to restore parliament, ending the monarchy’s control. The Maoists joined the peace process, and a new political settlement emerged, eventually abolishing the monarchy and creating a federal democratic republic in 2008. The 2006 Jana Andolan II marked the victory of democratic forces, launching an era of republicanism in Nepal.
In the post-monarchy era, Nepal’s political landscape has been shaped by the aspirations of marginalized groups, including ethnic minorities, women, and indigenous communities, seeking greater political representation and inclusion. However, the 2015 constitution, despite its promises of federalism, secularism, and inclusivity, has failed to fully address the multicultural nature of Nepal’s society. Instead of fostering a truly inclusive and progressive system, the constitution has largely been shaped by a dominant ethnic group, sidelining the diverse demographic reality of the nation. This has perpetuated a system that remains disconnected from the aspirations of many, undermining the goals of a federal republic. Political instability, corruption, and the exploitation of the system by entrenched elites have further hindered the implementation of a truly inclusive governance structure, deepening regional tensions and challenges in local governance. The constitutional framework, while offering federalism, has yet to realize its promise of a just and inclusive democracy for all.
From 1951 to 2025, Nepal's democratic journey has been a complex and evolving process, characterized by periods of hope, struggle, and setbacks. In 1951, the country took its first steps towards democracy with the end of the centuries-old autocratic Rana rule. This was a moment of optimism, but the political system quickly became mired in instability. The 1990 People’s Movement (Jana Andolan) was a major turning point, leading to the end of the partyless Panchayat system and the restoration of multi-party democracy. The movement's success brought hope for a more democratic and inclusive society. Yet, political leaders failed to deliver on promises of prosperity, and the new political system was plagued by corruption, inefficiency, and power struggles.
The 2006 People's Movement (Jana Andolan II) marked another major milestone, leading to the abolition of the autocratic monarchy and the establishment of a federal democratic republic. This moment was seen as a victory for the people, who had long struggled for a more equitable system. However, the transition from monarchy to republic did not bring the stability or prosperity that many had hoped for. Political instability, factionalism, and a lack of effective governance continued to undermine the country’s democratic aspirations. Leadership changes became frequent, and the promises made by political elites remained unfulfilled, further fueling frustration among the public.
Corruption, weak governance structures, and the concentration of power in the hands of a few elites have consistently hampered Nepal's democratic development. The country has faced challenges in ensuring political accountability, delivering services to citizens, and creating an inclusive society where all voices are heard. Despite these obstacles, the resilience of the Nepali people has been a defining feature of the democratic process. Their ongoing commitment to a fairer, more just, and stable system continues to drive efforts to address these deep-rooted challenges. The determination to build a democracy that represents the needs and aspirations of all citizens remains strong, even as the country grapples with political and economic hurdles.
While Nepal's democratic journey has been marked by both progress and setbacks, the vision for a more inclusive and effective democracy endures, driven by the collective will of the Nepali people to create a system that fosters equality, justice, and stability.