By Our Reporter
The internal balance within the Nepali Congress (NC) is under renewed pressure after the Supreme Court endorsed the leadership structure headed by Gagan Thapa. The faction aligned with Sher Bahadur Deuba has not responded with confrontation. Instead, it has chosen to assess the situation before deciding its next move.
Over the past few days, senior leaders from the Deuba camp, coordinated by Purna Bahadur Khadka, held internal consultations with former central committee members. The discussions revolved around how to respond to the court’s decision and what role the faction can expect within the party going forward.
The broad conclusion from these meetings is twofold. First, the faction accepts the legal outcome. Second, it is not ready to accept reduced political space within the party structure. Leaders describe this position as a demand for “dignified treatment,” meaning meaningful participation in decision-making rather than symbolic inclusion.
While there is no immediate move toward confrontation, some leaders have raised the possibility of exploring alternatives if the current arrangement sidelines them further. That discussion remains informal, but its presence signals underlying uncertainty within the party.
At the same time, the faction led by Shekhar Koirala has taken a different approach. It has publicly accepted the court’s decision and called for unity within the party. This position emphasizes consolidation over internal contestation, although translating that into practice remains a challenge given long-standing factional divisions.
On the other side, leaders close to Thapa are signalling a shift in internal party management. The emphasis is now on merit-based inclusion, institutional discipline, and reducing reliance on factional quotas. While this reflects an attempt to modernize internal practices, it also raises concerns among competing groups about fair representation.
The Deuba faction is watching this closely. A key point of attention is how the new leadership uses its authority to nominate central committee members and shape the party’s organizational structure. That authority has not yet been fully exercised, and its eventual use will likely determine the next phase of internal relations.
The situation becomes more significant when placed in the broader political context. The Rastriya Swatantra Party has expanded its parliamentary presence, altering the competitive environment for traditional parties. At the same time, leftist forces including the Communist Party of Nepal (UML) and factions aligned with Pushpa Kamal Dahal are showing signs of coordination and strategic alignment.
This shifting landscape puts pressure on the Nepali Congress to maintain internal cohesion. Any sustained division would not only affect party functioning but could also weaken its position in a changing electoral environment. For both factions, internal disputes now carry wider consequences beyond party structures.
Within the Deuba camp, leaders maintain that they are not seeking confrontation. However, they insist that exclusion is not an acceptable outcome. This has led to a cautious stance—remaining engaged while keeping future options open. Some leaders have even suggested preparing for contingencies, though no formal steps have been taken in that direction.
Meanwhile, calls for compromise are increasing from within both sides. Leaders argue that the party has faced deeper divisions in the past and still managed to recover. The current challenge, they suggest, is not new conflict but the timing, given external political shifts and growing voter volatility.
There is also recognition that legal validation alone does not resolve political legitimacy. While the court has settled one aspect of the leadership dispute, internal acceptance within the party remains essential. Without that, administrative decisions risk deepening internal distrust.
Proposals for an inclusive organizational committee for the upcoming general convention have emerged as one possible way forward. Such a structure could help balance competing interests and reduce tensions. However, there is no consensus yet on how inclusive the process will be.
Both factions continue to publicly affirm unity, but their conditions for that unity differ. One side emphasizes structure and authority, the other emphasizes inclusion and respect. Bridging that gap will require negotiation rather than parallel positioning.
At present, the Deuba faction remains in a review phase, observing how decisions unfold within the party leadership. The Thapa-led group is focused on consolidation and organizational reform. The interaction between these two approaches will shape the party’s immediate future.
What is clear is that internal disagreements now exist alongside broader political changes. In that environment, maintaining unity is not just a matter of internal stability but also of external relevance.
Login to add a comment