Kathmandu
Wednesday, September 24, 2025
Three years of the House of Representatives lost amid ruling-opposition spectacle
KATHMANDU: On the first day of the Gen Z movement, September 8 the main target was the Federal Parliament building in New Baneshwar. This building housed the 275-member House of Representatives and the 59-member National Assembly.
The House of Representatives is the country’s highest elected body. Ironically, the building of the very house elected by the people became the focal point of the latest youth movement. Before vandalizing the courts, Singha Durbar, and Sheetal Niwas, protesters set fire to the Parliament building.
In accordance with the movement’s demands, on September 12 based on the recommendation of Prime Minister-designate Sushila Karki, President Ram Chandra Paudel dissolved the House of Representatives that very night. A date was set for the next parliamentary election on March 5, 2026.
The House of Representatives elected on November 20, 2022, failed to play an effective role in enacting essential laws for the implementation of the constitution, overseeing the government, and raising public-interest issues.
Instead, the House became a field for disputes and quarrels between the ruling and opposition parties and for mutual obstruction. Unable to meet public expectations, the House was dissolved with two years of its term still remaining.
Pradeep Gyawali, a leader of the Gen Z rebellion, says, “The old momentum of Parliament, the same faces present there, and their style wouldn’t work. We had demanded the dissolution of Parliament so that it would operate according to the mandate given by the Gen Z movement, and that demand was fulfilled.”
Indeed, in recent years, the federal parliament had become more of a stage for political obstruction than policy-making. From major parties to minor ones, there was a growing trend of presenting their demands and grievances in the House rather than on the streets. This seriously affected lawmaking, government accountability, and the health of democracy.
After becoming the main opposition, Nepali Congress, as the largest party in the House, adopted a policy of parliamentary obstruction, raising the issue of cooperative fraud.
On May 24, 2023, standing at the parliamentary rostrum, CPN (Maoist Centre) MP Lekhnath Dahal stated, “During Oli’s tenure, even when installing a water fountain in Pashupatinath, they claimed gold but used brass, committing corruption.”
At that time, Dahal was a ruling-party MP. He made this allegation while speaking during the discussion on the Fiscal Year 2023/24 policy and program.
Interestingly, on that day, even CPN (UML) MPs were unaware of what Dahal had said. Two days later, on May 26, 2023, the parliamentary session saw an uproar over his statement.
UML protested by obstructing the parliament. Padam Giri, then chief whip of UML, demanded a response from the Prime Minister. Despite three attempts to postpone the session to reach a consensus, the efforts failed. The following day, May 27, 2023, only after Prime Minister Pushpa Kamal Dahal responded to the House did the obstruction end.
On March 4, 2024, the ruling coalition of the CPN (Maoist Centre) and Nepali Congress collapsed. The then-Prime Minister Dahal sidelined the Nepali Congress, collaborating with CPN (UML) and the Rastriya Swatantra Party (RSP) to continue the government.
After becoming the main opposition, Nepali Congress, as the largest party in the House, adopted a policy of parliamentary obstruction, raising the issue of cooperative fraud.
Rabi Lamichhane, president of RSP, was accused of being involved in embezzlement of cooperative savings. Nepali Congress demanded the formation of a parliamentary inquiry committee and obstructed parliament from April 9, 2024, onward. Amid the parliamentary obstruction, the then-Prime Minister Dahal had to hold a vote of confidence with the help of marshasl on May 20, 2024.
Nepali Congress lifted the obstruction only after an agreement to form a parliamentary inquiry committee was reached on May 28, 2024.
After the general election on November 20, 2022, the first session of parliament began on January 9, 2023. While the sixth session was ongoing, the Gen Z rebellion led to the dissolution of the House.
During this period, the parliament frequently faced obstruction. Both old parties, Nepali Congress and CPN (UML), as well as new parties like RSP, obstructed the House.
Recently, demanding an investigation into the “Visit Visa” case, RSP and the Rastriya Prajatantra Party had been protesting in the House for more than three months. Speaking about the history of parliamentary obstruction, parliamentary affairs expert Hari Bahadur Thapa says, “Since the restoration of multiparty democracy in 1990 and the reinstatement of Parliament, continuous parliamentary obstruction has been a recurring phenomenon.”
Issues that triggered parliamentary obstruction
On July 3, 2023, a book release program for Sardar Pritam Singh, affiliated with the Indian National Congress, was held in Kathmandu. During the event, then-Prime Minister Dahal’s remarks created uproar in Parliament. Dahal said at the program, “…He worked very hard to make me Prime Minister. He went to Delhi many times and continuously consulted with party leaders in Kathmandu.”
