Explainer | Nepal’s Gen Z anti-corruption revolt and the Karki interim government
Standfirst
A youth-led uprising against graft and inequality has toppled Nepal’s government after deadly clashes – forcing Prime Minister K.P. Sharma Oli to resign and ushering in an interim administration led by former Chief Justice Sushila Karki, tasked with reform and fresh elections by March 2026.
What happened
A nationwide anti-corruption protest movement led by Nepal’s Generation Z erupted on September 8, 2025, after the government banned 26 social media platforms over registration disputes. Thousands of young Nepalis – including school and college students in uniform – marched in Kathmandu and cities across the country, chanting slogans like “Shut down corruption, not social media.” The initially peaceful rallies escalated when some protesters breached barricades at the Parliament complex in New Baneshwar, Kathmandu, defying a curfew imposed at midday. Security forces responded with water cannons, tear gas, and live ammunition, triggering Nepal’s worst civil unrest in decades.
By nightfall on September 8, at least 19 people – mostly young protesters – had been shot dead in Kathmandu and another city, with over 300 injured, according to hospital and police reports. Rights monitors condemned the “unlawful use of lethal force” and urged an independent investigation. It was Nepal’s deadliest single-day crackdown on a protest in modern times. Anger at the bloodshed saw crowds swell the next day, September 9, as Nepalis of all ages poured into the streets demanding justice. Demonstrators defied curfews in cities nationwide and set fire to government buildings, including the historic Singha Durbar office complex (which houses the Prime Minister’s office) and the Parliament building. Mobs ransacked ministers’ homes and even freed prisoners from jails amid the chaos. With law and order breaking down, the government deployed the Army on the night of September 9 to guard key installations and restore a semblance of order.
Facing public fury, Prime Minister Khadga Prasad Sharma Oli – a political veteran in his fourth term – announced his resignation on September 9 “in view of the adverse situation” and to facilitate a peaceful solution. Jubilant youth protesters waved flags and painted “WE WON” on parliament’s walls when news of Oli’s ouster broke. Other ministers, including Home Minister Ramesh Lekhak, also quit, taking “moral responsibility” for the carnage. As smoke rose from government quarters, authorities shut Kathmandu’s international airport and imposed round-the-clock curfews in urban centers to prevent further violence. By mid-week, the known death toll had climbed above 50 – and would later rise to 72 as more bodies (some charred in arson fires) were recovered. Over 1,000 people were injured in the two-day turmoil. Nepal’s President, Ramchandra Paudel, opened talks with protest leaders as the country reeled from one of the bloodiest weeks since the civil war ended in 2006.
Why Gen Z erupted now
Grand corruption and ‘nepo kids’. This youth uprising was rooted in long-simmering grievances over Nepal’s entrenched corruption and nepotism. Demonstrators railed against the “Nepo babies” – offspring of powerful politicians and tycoons flaunting lavish lifestyles – while ordinary citizens struggle. “We kept hearing that if we go to government offices, we need to bribe,” said one 22-year-old protest organiser, describing an endless cycle of graft and favoritism that shuts out those without connections. Nepal consistently ranks poorly on corruption indices (107th of 180 countries in 2024) and scandals have proliferated. Oli’s latest tenure, protesters say, epitomized the problem – marked by entrenched cronyism, economic stagnation, and authoritarian impulses. The final spark was the social media gag order. Many youths saw the ban on Facebook, YouTube, and other apps as an attempt to silence whistleblowers exposing elite misdeeds. When videos of police firing on unarmed students spread online despite the ban, it inflamed public outrage at a government widely perceived as serving only the well-connected.
