The ruling National Independent Party has brought up the issue of making the local level and the National Assembly non-partisan for debate. The political report presented at the party's first general convention held in Chitwan has put forward the agenda of making the National Assembly a non-partisan expert assembly. The party's economic-political proposal mentions a non-partisan local level. 

The RSP had brought up the agenda of arranging non-partisan competition at the local level in its election manifesto for the House of Representatives. The issue of making the National Assembly non-partisan was also put forward through the general convention. The economic-political proposal brought by the then Vice President of the RSP, Swarnim Wagle, also mentions that the RSP has already put up the debate on the 'system of not becoming ministers for MPs'. 

There is a constitutional provision for three members of the 59-member National Assembly to be nominated by the President on the recommendation of the Council of Ministers. The remaining 56 members are elected by an electoral college consisting of members of the provincial assembly, the chairperson and vice-chairperson of the rural municipality, and the mayor and deputy mayor. Since political parties control the provincial assemblies and local level people's representatives, only candidates nominated by political parties are elected to the National Assembly. 

There is a legal provision that a candidate for the National Assembly must find one proposer and one supporter from among the voters in the electoral college. That also makes it difficult for an independent candidate to become a candidate in the National Assembly from outside a political party. The constitution and law do not prohibit independent candidates from becoming candidates. 

Since almost all voters belong to political parties, there is no possibility of an independent candidate reaching the National Assembly without the support and backing of the party, says Radheshyam Adhikari, a former member of the National Assembly and senior advocate. ‘The RSVP is bringing up new issues one after another. It seems that various proposals are being brought up for debate without analyzing the provisions, practices, and results of the constitution,’ he said. ‘This shows the situation of rewriting the constitution, which does not seem possible at the moment.’ 

Adhikari says that a constitutional amendment is necessary to abolish the provincial assembly, make the National Assembly and local levels non-partisan, and prevent MPs from being ministers. The current constitution emphasizes that a minister must be a federal MP. The constitution has a provision that a person who is not a member of the federal parliament can be a minister, but must become a member of the parliament within 6 months. Therefore, according to the current constitution, a person who is not a member of the federal parliament cannot be a minister for more than 6 months.

The RSVP-led government has already started preparations for the constitutional amendment. A task force has been formed to find an agenda for the constitutional amendment. However, senior advocate Adhikari says that the possibility of reaching an agreement among political parties on the constitutional amendment will diminish as the RSVP itself brings new issues up for debate one after another. A two-thirds majority is required in the National Assembly as well as the House of Representatives to amend the constitution. The RSVP is close to two-thirds in the House of Representatives, but the RSVP does not have representation in the National Assembly.

Professor Krishna Khanal says that the RSVP has had 'reservations' about the constitution from the beginning and that this has continued in the general convention. He considers the desire to raise many issues of the constitution one after another as an expression of the contradictions of the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS). ‘The RSSS is not involved in the constitution-making process. That is why it seems to be difficult to take full ownership in some areas. On the one hand, it has won the election from within the constitution itself,’ he said, ‘It has had to go through the constitutional process. On the other hand, it has also had to show that it has done something new. There is a contradiction.’ He says that since the RSSSS is currently not in a political situation to change the constitution alone, it may have adopted a strategy of raising ‘popular’ issues. 

The debate on ‘non-partisan’ elections at the local level is not new. During the constitution-making process in 2072, some political parties raised the issue of keeping local level elections outside of political parties. The RSSS has raised this issue after a long time. The RSSSS had included the issue of local government being non-partisan in its election manifesto as a minimum concept for amending the constitution.

The political report presented by party president Ravi Lamichhane at the party's first general convention includes the issue of making the National Assembly a non-partisan expert assembly and making the Vice President the Speaker of the National Assembly. In the report's title 'Our Different Views on Constitutional Amendment', Lamichhane has mentioned that they are in favor of an elected executive, a fully proportional electoral system, restructuring of the provincial assembly and the provincial government. 

