Young protesters who spearheaded last year’s mass uprising in Nepal are increasingly disillusioned with the interim government that came to power after weeks of violent demonstrations, accusing it of failing to deliver on promises to end corruption and ensure accountability.
Mukesh Awasti, 22, had planned to leave for Australia in September to study civil engineering. Instead, he joined protests in Kathmandu demanding an end to corruption and better governance. He was shot by security forces during the unrest and later lost a leg. From his hospital bed at the National Trauma Center in the capital, Awasti said he now regrets taking part in the movement.
“I gave up everything, but nothing has changed,” he said. “Corruption has not ended, and those who fired on protesters have not been arrested.”
The protests erupted on Sept. 8 and quickly turned violent, leaving at least 76 people dead and more than 2,300 injured. The movement, driven largely by so-called Gen Z activists, forced political leaders into negotiations that resulted in the appointment on Sept. 12 of Sushila Karki, a retired Supreme Court judge, as Nepal’s first female prime minister. She was tasked with leading an interim government and holding parliamentary elections in March.
Months later, many of the same protesters say the government has failed them. The country’s anti-corruption agency has filed only one major case, which does not involve prominent political figures. Politicians accused by demonstrators are preparing to contest the upcoming elections, while no cases have been brought against leaders who were in power when protesters were killed or injured.
Frustration has pushed injured demonstrators and families of victims back onto the streets. In recent weeks, dozens have staged protests outside the prime minister’s office, some of which were dispersed by police.
“We are here again because the government did nothing,” said Suman Bohara, who walks with crutches after his right foot was badly injured during the protests. “Families lost loved ones, many were wounded, but there has been no justice.”
The original demonstrations drew tens of thousands of mostly young people angered by widespread corruption, unemployment, lack of opportunity and poor governance. The unrest was initially triggered by a government ban on social media platforms. Protesters broke through police barricades and tried to storm Parliament, prompting security forces to open fire.
Within days, protests spread nationwide. Mobs torched the offices of the prime minister and president, attacked police stations and burned the homes of senior politicians, many of whom were evacuated by army helicopters. The military eventually restored order, and talks led to the formation of the interim government with the sole mandate of conducting elections.
Prime Minister Karki has repeatedly said her government is focused on that task. She has pledged that parliamentary polls will be held on March 5, saying preparations are nearly complete and the security situation has improved.
“As the world looks toward a smooth transition through elections, I want to assure everyone that we will deliver,” Karki said recently.
However, divisions within the Gen Z movement have complicated the political landscape. Different groups are now pushing competing demands, including direct elections for prime minister, scrapping the current constitution and imprisoning all former political leaders. There is no unified leadership, with multiple individuals claiming to represent the movement’s voice.
Analysts say this lack of clarity has become a major obstacle.
“The confusion we see today is largely because there was no clear agreement on what the protesters wanted or how the new government should function,” said Abeeral Thapa, principal of Polygon College of Journalism and Mass Communications in Kathmandu.
Some activists have begun opposing the March elections, arguing that their movement was not meant simply to replace one parliament with another. They insist that corruption must be tackled immediately and those responsible for abuses must be punished before any vote is held.
Others believe elections are necessary to bring in new lawmakers who can pursue those goals through democratic means.
Legal uncertainty has further complicated matters. Nepal’s constitution does not clearly outline provisions for forming an interim government. When appointing Karki’s administration, the president stated that its primary responsibility was to hold elections, raising questions about how much authority it has to meet broader demands.
Thapa said the protests were initially narrow in focus but quickly spiraled beyond their original aims.
“They started with demands to control corruption and lift the social media ban,” he said. “But events took an unexpected turn, and the collapse of the government was not something they fully planned for.”
Whether the promised elections can be held in March remains uncertain, but analysts say there are few alternatives. For now, many young Nepalis who once celebrated the fall of the previous government are left feeling betrayed by a system they hoped to change, unsure whether the movement that cost so much can still deliver the reforms they demanded.