Youth joblessness and exodus. Underlying the anger is a demographic crisis of expectations. Young Nepalis face one of South Asia’s highest unemployment rates (around 20%), with millions forced to migrate for work. “You guys are in fancy cars while we’re giving our blood and sweat in the Gulf,” was a common refrain at the rallies. About 90% of Nepal’s 30 million people have internet access, so youths are acutely aware of global opportunities – and of their own leaders’ families enjoying private education and foreign luxuries while Nepal’s economy stagnates. Frustration has mounted as the same few men (aged in their 70s) have traded the premiership among themselves for decades, rarely making space for new leadership. “It has moved like a game of musical chairs between three people for 30 years… It was a mafia,” one young activist observed bluntly. With Nepal’s two biggest parties – the Communist Party of Nepal (UML) and the Nepali Congress – in an unnatural grand coalition since 2024, there was effectively no opposition voice in parliament, which protesters say allowed complacency and unchecked misrule. Gen Z stepped into that void.
Citizenship and gender inequity. The youth revolt also tapped into resentment over Nepal’s discriminatory citizenship laws, which many see as emblematic of the patriarchal, feudal mindset of the old guard. Until recently, Nepali women could not pass citizenship to their children or foreign spouses on an equal basis with men, leaving countless families in legal limbo. Children of single Nepali mothers, for example, were often rendered stateless because the law demanded proof of a Nepali father. “The feeling of exclusion is very strong… without citizenship I couldn’t even get a SIM card,” one affected young woman recounted. Although a partial reform in 2023 finally granted citizenship to many such youths, activists note that gender bias persists in the statutes. For Gen Z campaigners, these lingering inequities – along with issues like inheritance discrimination – symbolise how Nepal’s political class has failed to deliver on the inclusive, egalitarian promises of the 2015 Constitution.
How an interim PM was installed
Oli’s resignation set the stage for an unprecedented constitutional experiment. With the ruling coalition in disarray and protesters insisting that none of the “old faces” take over, Nepal’s leaders turned to an independent elder to steer a transitional government. On September 12, 2025, President Ramchandra Paudel appointed Sushila Karki – the country’s respected former Chief Justice – as interim Prime Minister, making her Nepal’s first female head of government. The 73-year-old Karki was sworn in that evening after a whirlwind consensus was forged across the political spectrum and protest representatives. To enable this, the 275-seat lower house of Parliament was dissolved and snap elections for March 5, 2026 were announced – about two years ahead of schedule. Karki’s appointment did not follow the typical constitutional process (normally, only a Member of Parliament can become PM under Article 76 of the 2015 Constitution). Instead, officials invoked Article 61 – which charges the President with protecting the constitution – as the legal basis for installing an interim government of national unity. In effect, Nepal’s political class agreed to momentarily set aside strict constitutional formalities in order to “save the Constitution” itself from collapse.
President Paudel’s role was pivotal. He consulted party chiefs, civil society, and reportedly the Army leadership in marathon talks to broker the deal. (Nepal’s army quietly signaled it would not back any leader unwilling to heed the street, according to political insiders.) By September 12, a cross-party consensus emerged to back Karki as a neutral caretaker PM “to manage the transition and hand over responsibility to an elected government” within six months. Article 61(4) of Nepal’s Constitution – which says the President’s main duty is to abide by and protect the charter – was broadly interpreted to justify this extra-parliamentary solution. As one Nepali commentator put it, only “a small violence” was done to the letter of the constitution, in order to uphold its spirit. Karki herself acknowledged the unusual circumstances, saying she “did not seek this position” but accepted it at the request of youth protest leaders who trusted her integrity. Notably, Nepal had a loose precedent in 2013 when a sitting chief justice led an interim election government – underscoring that, in crises, Nepali politics has improvised outside the constitutional box.