The then-main opposition UML claimed the Prime Minister’s statement questioned the country’s sovereignty and obstructed parliament. UML blocked the sessions on July 5, 7, and 9, 2023.
On July 10, 2023, the obstruction ended after the then-Prime Minister Dahal responded to the questions raised by the opposition.
Earlier, the parliamentary session on June 4, 2023, also could not proceed. UML had obstructed parliament due to the then-Prime Minister Dahal’s recent visit to India. During that visit, it was publicized that Dahal suggested, in case Nepal obtained a route to Bangladesh, the possibility of exchanging Lipulekh, Limpiyadhura, and Kalapani with India.
UML demanded a response on this issue, causing a one-day obstruction. On June 5, 2023, after Dahal responded, the parliamentary deadlock was resolved.
From July 26, 2023, to August 21, 2023, parliament could not function for about a month. The then main opposition UML obstructed meetings demanding a parliamentary committee to investigate the smuggling of a quintal of gold from Tribhuvan International Airport.
The ruling side insisted that existing mechanisms investigating the case should be allowed to work. Once an agreement to form the committee was reached, the obstruction ended from August 22, 2023.
In addition, there were many other instances of parliamentary obstruction. As soon as parties reached the opposition, they adopted a strategy of obstructing the House to pressure the government into fulfilling their demands. Records in the parliamentary secretariat show that the largest party in the House, Nepali Congress, along with UML, Maoist Centre, and RSP, repeatedly obstructed parliament on various pretexts.
From March 26–29, 2025, opposition parties including Maoist Centre, RSP, and RSP continuously obstructed parliament. They did not allow the House to function in protest of the removal of Kulman Ghising from the position of Executive Director of the Nepal Electricity Authority.
Opposition parties demanded that Prime Minister KP Sharma Oli respond at the rostrum regarding this matter. On March 31, 2025, during the parliamentary session, PM Oli explained that it was normal for departmental ministers to transfer, place, seek clarification, issue caution/warning, or dismiss employees if they were not loyal, and only then did parliament resume its proceedings.
Recently, opposition parties, including the Maoist Centre, had been obstructing parliament since May 27, 2025, demanding a parliamentary investigation, alleging human trafficking through the collection of large sums in the name of “Visit Visas.”
After 11 days of obstruction, the Maoist Centre reached an agreement with the ruling parties, UML and Congress, allowing parliament to function. Following this agreement, the government formed an inquiry committee led by former Secretary Shankardas Bairagi, but RSP and RPP continued to protest in parliament, claiming the committee was invalid.
Despite the protests, the ruling side kept pushing to conduct parliamentary proceedings. During this period, Speaker Devaraj Ghimire faced sharp criticism from opposition leaders for allegedly acting under government or certain party influence and failing to fulfill his role impartially. He was also criticized for failing to restrain arbitrary executive actions and for not making the government accountable to citizens.
As parties repeatedly obstructed parliament over various issues, lawmaking and matters of public concern were neglected, increasing public frustration. Were the issues that caused these obstructions serious and legitimate? Jagat Nepal, a parliamentary affairs expert and Associate Professor at Tribhuvan University, says political parties established a harmful precedent.
“The trend of obstructing parliament, claiming it as pressure to fulfill their demands, undermines the people’s forum, which is wrong,” Nepal says. He suggests that with a new parliament, parties should reach national consensus on avoiding such obstruction.
Partisan competition in obstruction
The House of Representatives is the forum to discuss policies, laws, and issues directly affecting the people. Its responsibility also includes holding the government accountable. However, the House increasingly focused on political maneuvering rather than public concerns. Except for a few instances, parliamentary meetings were frequently obstructed over minor and unnecessary issues.
The dissolved House saw the most obstruction from CPN (UML).
Parties collectively played a role in immobilizing the House, preventing it from focusing on matters of public concern. As a result, parliament failed to perform as expected—it could neither enact necessary laws nor rein in arbitrary government actions or hold the government accountable to public expectations. Even ten years after the promulgation of the new constitution, necessary laws for its implementation could not be passed.
The dissolved House saw the most obstruction from CPN (UML). UML blocked parliament for 15 days over issues including the “Water Fountain Case,” the then Prime Minister Dahal’s remarks at an Indian citizen’s book release, and the smuggling of a quintal of gold.
Nepali Congress, the largest party in the House, also repeatedly obstructed parliament. Records from the parliamentary secretariat show that Congress blocked sessions for 11 days, demanding the formation of a special parliamentary committee to investigate cooperative fraud.
