Nepal New PM: After days of intense protests and the resignation of Prime Minister KP Sharma Oli along with several ministers, Nepal has selected its new interim leader. Sushila Karki, the former Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, is set to become the country's first female interim Prime Minister. While names like Kathmandu Mayor Balen Shah and former Nepal Electricity Authority head Kulman Ghising gained traction, consensus ultimately favored Karki. She will hold the position until the next elections. This development raises key questions: What does Nepal's constitution stipulate about the Prime Minister and interim roles? And what powers does an interim PM actually wield?
Nepal's political landscape is no stranger to instability, marked by frequent power shifts, coalition breakdowns, party defections, and internal conflicts that hinder stable governance. Despite adopting a parliamentary democracy, these challenges persist. The Prime Minister's position, similar to India's system, relies on parliamentary majority and the President's endorsement.
When a PM loses majority support, resigns, or the house is dissolved, the President typically retains the outgoing leader in a caretaker capacity to prevent a leadership vacuum until a new appointment. Nepal has seen multiple interim setups since embracing democracy, especially during coalition collapses. However, this instance stands out due to the unique circumstances surrounding Oli's exit amid widespread unrest.
Nepal's current constitution, adopted in 2015 (known as the "Constitution of Nepal-2072" by the Constituent Assembly), outlines these processes in Article 76. This section details PM appointments, majority requirements, and scenarios for vacancy. Specifically, Article 76(7) states that if no new PM is appointed after a resignation or removal, the President allows the former PM to continue in an executive role until a successor is named. While the term "Caretaker PM" isn't explicitly used, it effectively describes the arrangement in practice.
Under the constitution, a newly appointed PM must prove majority support within 30 days. This is why Karki will serve interimly for now, with elections on the horizon. If no party secures a clear majority post-election, the President can appoint the leader of the largest party. In a multi-party setup, the President holds discretion in selection, but the appointee must still demonstrate majority within 30 days. Failure allows the President to name another parliamentary member or even dissolve the house if needed.
The role of an interim PM is strictly limited to executive functions aimed at maintaining continuity. Their primary goal is to handle routine administration and ensure stability during the transition to elections or a new government. Permissible actions include:
However, interim PMs are barred from overstepping into major policy areas to avoid influencing future administrations. Prohibited activities encompass:
In Nepal, the President's role is largely ceremonial but becomes pivotal during political deadlocks. They ensure no power vacuum occurs, keeping the outgoing PM in caretaker mode until a new leader emerges. Under Article 76, they oversee the majority-proving process.
Parliament's function kicks in post-election, recommending a new majority to the President as soon as it's evident.
Since the monarchy's abolition and the shift to a republic, Nepal has navigated several transitional phases with interim leaders. In 2013, following Baburam Bhattarai's resignation, Chief Justice Khil Raj Regmi was appointed to oversee elections as head of a caretaker government. More recently, in 2021, the tug-of-war between KP Sharma Oli and Sher Bahadur Deuba highlighted the courts' and President's roles in resolving crises. These episodes underscore how interim setups preserve the status quo, allowing governance to continue until an elected administration takes over, averting potential chaos.
This framework aligns with international democratic norms. In India, a resigning PM or post-election announcement period sees a caretaker government limited to routine decisions. Bangladesh recently appointed Muhammad Yunus as interim chief after Sheikh Hasina's ouster amid student protests, focusing solely on stability. Parliamentary systems like the UK's also restrict caretaker governments from major policy shifts, emphasizing transitional restraint.
Frequent governmental instability in Nepal, fueled by fracturing alliances and judicial interventions, has intensified discussions on interim PM boundaries. Critics argue that some caretakers exceed limits by making high-level appointments or sensitive deals. Supporters counter that, as acting executives, they must exercise necessary authority. Yet, judicial precedents and traditions lean toward confining them to daily administration.
Unrestricted powers for interim leaders could enable election manipulation, opposition suppression, or preemptive binding on successors – risks that democracies mitigate by capping caretaker authority. This setup serves as a bridge for smooth transitions, not a substitute for elected rule.
In summary, Nepal's interim PM role, as defined by the 2015 Constitution's Article 76, is a bounded mechanism for continuity. Though not exhaustively listed, powers are shaped by tradition, court rulings, and political experience: focus on routine governance, uphold stability through elections, and facilitate handover. Given Nepal's volatile politics, this position acts as a guardian of democratic transitions, ensuring the system endures amid change.