We cannot bar anyone from contesting polls

Nepal is holding elections to the House of Representatives on March 5, 2026 amid rising public frustration. Fed up with bad governance, the people, especially the youth, are demanding a change in the situation with greater participation of youth and women in politics, accountability, and political stability.

In this context, Arpana Adhikari of The Rising Nepal, together with a Gorkhapatra team, spoke with communist leader Pampha Bhusal, former chair of the Rastriya Janamorcha, ex-vice chair of the CPN (Maoist Centre), former minister, and current central committee member of the Nepali Communist Party. Bhusal shared her perspectives on the upcoming elections, youth and women’s representation, leadership renewal, the party’s Maoist legacy, and the future direction of the communist movement in Nepal. Excerpts:

How is your party preparing for the March 5 election amid splits and change of symbol ?

Unlike the past legacy of division, this time we are approaching the election with unity. We simplified the election symbol for public ease and are focused on maintaining the spirit of the movement, freedom, good governance, and political stability.

What makes this election different from previous ones?

This election is different. It comes after the sacrifice of 76 people in the Gen-Z movement and the dissolution of the House of Representatives. Unlike ordinary elections, this one is for a new public mandate following the formation of the interim government to hold elections in six months. It reflects the core goals of freedom of expression, corruption-free governance, and political stability.

What strategies and preparations have your party put in place to ensure meaningful representation of young people, women, Dalits, and marginalised communities in this election?

The constitution establishes Nepal as an inclusive federal democratic republic, guaranteeing representation for Dalits, women, indigenous nationalities, Madhesis, Muslims, persons with disabilities and other marginalised groups. What the Gen-Z movement has highlighted more strongly is the need to promote young people into leadership roles.

Young people have always been part of political movements; I myself became an organised party member at 13 and was imprisoned during the anti-Panchayat movement as a teenager. As movements continued, leaders naturally grew older. What is new now is the stronger and clearer demand for youth leadership, which must be embraced.

Accordingly, the party aims to allocate around half of its candidacies to young people. Given the minimum candidacy age of 25, we plan to ensure that more than 50 per cent of our candidates fall within the 25–40, or even up to 50 age group.

Your party has proposed barring individuals who have repeatedly served as PM, Minister, or MP from contesting the next election. Will this be implemented?

We cannot adopt a policy that bars anyone from contesting elections, but I do believe the same individuals should not run repeatedly. While some colleagues have proposed this idea, it cannot be implemented as it stands. That said, more than 50 per cent of our candidates in this election will be new and young.

My own experience illustrates this approach. I have been active in politics since the age of 13 and have contested three elections—winning twice and losing once. When I ran for the third time, I made it clear that it would be my last direct contest from my provincial constituency. Accordingly, I will not contest the first-past-the-post lot in this election. Although I am eligible to seek a seat through the proportional representation system, I have chosen not to do so.

Instead, I have encouraged young and new colleagues to prepare and contest from my constituency, supporting them well before the election was announced. They have already begun campaigning, and I am fully committed to backing them so that a younger party leader can win from the constituency this time.

Some say “elders should be listened to,” but this may hinder leadership renewal. How do you address this?

A movement is driven by ideas, political direction and clear agendas of good governance, freedom of expression, transparency, the fight against corruption and political stability. In the March election, our aim is to form a government, but Nepal’s mixed electoral system makes it difficult for any single party to secure a majority. As a result, governments rarely complete a full five-year term, as seen in the short tenures of recent prime ministers.

This raises questions about repeated terms in office and the public’s demand for change. While public opinion must be respected, leadership ultimately rests on ideas.

Leadership is about political vision, national agendas and direction. As communists, we believe in a one-to-three approach, a balanced mix of young, adult and mature leadership. Experienced leaders bring knowledge gained over time, while new leaders must learn gradually. Leadership cannot be created overnight; it requires the ability to shape policy and direction.

Politics is rooted in ideology, principles and laws, and leading a large organisation demands experience. Therefore, we must move forward by integrating new talent with experienced and seasoned leaders in a balanced way.

With the party having faced several splits and the departure of many young leaders, how does your party intend to restore its popular support while working with senior leaders?

As we move forward in unity, we are bringing 20 per cent young people aged 20 to 40 into the organisation. In our party, all members began their political journey at a similarly young age, around the Gen-Z stage, and even now, 60 per cent of our members are aged between 40 and 50 years old. By continuing to induct new members in this way, they will be allowed to learn through participation, without sidelining the older, experienced leaders.

Would dropping your party’s Maoist identity or election symbol uphold or betray the movement it led?

We have done justice to the movement. Building on its foundation, we are now transforming the party into one that provides peaceful leadership to society. By means of the general convention, we will decide how Maoist ideology should be interpreted and applied politically. While the party’s name reflects unity, this is only symbolic; in substance, today’s Nepal, exists because of the People’s War. Without it, Nepal would not have become a federal, inclusive, democratic republic, a transformation completed through the 12-point agreement and the 19-day People’s Movement.

The People’s War was a historic and unparalleled struggle. Its martyrs, the injured, the disabled, the disappeared and the people who supported it made today’s Nepal possible. It cannot be erased or ignored.

However, society now demands a new direction. We will move forward on a socialist path, pursuing a socialist revolution through a new political strategy. Unlike the earlier rural-based, underground struggle, this phase will be centred in cities and will unite workers, farmers, women, Dalits, indigenous nationalities, the urban poor, marginalised communities and progressive intellectuals to achieve transformative change.

When do you think your party will have a woman chair, given its history of producing prominent women leaders?

We plan to hold a general convention after this election. By that time, women should have the opportunity to develop the leadership skills needed to take full command. In a communist party, or any political party, leadership is not about being male or female; it is about political, ideological, cultural, and practical competence.

