Népal
The Supreme Court of Nepal has scheduled a full hearing on a petition challenging the constitutionality of the agreement between the interim government and Gen Z representatives. The petitioners argue that the interim government lacks the authority to enter into long-term political agreements, potentially leading to instability. The court's decision to proceed with a full hearing underscores the significance of the case in Nepal's legal and political landscape.
In December 2025, the interim government led by Prime Minister Sushila Karki signed a 10-point agreement with Gen Z representatives. This accord recognized the September 2025 Gen Z movement as a 'jana andolan' (people's movement) and outlined various political, electoral, judicial, and institutional reforms. The agreement aimed to address the demands of the youth-led protests that had called for systemic changes in governance and accountability.
The petitioners, including advocates and law students, filed the writ on December 18, 2025, shortly after the agreement was signed. They contend that the interim government's mandate is limited to conducting free and fair elections and that entering into substantive political agreements exceeds its authority. The petition also raises concerns about the potential overlap of new commissions proposed in the agreement with existing constitutional bodies, such as the Commission for the Investigation of Abuse of Authority.
The Supreme Court's decision to consolidate related writ petitions and move forward with a full bench hearing indicates the case's complexity and importance. The outcome could have far-reaching consequences for the interim government's actions and the implementation of the proposed reforms.
This legal development occurs against the backdrop of Nepal's recent political upheavals. The Gen Z movement, driven by widespread dissatisfaction among the youth regarding corruption, unemployment, and governance issues, led to significant protests in September 2025. These events resulted in the resignation of the previous government and the appointment of an interim administration tasked with stabilizing the country and preparing for upcoming elections.
The Supreme Court's forthcoming hearing will be closely watched, as it addresses fundamental questions about the scope of interim governmental powers and the legitimacy of agreements made during transitional periods. The decision will not only impact the current political framework but also set precedents for future governance and legal interpretations in Nepal.