Similarly, the third-largest party, the Maoist Centre, along with RSP and RPP, obstructed parliament for four days after Kulman Ghising was removed from the Nepal Electricity Authority.
Later, these parties collectively obstructed the House for 11 days from May 27, 2025, alleging human trafficking and demanding the resignation of then-Home Minister Ramesh Lekhak. Even after the Maoist Centre agreed with the government and withdrew from obstruction, RSP and RSP continued to boycott parliamentary meetings.
Sudarshan Khadka, former Secretary of the Federal Parliament Secretariat, says differing views in parliament should be reconciled. “Obstruction and protest weaken parliament, so the opposition’s concerns should be addressed by the government, Speaker, and ruling parties to strengthen the House,” Khadka states.
Obstruction in the House of Representatives since 2022
| Party | Major Reason for Obstruction | Duration of Obstruction |
| CPN-UML | Water Fountain Case; the then Prime Minister Prachanda’s remarks at Indian citizen’s book release; Quintal gold smuggling | 15 days |
| Nepali Congress | Demand for parliamentary investigation committee on cooperative fraud, targeting then-Home Minister Rabi Lamichhane | 11 days |
| Maoist Centre, RPP, RSP (Joint obstruction) | Removal of Kulman Ghising from Nepal Electricity Authority | 4 days |
| Maoist Centre, RPP, RSP (Joint obstruction) | Alleged human trafficking via Visit Visa; demand for the then Home Minister Ramesh Lekhak’s resignation | 11 days |
| RSP (Solo) | Alleged human trafficking via Visit Visa; demand for the then Home Minister Ramesh Lekhak’s resignation (boycott) | Over 100 days of session boycott |
Note: Compiled from various parliamentary reports.
Obstruction contrary to House rules
Section 11 of the House of Representatives Rules of Procedure provides for “adjournment motions.” Critical issues in parliament can be debated and concluded through such motions. However, parties skilled at obstruction ignored this provision.
According to Subsection 1 of Rule 74, a member may submit an adjournment motion with the Speaker’s permission to discuss matters of urgent public importance. If the motion is not in accordance with the rules, the Speaker may reject it; if compliant, it is approved. The rules also require that the Secretary be notified two hours before the session begins. Rule 75 specifies that only incidents within the immediate responsibility of the Government of Nepal can be addressed through adjournment motions.
Whether it was UML obstructing over the Water Fountain Case, PM Dahal’s alleged agreement during the India visit, the quintal gold smuggling, Congress demanding investigation of cooperative fraud, or the Maoist Centre, RSP, and RPP obstructing over Visit Visa and Kulman Ghising’s removal, all these should have been addressed through adjournment motions. Instead, parties sought to directly immobilize the House to display their influence.
Parliamentary expert Hari Bahadur Thapa says parties’ initial speeches and subsequent obstruction violated parliamentary rules and their own procedural regulations. “If no adjournment motion is filed, there are options like resolution proposals, public importance motions, or ministry-related questions. Obstructing parliament alone is not correct,” Thapa explains.
24 laws passed in three years
A bill becomes law only after passing both houses of the federal parliament. From the six sessions of the House of Representatives elected on November 19, 2022, and functioning until September 7, 2025, only 24 laws were enacted. Additionally, 10 other laws were passed to implement three fiscal years’ budgets, according to federal parliamentary spokesperson Ekram Giri.
With the dissolution of parliament, 30 bills related to civil service, school education, land, police, and other matters necessary for constitutional implementation became inactive. At the end of the current session of the National Assembly, five bills pending there also remained unfinished. Giri notes that bills originating in the House of Representatives automatically became inactive upon dissolution.
The first responsibility of parliament is lawmaking, followed by forming governments, passing budgets, and holding the government accountable. However, debate on important policies and bills had largely ceased. For example, the Constitutional Council Bill, which originated in the National Assembly, was thoroughly discussed in the House committee and passed by the full House. It allowed meetings of the six-member Constitutional Council to proceed with only three members present, and decisions could be made by just two members—provisions that constitutional expert Chandrakant Gyawali says contradict the spirit of the Constitution.
The House often passed bills without amendments, despite sharp speeches and mutual accusations, even when the bills were contrary to the Constitution. This shows that the people’s forum was reduced to a tool for certain parties’ and leaders’ political interests, compromising even the supreme law of the country.
