KATHMANDU, Dec 29: Founded nearly eight decades ago with the vision of establishing democratic socialism, the Nepali Congress (NC) has long stood at the forefront of Nepal’s political, social, economic, and cultural transformation. Today, however, the party finds itself mired in a prolonged dispute over active membership—an internal conflict that has pushed it into crisis and blurred its public image.
The uncertainty surrounding the party’s 15th General Convention has become a powerful symbol of this malaise. As the convention of the country’s oldest democratic party remains in limbo, questions are growing—not only about leadership timelines, but about the NC’s direction and identity itself.
Although the NC has historically enjoyed public trust for its democratic legacy, voices within the party increasingly accuse it of imitating rival political forces instead of strengthening its own ideological foundation. Leaders openly complain that in copying others, the NC has gradually eroded its distinct character.
Democratic in statute and constitution, the NC is now accused of functioning like a party without rules. Its failure to operate in line with its own statute has made even holding a General Convention a challenge. While the statute mandates a convention every four years, more than four years have passed since the 14th General Convention held in December—yet there is still no certainty over when the 15th will take place.
Way to solve India-Nepal border dispute
After prolonged internal disputes, the party announced that the 15th General Convention would begin on January 10. However, the distribution of active membership—a prerequisite for the convention—remains incomplete. Despite projecting itself as a mass-based party, the NC has adopted a leadership selection model resembling that of communist parties, where numerical dominance in membership largely determines leadership outcomes.
As leaders focus on securing favourable membership numbers to gain and retain power, the issue resurfaces before every General Convention. Even as membership figures rise, the party’s vote share in general elections has steadily declined, signalling a weakening bond with the electorate. This contradiction has triggered a deeper debate: Is the NC truly a mass-based party, or is it drifting toward a cadre-based structure without fully becoming one?
Since the 14th General Convention, the NC has added nearly 600,000 new active members at the grassroots level. Like communist parties, it has increasingly reshaped its organisational structure around membership strength. Yet, unable to build a disciplined cadre like the CPN-UML and equally unable to function as a genuine mass party, the NC appears stuck in an uncomfortable middle ground.
As a result, leaders say the party has become neither one nor the other. Senior leader Chandra Bhandari argues that the NC today lacks a clear ideological anchor. “There is only position, property, and the ego born out of ‘I’,” he said. “The NC of yesterday no longer exists—nor does that thinking.” He added that tolerance and mutual respect within the party have sharply declined. “The NC has neither the character of a mass party nor the discipline of a cadre,” he said, noting that the party is increasingly driven by events rather than ideology.
Ironically, while parties influenced by communist ideology are gradually adopting more democratic, socialist, and pluralistic organisational models, the NC appears to be moving in the opposite direction. Within the party, leaders decide who receives active membership, and those same members then elect leadership from the bottom up.
Central Committee member Urmila Thapaliya says active membership has begun to resemble the organised membership system of communist parties. Worse, she argues, such members are often accountable not to the organisation but to factions and individual leaders, deepening internal divisions. The NC, she adds, is increasingly accused of abandoning its socialist principles in favour of leader-centric politics. “It is wrong to think that responsibility ends after casting a vote at one stage,” she said.
Party leaders note that before 2046 BS, the NC issued symbolic “chhawanni” memberships. After 2046 BS, leadership selection through active members via General Conventions and Mahasamiti meetings became the norm, marking the party’s entry into professional politics. Following the 2062/63 movement, the NC also began forming ethnic organisations. While the statute previously made no explicit reference to caste or region, inclusive representation was ensured in practice. Today, however, caste and region are formally incorporated into the statute.
Despite allegations of organisational weakening, Mahasamiti member from Kathmandu Constituency–7, Sushil Bhatt, rejects that narrative. He says the party that fought the Rana regime to defend democracy belongs to everyone. “The NC is not a party of any one caste, class, or region,” Bhatt said. “It is the farmer’s plough, the worker’s hands, the youth’s dream, and the people’s hope. It is the voice of women, Dalits, Janajatis, Madhesis, and hill communities alike.”
Others are more critical. Kalikot-based NC leader Bhupendra Jung Shahi says active membership is increasingly distributed not to expand participation, but to capture the organisation. “Instead of bringing in new people, leaders enrol only their own supporters,” he said. “Leaders grow stronger, the organisation weaker, and the party itself more fragile.”
Another leader Bharat Khadka echoed the concern, saying membership distribution has become a tool for asserting dominance rather than reconnecting with the people. Stressing the need for inclusivity across regions, communities, and age groups, he said, “The NC must become policy-oriented, not leader-oriented. Membership should grow—but more importantly, the NC must reconnect with the people.”