Security response & rights concerns
The state’s response to the Gen Z movement has swung from deadly force to belated restraint. After the shootings on September 8, the outgoing government imposed curfews in at least eight districts (including the entire Kathmandu Valley and key cities like Biratnagar, Pokhara, Itahari and Birgunj) to quell unrest. Mobile internet service remained active, but the short-lived social media shutdown – blamed by officials on “misuse” of unregistered platforms – was widely seen as a rights violation and was lifted by September 9 amid the backlash. During the height of clashes, police arrested dozens of demonstrators (exact figures remain fluid) and struggled to regain control of streets awash in tear gas and smoke. In a dramatic turn, rioters on September 9 broke into prisons and released over a thousand inmates across several regions, adding to the chaos. Some escapees remain at large, and security forces have been scrambling to recapture them, fearing a rise in criminality.
Both Nepali and international rights groups have sounded alarms. The National Human Rights Commission in Nepal called the killings of unarmed protesters “regrettable” and reminded authorities that peaceful dissent is guaranteed by the constitution. Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch urged an impartial investigation into the use of live fire, noting that under UN basic principles police should use firearms only as a last resort to prevent death or serious injury. They warned against Nepal’s “culture of impunity” and demanded that those responsible – regardless of rank – be held to account. In response, the government (just before Oli resigned) formed a high-level inquiry committee to probe the violence within 15 days. Interim PM Karki has since pledged full cooperation with investigations. She used her Constitution Day address on September 19 to pay tribute to the “martyrs” of the Gen Z movement and promised justice for the victims of both the police crackdown and the rioting. Dozens of police officers are under suspension pending inquiries, and over 100 complaints of excessive force have been filed by families of the injured. Meanwhile, Gen Z activists continue to demand accountability at the very top – even calling for ex-PM Oli and ex-Home Minister Lekhak to face criminal charges over the shootings. Oli, for his part, denies ordering any shootings and claims “infiltrators” with automatic weapons (not possessed by police) instigated the bloodbath – a theory critics view with skepticism.
Politics and the road to March 2026
Oli’s fall from power is a seismic event in Nepali politics. His party, the CPN–UML, and its erstwhile rival-turned-coalition-partner, the Nepali Congress (NC), now find themselves on the defensive after being tarred by the crackdown. Both parties had dominated government for years – cycling through 13 governments since 2008 – but the Gen Z revolt exposed public exhaustion with the status quo. Observers say the political old guard will now face intense pressure to reform internally or risk rejection at the coming polls. Indeed, the protest slogan “Accountability or Exit” is as much aimed at established parties as at individual leaders. NC and UML leaders have expressed “regret” for the loss of life, and some second-rank leaders have hinted the parties need to promote younger faces before the election. Still, it remains to be seen whether figures like Oli (73) or NC’s Sher Bahadur Deuba (77) will genuinely cede ground.
In the meantime, Prime Minister Sushila Karki is assembling a technocratic caretaker cabinet with a mandate to stabilize the country and ensure free elections. Admired for her integrity and austere lifestyle, Karki earned fame as chief justice (2016–17) for taking on corrupt politicians and defending the rule of law. She has indicated that her interim administration will include prominent reformists outside the mainstream parties. Early reports suggest constitutional lawyer Om Prakash Aryal (known for crusading against impunity) and former energy authority head Kulman Ghising (celebrated for ending Nepal’s endemic power blackouts) are in line for key ministerial posts. The interim cabinet also has representation from all major parties to project consensus, but Karki has insisted that any ministers “tainted by corruption” will be excluded. Youth activists and civil society members may be given advisory roles in governance – an unprecedented gesture to keep the generation that sparked this change engaged in the political process.
Notably, Nepal’s dynamic young Kathmandu mayor, Balen Shah, has emerged as an influential voice aligning with the Gen Z cause. Shah, a 33-year-old independent who won office in 2022 on an anti-establishment plank, publicly praised the youth “martyrs” and urged unity as the country embarks on this transition. There is even talk of the protest movement evolving into a formal political platform. A new “Gen Z Party” or coalition of independent youth candidates could contest the 2026 elections – possibly in alliance with Shah – to challenge the traditional parties’ hold on power. However, organizing a coherent political force in a few months will be challenging for the diffuse movement. The protesters themselves are diverse: many are students or first-time voters with no party affiliation, while others belong to the youth wings of existing parties but acted out of frustration with their elders. How the energy of the streets translates into structured politics is a key question ahead. Established players like the Maoist Centre (led by ex-rebel Pushpa Kamal Dahal ‘Prachanda’) and newer populist parties (such as Rabi Lamichhane’s Rastriya Swatantra Party) will also jostle for advantage in the new landscape. For now, Nepal’s party system has entered uncharted territory – a mix of contrition, realignment, and guarded optimism as the countdown to the March 2026 polls begins.
