KATHMANDU: Nepal’s political standoff deepened on Thursday as President Ram Chandra Paudel signaled his willingness to appoint former Chief Justice Sushila Karki as interim Prime Minister — a central demand of the country’s Gen-Z–led protest movement — but balked at dissolving Parliament amid fears of a constitutional breakdown.
According to officials familiar with late-night discussions at Sheetal Niwas, the presidential residence, Paudel held intensive consultations with a panel of leading constitutional scholars before indicating that he could, in principle, back Karki’s elevation to the top post. But the president remains hesitant to trigger a parliamentary dissolution, a step he regards as fraught with legal and political risk.
Karki, in talks with Paudel, reportedly underscored that Nepal’s constitution does not permit the appointment of a non-Member of Parliament as Prime Minister unless the legislature is dissolved. Paudel has been exploring procedural workarounds to install Karki without dismantling the House, participants in the consultations said.
“Talks have made progress but no final decision has been reached,” one legal expert briefed on the meetings told The Political Observer. Paudel is expected to resume discussions with advisers Friday morning.
Among those advising the president were constitutional lawyers Bhimarjun Acharya, Bipin Adhikari, Purnaman Shakya, Chandrakanta Gyawali, Surya Dhungel and Lalit Bahadur Basnet, reflecting the high stakes of the decision.
The unprecedented youth-driven demonstrations on Sept. 8–9, which left more than 30 people dead and over a thousand injured, have intensified pressure on Nepal’s political establishment. Protesters have demanded both the dissolution of Parliament and the appointment of Karki as a non-partisan caretaker, rejecting mainstream party leaders.
Paudel is weighing whether an “independent” appointment can be made within existing constitutional limits. Much of the debate has revolved around Article 61(4), which obliges the president to safeguard the constitution, and Article 305, which allows temporary orders on the Cabinet’s recommendation. Several experts contend that the latter provision cannot legitimately be used in the current context.
The crisis has escalated since Prime Minister K.P. Oli resigned during the protests, prompting the transfer of key security functions to the Nepal Army in coordination with civilian agencies. With no consensus yet achieved, Nepal faces a delicate balancing act between popular demands for a fresh start and the rigid constraints of its constitutional order.
