By Deepak Joshi Pokhrel
The 15th General Convention of the Nepali Congress has come to an end amid great fanfare. Thousands of supporters from across the country took part in the mega gathering with great zeal and enthusiasm. The convention elected a new Central Working Committee, office-bearers and Central Committee members. By all accounts, the gathering was a huge success. But the moot question remains: has the convention been able to put forward any measures to ensure party unity and advance reforms in the days ahead?
The Nepali Congress—the grand old party—is no stranger to Nepal’s political landscape. History bears testimony to its contribution to the struggle against repressive forces and the establishment of what we call democracy. Furthermore, the party has long been synonymous with democracy. Sadly, however, the party that carries such a rich historical legacy has been relegated to second place in the recently concluded parliamentary election following the student uprising that ousted the Oli-led government. The Nepali Congress has a meagre 38 seats, comprising 18 directly elected and 20 proportional representation seats in the House of Representatives.
It is extremely difficult to imagine that a party that once dominated Nepalese politics through good governance, a people-centric approach and a reformist agenda is now in continued decline. Similarly, it is difficult to understand the factors that contributed to its downfall. Many party supporters and sympathisers blame the leaders’ lust for power, factional feuds and controversies for the party’s current dismal state, despite its claim to represent democracy.
These are not merely baseless allegations. Supporters point to substantial evidence to substantiate their claims. Consider the confrontations over leadership within the party. From its principal founding leader, BP Koirala, to Matrika Prasad Koirala, Krishna Prasad Bhattarai, GP Koirala and Sher Bahadur Deuba, successive leaders have been accused of displaying an excessive appetite for power. For them, leadership itself appeared to matter most, often at the expense of the party’s democratic norms and values. This is one of the key reasons the party is on a path of decline.
Beyond leadership disputes, the party has long been mired in internal feuds, factional rivalries and groupism. In recent years, these problems have become increasingly pronounced. The five-time prime minister and former party president Sher Bahadur Deuba offers a stark example. For an extended period, several voices within the party called on him to step down on moral grounds. Even some of his supporters believed that Deuba should hand over the reins of leadership to the younger generation to ensure a graceful exit.
However, the adamant Deuba refused to step down, compelling the Nepali Congress to convene a special convention to elect a new president while he was in Singapore for what was described as medical treatment.
Additionally, the party lacks a concrete agenda and a vision capable of appealing to the masses in the changed political context. It remains driven by traditional ideological foundations that many consider outdated in light of the changing political landscape. Although its commitment to democracy remains relevant, the party needs to rethink how it can translate these principles into a credible political agenda that addresses the aspirations of the younger generation and the evolving challenges facing the country.
It would not be an exaggeration to conclude that rampant internal factionalism, weak institutionalisation, leadership deficiencies and generational gaps are among the key challenges facing the party. In addition, nepotism, favouritism and a failure to deliver on governance are other major problems. How can a party that is itself internally divided hope to challenge powerful political actors such as the Rastriya Swatantra Party (RSP)? Why has the party leadership failed to understand the saying, “United we stand, divided we fall”?
During the recently concluded 15th General Convention, party president Gagan Thapa presented a proposal addressing organisational weaknesses, political culture and the party’s future direction. He proposed a vision centred on a prosperous Nepal and respected Nepalis. This is undoubtedly a pragmatic vision. However, it must not remain a mere facade that invites backlash and criticism.
Party supporters and sympathisers argue that the Nepali Congress is now in safe hands under Gagan Thapa’s leadership. Undoubtedly, the new president compares favourably with other senior leaders within the party. However, he alone cannot transform the party or take it to new heights.
For any party to perform better, it must foster a culture of collaborative governance, collective decision-making and respect for its norms and values—something that was clearly missing in the past. What we have witnessed is a blatant disregard for collaborative governance, with the party being run in an oligarchic manner. This approach has only fuelled internal feuds, factionalism and groupism.
However, this is not to suggest that all is lost. The party now has new leadership comprising competent and results-oriented leaders known for their vision and policy agendas. If the party embraces change, addresses internal bickering and works to unite its members, it can make a strong comeback and silence its critics.
To begin with, the party under its new leadership must address the various dimensions of party-building. The prerequisites include establishing a strong institutional network, maintaining an efficient central office staffed by professionals, expanding its membership base and developing a decentralised network of party branches.
Party workers have identified the problems and the reforms needed to address them. They have cited weak leadership, a flawed electoral strategy and internal conflicts as the key factors behind the party’s poor performance in the last election. The party also lacks sufficient youth representation, despite having a youth-led sister organisation. It must therefore attract more young people to leadership positions to address emerging challenges.
No reasonable person would disagree that the Nepali Congress has come of age as a political institution. It is also widely acknowledged that the party has played a leading role in the democratic movement and the struggle against repressive forces. Moreover, its norms and values are intended to guide it in promoting and protecting democracy. Given the changing political context, party members will no longer tolerate malpractice aimed at consolidating power at the expense of internal party democracy. Unlike his predecessors, the newly elected party president cannot assume that he will be immune to challenges from the party rank and file or escape accountability for any wrongdoing.
Finally, the new leadership must place strong emphasis on narrowing differences within the party and devising a concrete reform agenda to restore its lost lustre.
Login to add a comment