It has been more than a month since Nepal witnessed a wave of Gen Z-led protests that toppled the government practically overnight, dissolving parliament and forcing formerly entrenched leaders to step aside. Despite the dramatic political upheaval, many of the young activists and ordinary citizens who poured into the streets in early September say the promised reforms—especially regarding corruption—have been slow in coming.
The movement began on 8 September, when thousands of young Nepalis rallied against growing corruption and a rigid social media ban. The protests escalated rapidly, and in just one day the government of KP Sharma Oli was removed, parliament dissolved, and an interim administration installed under Sushila Karki—a former chief justice noted for her anti-corruption stance.
Among the protesters injured that day was 23-year-old Prakash Bohora, who was shot in the leg near the parliament building. He remains hospitalized, his condition urgent. A viral image of his blood-stained shoe has become a lasting symbol of the tragedy that claimed 19 lives—the highest death toll ever recorded in a single protest in Nepal.
Bohora’s story highlights the grit and resolve of many young people who took part in the uprising. Disillusioned with a system that in their view enriches those in power while leaving others unemployed, exploited, or compelled to accept harsh conditions, they insisted the movement was not about replacing one elite with another but fundamentally transforming how politics works in their country.
Yet as October rolls in, many demands remain unmet. While the appointment of Karki has given hope, few concrete actions have followed. There have been no major arrests of former officials widely accused of corruption, sparking disappointment among protesters who expected swift accountability. Government officials say investigations are being enabled—commissions are being cleared of political interference and empowered to accept complaints against high-ranking individuals. But such promises have yet to materialize in visible results.
The interim administration is under heavy pressure. Gen Z groups voice that unless corruption scandals involving former leaders are meaningfully investigated, the very purpose of the widespread movement will be lost. Meanwhile, the legitimacy of the interim government is being challenged by Nepal’s major parties—Nepali Congress, the Communists, and the Maoists—who boycotted Karki’s swearing-in and question whether dissolving parliament was even constitutional.
Observers warn that this tension between the youth movement and the established political class could pose serious risks to Nepal’s political stability, especially with national elections scheduled for March. For many young Nepalis, the moment is a rare opportunity for entrenched parties to re-evaluate their leadership, renew credibility, and truly address systemic issues. Whether that opportunity leads to lasting change, however, hinges on whether promises are translated into action.