The party's economic-political proposal presented by the then vice president Swarnim Wagle states that 'the RSVP has already submitted for debate the agenda of governance reforms such as a directly elected prime minister, a system in which MPs do not become ministers, non-party local levels, a one-third reduction in the number of local levels, restructuring of federalism including the abolition of the provincial assembly, radical reforms of other constitutional bodies including the Judicial Council, and transparent funding of recognized political parties.' Wagle has said that 'we will amend the current constitution the day we reach our numbers and strength.' 

During the constitution-making process, mainly Madhesh-centric parties advocated for a party-free system at the local level. The Janata Samajwadi Party Nepal still seems to be in favor of it. JSP Nepal Chairman Upendra Yadav says that it would be better to free the local level from party politics to develop it as an institution for development. ‘Even though we raised the issue of non-party elections at the local level during the constitution-making process, the then big parties did not accept it,’ he said, ‘We should bring the local level under the province and arrange for party-free elections there.’

Janmat Party Chairman CK Raut says that a strict law is needed to bind the people’s representatives elected by the party at the local level to the party’s discipline. ‘In the absence of that, it would be better to hold elections without party symbols,’ he says, ‘Currently, there is a situation where people are elected by the party at the local level but the party does not care about them and cannot take action. On the other hand, when people's representatives do wrong, the party is being defamed.'

Raut also argues that a constitutional amendment is not necessary to go to local elections without party symbols. He says that the issue of party representation is not mentioned anywhere in the constitution in the context of local government formation.

UML's Local Development Department Chief Rajendra Prasad Gautam says that non-partisan elections are unthinkable in a party system. 'We are in a competitive party system. In a country that has adopted a competitive multi-party democratic system of governance, it cannot be called non-partisan,' he says, 'This is not a matter that suits the system, it is unacceptable.

He said that the contradictory character of the RSPB is seen in setting criteria for candidate selection and preparing for local elections on the one hand, and non-partisan local elections on the other. The central committee meeting of the RSPB held on 7 Baisakh had decided to set the framework and criteria for selecting candidates for local elections. UML leader Gautam has pointed to that. He said that non-partisan local elections cannot be held without amending the constitution. A two-thirds majority in both houses is required for amending the constitution. The local elections are about a year away. 

The Election Commission has also said that local elections can be made non-partisan. The commission had sent suggestions to the task force formed by the government to set the agenda for constitutional amendments last month. Acting Chief Election Commissioner Ram Prasad Bhandari informed that the commission had sent suggestions for non-partisan elections after looking at the two elections held at the local level and the subsequent practice. ‘The local level is the first unit for development work and a place to provide services to the people,’ he told Kantipur, ‘It is better not to promote partisanship or politicization there. There are such practices in other democratic countries too. 

Bhandari claims that leaving the local level independent will yield more returns. ‘It is better to make local level people’s representatives accountable to the people rather than parties and to facilitate development work,’ he said. 

Bhandari also says that there is no need to keep amending the constitution to hold elections without partisan competition at the local level. ‘The constitution does not prevent it. "It is enough to amend some laws including the Local Level Election Act," he said, who is also a senior advocate. "The issue of going into such an exercise depends on the willpower of the government and political parties." Constitutional scholar Bipin Adhikari has a different argument. He claims that no special achievement can be achieved by making the local level non-partisan. "The local level can be made non-partisan, but what achievement will be achieved from this should be seen," he said. "In a non-partisan system, an individual stands in the election. In a partisan system, an individual also has the responsibility of the party. An individual becomes small in front of the party. A party is also a large organization." Adhikari argues that it is easier for an individual to bring big policies and programs and successfully implement them, that is, those who have the support of the organization, that is, those who win from the party, than for an individual. "In a situation where an election is held without a party, who will take action if the behavior of the person who won deteriorates? Who will hold him responsible?" he says.