
General articles are free for 24 hours after publish.
Nepal PM's Image as Change Agent at Risk Amid Criticism of Neglect
Nepal's Prime Minister Balendra Shah faces mounting criticism for perceived neglect of the poor and a focus on forceful policy execution. Recent tragic incidents highlight public frustration over slow progress on youth unemployment and inequality, jeopardizing his image as a change agent.
Nepali Prime Minister Balendra Shah is facing criticism for a perceived lack of concern for the poor and a preoccupation with projecting an image as a ruthless executor of public plans. When 37-year-old Prem Prasad Acharya died after setting himself on fire in January 2023, Balendra Shah was the mayor of Kathmandu, Nepal’s bustling national capital. At the time, Shah termed the incident a sign of “the state’s extreme failure.” That comment is now coming back to haunt Shah, the country’s prime minister since March 2026. On July 9 this year, it was the turn of 25-year-old Ganesh Nepali, a Dalit who was providing for his family by running a ride-hailing service on his motorcycle, to try to self-immolate. He chose to do so rather than pay 1,000 Nepali rupees (roughly $6.5) in parking fines. He died a day later. Nepali was seemingly under great financial stress as he had to support his family on his meager income while paying the bank installments on the bike. The parking fine imposed by Kathmandu’s municipal police acted as the immediate trigger for Nepali, who was already under considerable financial strain. During his term as mayor, Shah had given the municipal police dubious powers that are otherwise given only to traffic police, including the power to impose traffic fines — and those powers continue to be abused. Although the municipal police falls under the Kathmandu Metropolitan City and not under the federal government that Shah leads, its actions continue to be seen as part of Shah’s legacy as mayor. The Ganesh Nepali controversy was especially damaging because the government at the time was defending proposals for a significant increase in the scope and amount of traffic violation fines, with top fines of 100,000 rupees for some offenses. Even before Nepali’s self-immolation, these proposed fines were widely being criticized as instruments of coercion rather than proportionate regulation. Furthermore, Shah came to power on the back of youth protests partly fueled by concerns over unemployment and inequality. There has been no visible progress in addressing these problems. Young people remain frustrated by the lack of good jobs and are looking to leave the country the first chance they get. Separately, soon after becoming prime minister, Shah started a campaign to raze Kathmandu’s riverside squatter settlements without any plan to resettle thousands of those who would be displaced. During the campaign, two squatters died by suicide. Shah seems determined to project an image of a ruthless executor of public plans. Critics of his government’s unjust plans and policies are often harassed by pro-Shah accounts online. Another emblematic recent case of state excess has been the beating and detention of Majid Ansari, a young activist who had dared to speak up on the wretched plight of the displaced squatters. Ansari vociferously criticized the government when the temporary shelters where the squatters had been housed started flooding; the government had earlier moved them there despite warnings that the place was flood-prone. Ansari was taken into custody on dubious charges — much to the anger of the Gen Z activists who had propelled Shah to power. Ansari was among the activists involved in the Gen Z movement that overthrew the old K.P. Sharma Oli government, an event that culminated in Shah’s election as prime minister in the March 2026 elections. Increasingly, even ruling-party lawmakers have been put off by the prime minister’s heavy-handedness and lack of foresight. Shah’s public image as a change agent is at risk. The prime minister always appears in public wearing his signature dark glasses. The glasses that once symbolized anti-establishment defiance have increasingly become a metaphor for a government unwilling to see those bearing the heaviest costs of its rule.
Original source
The Diplomat Indonesia