The main challenge of Nepal's political system is the lack of moral accountability and responsibility. Nepal has a constitution and elections. But the lack of transparency in the governance, thinking, style, and character of its leaders has eroded public trust. Incidents of political scandals, irregularities, and abuse of power are repeated again and again. However, there is no culture of taking moral responsibility.

The imbalance between power, position, and responsibility has eroded public trust. Lack of self-criticism and moral values ​​has weakened the backbone of democracy. Nepal's international image is weakening and its neighbors are beginning to waver in their trust. Resignation has not become a part of political culture, which has increased public discontent and distrust. In fact, resignation is a symbol of responsibility and moral self-control. Only when the leadership accepts the consequences of decisions does trust in the public be reawakened. 

In Nepal, resignation is often a formality used to deflect political pressure, remove someone, or calm public anger. In countries like Japan, Britain, or South Korea, ministers resign even for minor mistakes and maintain institutional integrity. 

Leadership instability

Since 2007, Nepal's political history has been a story of instability, agitation, and geopolitical power struggles. Criminalization of politics, distrust between the judiciary and the executive, and politicization of the legislature have blocked the path to sustainable governance and development. The 28 changes of government in 35 years since 2046, the average tenure of a prime minister is less than 15 months, and frequent changes of leadership in the security apparatus are all direct signs of political instability and interference. 

Impeachment and distrust among constitutional bodies have also undermined the independence of the judiciary, which has weakened state mechanisms. The impeachment of former Chief Justice Cholendra Shumsher Jabra and the proposal against Sushila Karki show that there is deep political pressure on the judiciary. In recent years, the shadow of political interests is visible even in the process of justice and authority. The fact that those involved in major financial irregularities and corruption have become ministers or MPs from parties, and those with foreign citizenship and double standards have reached high positions have raised questions about the judicial system.

In 2058 BS, Girija Prasad Koirala had to resign due to disagreements with King Gyanendra. In 2065 BS, the confrontation between Pushpa Kamal Dahal and Ram Baran Yadav exposed the imbalance of constitutional rights, foreign influence, and party interests. When Dahal decided to remove Army Chief Rukmangad Katuwal, President Yadav rejected it. The incident, which was said to have included India's 'advice', also exposed the imbalance between constitutional rights, civil control and foreign influence.

Gen-G movement, a question of national security

The Gen-G movement of 2082 Bhadau exposed the status of governance, corruption, looting and luxury in Nepal. It was not just dissatisfaction with unemployment - it was an explosion of public anger that had been hidden for decades, where the state, leadership and systems were put to the test. When the Prime Minister did not take moral responsibility in time and the movement turned violent, national security was affected. The ambiguity of the order and lack of coordination forced the security personnel to lay down their arms.

This is not only an administrative weakness, but also an injury to national pride. Accountability is not just administrative transparency - it is the protection of the nation's policy, independence and self-respect. For a landlocked and dependent nation like Nepal, this is a question of existence. This movement reassessed the trust in Nepal's political leadership - citizen consciousness is no longer a slogan, but a decisive force for major change. And, a truthful and impartial investigation is the first condition for accountability. 

Judicial independence, public trust and security can only be ensured by keeping crime and politics separate. Even in cases of state damage or violence, impartial investigation and legal punishment are necessary. The political, administrative and security levels must all be held responsible for accountability. Such unequal justice and unaccountable rule will continue until those who give orders, plan and set policies are brought under the legal umbrella. 

There has been a lack of trust in the relationship between the party, the army and the monarchy since 2047. While the political leaderships after 2063 have been facing accusations of failing to protect the national interest on sensitive issues such as Lipulekh, Kalapani and Limpiyadhura, the army has protected the constitution and the president. 

As a member state of the United Nations, foreign intervention or military landings in Nepal cannot be considered normal. Underdeveloped, landlocked and technologically dependent countries like Nepal are in the shadow of international geopolitical competition today. ‘Accountability’ means not only administrative transparency, but also the protection of the nation’s policy-independence and self-respect. Let there be no more irresponsible politics and activities that always lead to Nepal’s defeat. 

The path to restoring trust 

Strategic self-reliance, economic diversification, diplomatic balance and reliable national security should be the main foundations for restoring the stability and trust of the nation. National trust is strengthened only when governance is guided by internal foresight and national priorities, not external pressure.  

Nepal’s soft power—the Himalayas, watersheds, religious-cultural diversity, the history of the heroic Gorkhas and Nepal’s uniqueness as a geopolitical bridge between India and China—all these are natural sources of national interest. Spiritual heritages like Shiva-Knowledge Welt and Buddha-Knowledge Welt can strengthen Nepal's international image as a 'nation of peace and knowledge'. Unless the protection and use of these soft power heritages of Nepal are integrated into the strategic thinking of the state, they remain limited to symbols of national pride.

Moral leadership is indispensable for sustainable reform, where responsibility lies above power. Only transparent governance, independent regulatory bodies, and authority free from party influence can revive public trust. The accountability of governance does not lie with the ruler, but the silence of the citizen is also a partner in the blame. Therefore, conscious citizen pressure is the soul of democracy. BP Koirala's 'National Reconciliation' theory of 2033 BS is still the most practical and national option today, which places cooperation, not power, at the center of nation-building.

Call for national consciousness and reform

Resignation and accountability are not just formal words of governance, but the moral backbone of the nation. The path to reform in Nepal begins not only with a new constitution or a new party, but with new thinking and new character. Nepal's future depends not on political power, but on moral awakening and responsible citizens. Political stability is determined by character, not law. When power is smaller than principles, democracy is stronger. What is needed in Nepal is no longer a renaissance of loyalty, but a revival of loyalty and responsibility. The time has come to answer the question of 'who governs?' not 'how does one govern?' This is the real test of democracy and the starting point for reform demanded by the soil of Nepal.