Citizens are right to complain about the ineffectiveness of the political system in the country. Political parties in Nepal, instead of serving as vehicles to mobilize and engage people by offering them voice and agency, have largely turned into tools for distributing the benefits of power—enriching those at the top, who share the “spoils” with their enablers.
It would be unfair to typecast all politicians in this way, but we must admit that there is a massive ethical crisis in Nepali politics. It is not only about corruption at the top levels of major political parties. Certainly, there are deep structural problems in the way these parties operate. Corruption remains a defining issue.
As exemplified by the ongoing controversy that allegedly involves the current Home Minister, Ramesh Lekhak—accused of being the mastermind and main beneficiary of a massive corruption scheme at the Immigration Department of Tribhuvan International Airport—corruption at the top is just the tip of the iceberg. Tackling it requires a multifaceted response, but true and lasting improvements can only come through a complete reset of the political culture embedded in the system.
Such rethinking goes well beyond treating corruption as a standalone issue, however critical it may be. For example, let’s consider the frequent incidents involving the youth wings of many political parties. The situation is indeed worrying. Recently, reports emerged of clashes in Lamjung District among different factions of Tarun Dal, the youth wing of the Nepali Congress, during its local congress. Earlier in May, a similar incident occurred in Parbat District, where rival groups of the UML’s youth wing, the National Youth Federation, fought each other. The Maoist party also suffers from internal divisions that at times turn violent.
Though the details of each incident differ, they all reflect a political culture that views politics as a zero-sum game in which groups maximize their own benefits at the expense of others. Compromise is seen not as a tool of cooperation but as a bargaining chip, which in turn fuels further shenanigans, conflict, and division. As a result, politicians spend much of their energy managing internal disputes rather than developing effective policies and programs that benefit society as a whole.
Chepang students go to school barefoot in freezing cold
That is why tackling corruption alone cannot resolve the deep dysfunctions of the political system. Corruption across the system—including the nexus between politicians, public officials, and businesspeople—must be dealt with urgently, but doing so without broader reforms will only yield limited results.
According to Bhojraj Pokharel, former chief election commissioner, the best ways to reduce party-driven corruption would be to pass a strong conflict of interest law. He also proposed rethinking how parties are financed, suggesting that the state should play a central role in funding them. With the government already struggling to meet revenue targets, this may be difficult, but resources are regularly found for misplaced priorities.
For instance, as this daily reported, the federal government continues to push pork-barrel-style spending through the so-called “Balanced Infrastructure Development Program,” allocating funds to each of the 165 lawmakers elected through the first-past-the-post system. If money can be found for ineffective programs, surely it can be mobilized to overhaul the way politics works. A new legal framework enabling ethical politics would reduce competition over resources, which now fuels much of the infighting among party cadres.
Yet serious political reform requires more than policy fixes. The education sector could play a transformative role—if empowered to do so. This raises an important question: why can’t the country rethink the role and aims of civic education?
How effective is the current mandatory curriculum? Isn’t it often neglected and deprioritized compared to subjects seen as more important, largely because they carry more marks at the end of the school year? Could civic education be made more engaging through storytelling, theater, and other creative approaches?
There is vast potential to reimagine civic education so that it includes lessons on volunteerism and character-based leadership, beginning with personal accountability. If we want more transformative politics, we must not only focus on passing laws in Parliament but also work at the local level. A stronger civic education curriculum could open countless pathways to civic engagement beyond party politics.
For example, involving students in localizing the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) could help them understand how citizens’ problems can be solved. Isn’t that also a form of public service—another way of “doing politics”—that young people should be encouraged to explore?
What about training students in deliberative democracy? True deliberation occurs when citizens are empowered to form unbiased opinions and express thoughtful judgments on key issues. Rooted in ancient traditions once common across South Asia, deliberative democracy is now expanding globally and is seen as a complement to party-based electoral democracy. Imagine students learning from experts, debating, and then formulating their own opinions through rigorous dialogue. Isn’t that also another form of education?
It is almost ironic to keep calling young people the “future leaders” of the nation. In reality, only a minority will reach positions of leadership. But politics should not be limited to those few—it should empower all citizens to achieve their potential, not just for personal gain but also for the collective good.
Curbing corruption would be a milestone for Nepal, giving all citizens a chance to thrive. But deeper reform and rethinking are needed. To truly fix politics, we must go back to its foundations and nurture a new mindset.
Active and responsible citizenship, grounded in accountability and ethical leadership, should be the first building block of such a renaissance. To rebuild national politics, let’s start from the schools!