The House also failed to hold the government and parliamentary committees accountable in passing the Commission for the Investigation of Abuse of Authority (Third Amendment) Bill. The Legislative Management Committee of the National Assembly concluded that the federal parliament could not pressure the government to pass the 40 bills required for constitutional implementation. Former Speaker Onsari Gharti notes that slow lawmaking raises questions about parliament’s role. “The government sets the business for parliament. Private bills come occasionally. When the government doesn’t provide business, parliament cannot make laws, which is extremely unfortunate,” she says.
Sudarshan Khadka, former Secretary of the Federal Parliament, comments that parliament was weak in its role of ensuring good governance. “In a country where parliament cannot function effectively, the rule of law cannot be upheld,” he notes.
Questions on the Speaker’s role
Among the three main branches of the state, parliament is the first and most important. The Speaker’s role is to make it an autonomous body, ensuring its effectiveness and protecting citizens’ interests. However, questions arose both inside and outside parliament regarding Speaker Devaraj Ghimire’s style of conducting sessions. Elected as Speaker from CPN-UML, he was accused of running parliament according to UML’s instructions.
In parliament, the Speaker is expected to remain neutral and act as a referee. Therefore, upon election, the Speaker must renounce party affiliation. However, Speaker Ghimire was accused of conducting the House contrary to the prevalent notion that “government belongs to the ruling party, parliament to the opposition.” During Congress’s protest over cooperative fraud, the Speaker enforced a “marshalling” to grant a vote of confidence to then-Prime Minister Dahal, drawing heavy criticism. At the same time, Speaker Ghimire passed a motion to thank President Ramchandra Paudel, who had addressed the joint session of the federal parliament amid opposition protests. Former parliamentary secretary Khadka comments, “Having the Speaker pass a motion to thank the Head of State while marshalling to ensure the Prime Minister’s confidence vote was a historic disgrace.”
Speaker Ghimire was accused of conducting the House contrary to the prevalent notion that “government belongs to the ruling party, parliament to the opposition.”
Parliament is expected to hear all voices and allow opportunities for dissent. Matters of disagreement should be resolved through the Procedure Consultation Committee or other forums. However, with Speaker Ghimire’s weak role, sessions often escalated into confrontations. Former Speaker Onsari Gharti also notes that parliament became difficult to manage when the government ignored it and the Speaker only listened to coalition parties while acting harshly toward the opposition. “I do not question his ability, but judging from the outcomes, the Speaker did not succeed in effectively running parliament,” she says.
Obstruction in the 2017–2022 Parliament
Obstruction, slogans, and sit-ins were not unique to the current parliament. Even after the constitution was promulgated, meetings of elected parliament were frequently disrupted. According to the Federal Parliament Secretariat, between 2017 and 2022, sessions were obstructed and slogans raised for various reasons. “During this term of the House of Representatives, 50 instances of obstruction, slogans, and sit-ins were recorded by various political parties and members,” the Secretariat’s report notes.
According to the Secretariat, parliament was obstructed over issues such as implementation of agreements between the government and Dr. Govinda KC, publicizing reports of committees formed to investigate Madhes protests, and responses regarding the Lal Commission report. Additionally, debates over party splits and the imposition of ordinances, including UML’s division, also triggered obstructions.
On June 5 and 15, 2018, the then-main opposition, Congress, obstructed parliament. Supporting Dr. KC’s hunger strike and demands related to the Medical Education Bill, Congress blocked sessions. Even as Congress repeatedly obstructed the House, the ruling party forced the sessions to continue. Similarly, on July 10, 2019, Congress blocked parliament to demand the withdrawal of the Guthi Bill.
During that period, UML obstructed 21 sessions of the 9th and 10th parliamentary terms. After 14 MPs, including Madhav Kumar Nepal, broke away to form CPN (Unified Socialist), UML vented its anger in parliament, demanding action against the 14 MPs and submission of a disciplinary list.
Post-2022 Parliamentary Obstruction: Duration and Reasons
| Party | Major Reason for Obstruction | Duration of Obstruction |
| Congress | Medical Education Bill; Employee Adjustment Ordinance; Dissolution of GP Koirala Respiratory Center and Sushil Koirala Cancer Hospital; Lalita Niwas land case | 13 days |
| CPN-UML | Disciplinary action against 14 MPs | 22 days |
| Congress / Rastriya Janata Party | Guthi Bill; child death in Sarlahi | 5 days |
| Rastriya Janata Party | Demand for government response to Lal Commission report | 1 day |
Note: Compiled from various parliamentary reports.
Laws enacted over three years
Inactive Bills
Bills sent from the National Assembly to the House of Representatives:
Bills originating in the House of Representatives:
