Unwilling to accept political business as usual

Nepal's social media ban has sparked deadly protests, but deeper grievances are fuelling the fire, argues Leanne McCarthy-Cotter, programme director for politics and international relations at Cardiff Metropolitan University

- 

NEPAL'S prime minister, KP Sharma Oli, resigned on September 9 as his country reeled from some of its worst unrest in decades.

A government ban on 26 social media apps, including Facebook, WhatsApp, YouTube and X, triggered widespread protests. The police responded violently, 19 people were killed and hundreds more injured.

Demonstrations have escalated since then in the capital, Kathmandu, and some other cities. The homes of various politicians have been vandalised, the parliament building in Kathmandu was set on fire and the death toll has risen to 22.

Nepal's army has announced it will take control of the situation. It has imposed a countrywide curfew and is warning of punishment for anyone involved in violence or vandalism. The Gen Z groups leading the protests say the movement has been hijacked by “opportunist” infiltrators.

The forces that led to Oli’s exit run far deeper than anger at the government's social media ban. This was merely the final straw. Anger at political instability, elite corruption and economic stagnation have built up over many years.

Nepal’s democratic era began in 2008 after a decade-long Maoist insurgency culminated in the abolition of its monarchy. Several years later, in 2015, a constitution came into effect that introduced federalism and proportional representation to address ethnic tensions and prevent authoritarian rule.

But it has instead produced a highly fragmented party system. None of the 14 governments that have ruled since 2008 have completed a full term. This revolving-door politics, underpinned by patronage-driven coalitions, has fuelled public cynicism.