Oli accused of fueling political unrest in Madhesh to derail election environment; Midnight appointment sparks outrage

KATHMANDU: Political tensions have sharply intensified in Madhesh Province after a late-night maneuver by CPN-UML Chair KP Sharma Oli and Province Head Sumitra Bhandari Subedi resulted in the appointment of UML Parliamentary Party Leader Saroj Kumar Yadav as Chief Minister under highly controversial circumstances. The move has triggered street protests, vandalism of government offices, and accusations that Oli is deliberately attempting to derail the political environment ahead of the March 13 (Falgun 21) House of Representatives election.

Subedi, who was appointed Province Head a year and a half ago on Oli’s recommendation, administered the oath of office to Yadav at approximately 4:00 AM inside a Bardibas-based hotel. At the time, Subedi was said to be traveling toward Kathmandu for medical reasons, raising questions about how and why the oath ceremony was urgently organized outside official premises.

The appointment bypassed the political majority coalition of seven parties, including Nepali Congress, Loktantrik Samajwadi Party, CPN (Unified Socialist), and others, who had formally requested government formation under Article 168(2) of the Constitution a day earlier. Instead, Subedi invoked Article 168(3), appointing the parliamentary leader of the largest single party — a move constitutional experts describe as both procedurally premature and politically motivated.

Constitutional Process Bypassed

Article 168(2) of Nepal’s Constitution requires the Province Head to initiate government formation through a majority coalition if such a majority exists or if parties formally state intention to form one. Only when no such majority can be formed does Article 168(3) apply, allowing the largest party to lead the government — but with a mandatory requirement to prove majority within 30 days.

In this case, not only did the majority coalition exist, but it had also submitted a written request to the Province Head the previous evening. Despite this, Subedi moved ahead with the UML-led appointment without issuing the official call for coalition formation.

“This is not just an administrative irregularity — it is an intentional circumvention of the Constitution,” said a senior constitutional lawyer in Kathmandu. “If such a precedent stands, federalism becomes meaningless because the Province Head can unilaterally determine the government regardless of parliamentary majority.”

Protests and Public Outrage

Following the appointment, political unrest escalated in Janakpur and Bardibas. Demonstrators burned tires outside the Chief Minister’s Office, and members of several political parties vandalized sections of the Province Head’s Office and the Chief Minister’s secretariat. Security forces were deployed to prevent further escalation.

While vandalism itself has been widely condemned, critics argue that the underlying political trigger — the Province Head’s hotel-based oath ceremony — is the more serious affront to public trust.

“This was not a routine government transition — it was a calculated attempt to ignite instability,” a Nepali Congress provincial leader said.

Oli’s Role Under Scrutiny

The move has amplified scrutiny of former Prime Minister Oli’s political strategy during a pivotal national moment. The Gen-Z uprising of early September — which resulted in the deaths of 21 young demonstrators and 76 people overall — has left the public deeply distrustful of established political elites. The Falgun 21 snap elections were intended to restore a legitimate political mandate and stabilize governance after the uprising.

Observers argue that provoking instability in Madhesh risks undermining the election atmosphere nationwide.

“At a time when the state needs calm and institutional clarity, Oli appears to be pushing the situation toward confrontation,” said a political analyst at Tribhuvan University. “If the election environment collapses, the blame will not be abstract — it will be direct and personal.”

Critics also recall that during his tenure as Prime Minister, Oli resisted key federal implementation processes and delayed legislation necessary to operationalize provincial autonomy. His party’s former Chief Minister in Gandaki, Prithvi Subba Gurung, publicly stated that the federal government under Oli actively obstructed provincial functioning.

Impact on Federalism and Public Trust

The Madhesh development arrives at a time when public confidence in political institutions is already fragile. The Gen-Z uprising exposed deep dissatisfaction with corruption, patronage, and centralization of power. Many young Nepalis, especially in Madhesh, have viewed federalism as a mechanism to assert regional identity and local decision-making.

“The Province Head’s decision — made in secrecy, in a hotel, at dawn — symbolically insults the principle of federal governance,” noted a federalism scholar. “It reinforces the perception that powerful figures in Kathmandu continue to treat provinces as administrative extensions, not sovereign political units.”

If the appointment is challenged legally, the Supreme Court will ultimately determine whether Subedi acted in violation of constitutional procedure. However, the immediate political consequences are already unfolding on the ground.

Election Stability at Stake

The central government, formed after the Gen-Z uprising, holds a national mandate to conduct elections on Falgun 21. Disruption in Madhesh — a key political province with historically sensitive identity dynamics — could threaten election preparations across Nepal.

Parties opposed to the UML-led appointment have already warned that “democratic order cannot be maintained through unconstitutional manipulation.”

Meanwhile, Oli has continued public rhetoric downplaying the Gen-Z uprising and criticizing the transitional government. His remarks have fueled anger among families of victims and youth networks that participated in the protests.

The Road Ahead

If stability in Madhesh deteriorates further, the implications could be significant:

As one analyst summarized, “The Madhesh episode is not only a constitutional dispute — it is a test of Nepal’s commitment to democratic integrity following the most politically consequential youth uprising in decades. If political actors continue to play with fire, the consequences may go far beyond the province.”