Constitution Amendment Needs Trust, Not Haste

The government's attempt to initiate constitutional amendment without securing broad political consensus risks deepening distrust rather than strengthening Nepal's democratic institutions. Constitutional reform may well be necessary after a decade of implementation, but the process must begin with dialogue, review and consensus—not unilateral action. To prepare a discussion paper on constitutional amendment, the government formed a task force led by the prime minister's adviser and invited all parties represented in the House of Representatives to participate. The effort quickly lost credibility. The main opposition, the Nepali Congress, declined to nominate a representative, while the CPN-UML's nominee never attended meetings. Representatives from the Communist Party of Nepal, Loktantrik Samajwadi Party, Janata Samajwadi Party and Rastriya Janamorcha later withdrew, arguing that the task force had exceeded its mandate. It is now effectively represented only by the ruling Rastriya Swatantra Party (RSP) and the Rastriya Prajatantra Party (RPP). Constitutional amendment is not a new political agenda. Since the Constitution came into force in 2015, several parties have advocated revisions. Nearly every major party pledged constitutional amendment in the 2025 parliamentary election. Yet few explained which provisions had failed in practice or how proposed amendments would improve governance. Constitutional reform cannot become a political slogan detached from clearly identified problems and carefully defined objectives.