Reform docket & credibility tests
The interim government has a short six-month window to show tangible progress on the protesters’ core demands. Foremost on its agenda is anti-corruption reform. Prime Minister Karki – a jurist with a track record of zero tolerance for graft – has vowed to strengthen Nepal’s anti-graft bodies and pursue high-profile corruption cases that had stalled under previous governments. This could mean empowering the Commission for the Investigation of Abuse of Authority (CIAA) to act more independently, revisiting controversial cases (such as a recent fake refugee scam implicating top officials), and enforcing greater transparency in public procurement. Karki has also floated the idea of a “wealth audit” for political leaders, echoing Gen Z activists’ calls to investigate unexplained riches of officials since the 1990s. Implementing such measures will test the interim cabinet’s unity – and will certainly face pushback from entrenched interests. A positive signal is that Nepal’s supreme court and Auditor-General have pledged support for any lawful anti-corruption drive, and donors like the World Bank have indicated that governance improvements could unlock more development aid. Still, expectations must be tempered: “cleaning house” in six months is an enormous task, and any legal reforms via ordinance might need ratification by the next elected parliament.
Another urgent priority is addressing youth unemployment and economic stagnation. Karki’s administration inherits a shaky economy recovering from the pandemic and global inflation pressures. The government budget for FY2025/26 – which was passed under Oli – includes some job creation schemes and skills-training programs. The interim PM has signaled she will redirect funds toward quick-impact programs for young jobseekers, such as expanding vocational training, tech incubators, and possibly a short-term public works employment initiative. She is also seeking support from Nepal’s large expatriate community: remittances already account for nearly a quarter of GDP, and diaspora networks (so influential in this protest via online forums) may be tapped to invest in start-ups or mentorship for youth-led enterprises. However, financing constraints loom large. Nepal is under an IMF Extended Credit Facility program, which caps budget deficits – limiting how much fiscal stimulus the interim government can deploy. Any major populist spending is unlikely; instead Karki will aim for symbolic but meaningful steps (for example, fast-tracking licenses for new businesses or signing labor agreements to send more skilled Nepalis abroad with protections). The credibility of the interim government in managing the economy will also affect whether the general elections occur amid optimism or cynicism.
On social inclusion, there are cautious hopes that the interim period could break logjams. Citizenship law reform is one area activists want addressed. While a 2023 law began to fix gender discrimination in citizenship, significant inequities remain, especially for Nepali women married to foreigners and for children of Nepali mothers who face bureaucratic hurdles. Karki has long been an advocate for equal rights – in her speech on Constitution Day she acknowledged that the Gen Z movement sprang from “unfulfilled expectations” in governance and inclusion, and she committed to “embrace these agendas” of equality and good governance. There is talk that the interim cabinet could introduce an ordinance to further amend the Citizenship Act, granting mothers and fathers equal rights to confer nationality. Similarly, plans to ensure property inheritance rights irrespective of gender or caste may get interim attention. Yet passing any sweeping changes without a parliament is tricky. Karki must carefully stick to a caretaker’s remit, focusing on preparing elections and maintaining day-to-day administration. She has promised not to take any decision that would “bind the hands” of the next elected government – a self-imposed restraint to bolster her impartial image. This likely rules out tackling more contentious structural issues (for example, federal restructuring or long-pending transitional justice for wartime abuses). Instead, her government’s litmus test will be whether it can create a conducive environment for credible elections – which itself is the most important reform in the eyes of many Nepalis.