Women entered politics later, but the Maoist movement has nurtured many female leaders. From the grassroots to the top, the People’s War created a leadership chain, giving women the chance to learn, develop their skills, and participate in peaceful political processes. In the near future, women can assume key leadership positions, and even if not at the very top, they can lead important teams within the party.

Nepal has committed to ensuring 40 per cent women’s representation in the federal parliament. Do you think this is achievable?

I don’t think 40 per cent is sufficient; realistically, even an additional 10 per cent could be achieved. There should be 50 per cent women. Half of the population is women, half of the voters are women, so why shouldn’t half of the candidates be women? Currently, with 17–40 per cent, only about 10 per cent of women are ensured to compete. Women should not just be nominated because they are women, there should be 50 per cent representation. The agenda of the current women’s movement, or of any progressive revolutionary political movement, must ensure 50 per cent representation of women at all levels of the state and in all legislatures.

Under the current proportional representation system, critics say only leaders’ associates reach leadership positions. Could a fully proportional system worsen this problem?

Currently, about 33 per cent of representatives are women, with Dalits and Madhesis also represented. The Nepalese Parliament is structured as a model House of Representatives, but some people are dissatisfied, some dislike women representatives, some dislike Dalits, some dislike the poor, and some dislike those from marginalized regions. Despite these criticisms, the representation is appropriate.

A fully proportional system with population-based party lists would improve effectiveness. Nepotism exists but is limited, and parties can set clear rules on how many times a candidate may contest to ensure fairness and transparency.

After the Gen-Z movement, many new parties have emerged. How should your party, and older parties in general, move forward while engaging young people?

Our party moves forward with policies and agendas rooted in the interests of the people and the nation, not merely in historical legacy. Through the People’s War and subsequent movements, we helped build Nepal as an inclusive, federal democratic republic, and we continue to lead change with a clear progressive agenda. Anyone may join, but commitment to that agenda is essential, because stable politics cannot exist without clarity of purpose. My 50 years in active politics have shown this clearly.

Politics belongs to the working class and to those who serve the people. Representation requires all age groups, not just youth. Being young is not an agenda, it is just an age. True leadership requires ideas, direction, programmes, policies, and strategies.

Power gained without struggle often leads to corruption. Genuine leadership grows from sacrifice, hard work, and respect for the value of labour and resources.

You were a female leader during the armed movement and faced significant challenges at the time. How do you compare those experiences with the challenges women face in politics today?

I am proud of the past because I joined the movement with the aim of transformation, fully committed to either death or liberation. Our goal was to establish a republic in Nepal, even in the face of life-threatening dangers every minute and second. We succeeded in advancing the agendas of republicanism, inclusivity and federalism. Seeing these principles put into practice has made the struggle meaningful.

Change, however, is a continuous process. Progress from the grassroots brings major achievements but also new challenges, each stage demanding further advance. While some new elements have emerged, decisive action is still required. Only by taking the movement to new heights can past aspirations be fulfilled; remaining stagnant amid conflict yields nothing.

After 10 years since its promulgation, does the constitution need major amendments, or is it largely sufficient as it stands?

From the outset, we viewed the constitution as one based on compromise, which is why we registered a note of dissent despite supporting its promulgation. Our main concern was the electoral system, which has become costly and exclusionary. The mixed system favours wealth, limiting representation for women, workers, farmers and long-time activists.

We therefore advocated a fully proportional, affordable electoral system and a directly elected executive to ensure inclusion and political stability. We also believed governments should include subject experts, not only elected politicians. As these issues remain unresolved, we continue to call for constitutional amendment to reduce money’s influence and ensure fair representation for all.

In a small but geopolitically significant country like Nepal, situated between India and China, is a directly elected executive a safe and viable option?

We do need a directly elected executive but establish other mechanisms to uphold it. We must create laws and procedures that respect the people’s mandate and protect national interests. Nepal is a multi-ethnic, multilingual, and multicultural country, so no single caste or community should dominate. The executive carries forward the agenda, not personal interests. The law should grant the executive authority to act, but significant public and political decisions should only be made by someone competent, maintaining balance through proper legal and procedural mechanisms.

How can provincial governments be made more efficient and stable under federalism?

There are two main reasons for inefficiency. First, provincial governments have a budget but lack their own employees to implement it. Sometimes, the federal government sends staff who only mark attendance and do not perform real work. Provinces should have their own civil servants, as provided by the constitution. However, since the federal system has not fully allowed provinces to establish their own civil service laws, they have been unable to recruit their own staff. Without full staffing, provinces cannot deliver public services effectively.

Second, while the constitution provides for provincial administration, the federal government still controls the deployment and allocation of personnel, leaving provinces without proper authority. As a result, provincial governments face difficulties in security, execution, and administration, preventing them from functioning at full capacity.

Several Gen-Z leaders have called for constitutional amendments after the movement. Do you think it is feasible to make changes before the upcoming elections?

That is not possible. They have formed the government and announced the election date. It cannot happen based on mere hopes. During the elections, they will carry their agenda, and all political parties’ manifestos will be considered. If agendas align, constitutional amendments can only be made after the House of Representatives is formed following the elections on March 5.

With the Election Commission preparing the electoral schedule, how do you assess its role and the challenges of ensuring sensitive security arrangements?

The Election Commission is fully prepared, but the government must ensure full cooperation with political parties, as successful elections depend on their participation. These parties, often called “old,” are actually transformative forces, having led historic movements and boasting grassroots reach. Anyone thinking they can be sidelined misunderstands their role.

Building trust with these parties is essential for a secure, impartial, and transparent election. The primary responsibility lies with the government, supported by political parties and the Election Commission. From the start, we have backed a participatory approach, and our support remains for the government to focus solely on conducting the election, without long-term strategic distractions or populist agendas.