Regional and international stakes
Nepal’s turbulence has prompted a cautious response from its neighbors and international partners. The Indian and Chinese governments – each with significant strategic interests in Nepal – have been notably muted publicly. India, which maintains an open border with Nepal and traditionally exerts strong influence, refrained from any official comment on Oli’s resignation or Karki’s appointment. Analysts suggest New Delhi is quietly supportive of steps that restore stability, but Indian leaders are mindful of not appearing to meddle amid a popular uprising. Beijing, too, stayed largely quiet until after Karki took office; Chinese officials then signaled hopes for Nepal’s “social stability and development” under the interim setup, an implicit nod of approval. Both Asian giants likely prefer a peaceful transition in Kathmandu over protracted chaos, given Nepal’s role as a buffer state – and both will watch the March 2026 election closely, hoping for a government friendly to their interests. Nepali commentators have speculated that elements of the Gen Z movement harbor skepticism of China’s and India’s political investments in Nepal, but the protests were overwhelmingly focused on domestic governance, not geopolitical alignments.
Western nations and multilateral institutions have been more vocal in encouraging a democratic resolution. The United States urged all sides to refrain from violence at the height of the clashes, reaffirming its support for Nepal’s “stability, prosperity, and democratic governance.” After Karki’s interim government was formed, Washington, the European Union, and the United Nations all welcomed the plan for early elections, emphasizing the importance of upholding human rights during the transition. The UN Resident Coordinator in Kathmandu offered technical assistance for election management and called on authorities to ensure freedom of expression and assembly remain protected in the run-up to the polls. International lenders like the IMF and World Bank have a stake as well: Nepal is mid-way through an IMF-supported reform program, and any derailment could hurt its economy. Encouragingly, early signals from donors suggest that if the interim administration demonstrates commitment to anti-corruption and conducts a fair election, development aid and loan disbursements will continue without disruption. Nepal’s large diaspora, spread across the Gulf, East Asia, India, and the West, also holds influence. Diasporic Nepalis were actively involved in the Gen Z movement’s online organizing (about 10,000 joined a Discord call to nominate the interim PM), and many in the diaspora have lobbied foreign governments to support Nepal’s democratic aspirations. Remittances could even see a short-term uptick if expatriates rally around hopes of a cleaner government at home. The international bottom line: so long as Nepal’s interim leaders keep their promise of elections in March 2026 and avoid any constitutional adventurism, they are likely to enjoy broad external goodwill, if not outright support.
What to watch next
• Electoral countdown. Preparations for the March 5, 2026 elections will be a critical barometer. Watch if the Election Commission is given full independence and resources, and whether voter registration (especially of first-time youth voters) surges. Any delay or attempt to extend the interim government beyond six months would raise alarms.
• Youth movement’s evolution. Will the Gen Z activists channel their momentum into formal politics? Keep an eye on new political groupings or independent candidates emerging from the protest leaders. Their ability to organize, and whether they ally with figures like Mayor Balen Shah, will shape the electoral challenge to Nepal’s old parties.
• Accountability and justice. The handling of the investigation into protest deaths is a near-term test. Indicators to watch include: are any police or officials indicted for excessive force? Is there transparency about who gave the live-fire orders? Conversely, are rioters and those involved in arson on Sept 9 being prosecuted in a fair manner? A credible, balanced accountability process could either mollify or further agitate public sentiment.
• Civil–military balance. Nepal’s Army played a behind-the-scenes role in this transition; going forward, its posture bears watching. Any sign of the military overstepping (even under the pretext of security) would be a red flag. Conversely, the Army’s acceptance of civilian interim authority and its non-interference in the electoral process will be key for Nepal’s democracy. Also observe whether the army continues heavy deployment in the streets or gradually returns to barracks as stability returns.