Abstract

Elections are vital to democracy, ensuring representation, peaceful transitions, and stability. They resolve conflicts and legitimise leadership. However, dissatisfaction among youth voters due to political infighting and slow governance has created negative perceptions. Social media significantly impacts political engagement, and educating new voters is essential for strengthening democracy and fostering informed participation. Using a historical-analytical research design with elements of quantitative analysis, this article assesses the public participation in Nepal’s political system right from the autocratic Rana and Panchayat rule to general elections for the House of Representative in 1959, 1991, 1994, 1999, 2017 and 2022 and Constitution Assembly elections of 2008 and 2013. It infers that voter participation in Nepal has evolved significantly, especially after the 1951 democratic revolution, and in democratic periods, voter turnout remained strong, even during the Maoist insurgency. The 2008 Constituent Assembly election marked a shift towards a federal democratic republic, with increased voter engagement in 2013. Political stability and local governance structures have since revivified voter interest, with youth increasingly advocating for reforms and shaping Nepal’s political future.

Introduction

Democracy, originating from the Greek terms ‘demos’ (people) and ‘kratein’ (to rule), denotes a system of governance where the majority of citizens hold decision-making power. Unlike monarchy, aristocracy, or dictatorship, democracy prioritises the interests and well-being of the populace (Mohanty, 2013). Thus, it is characterised by three core principles: participation, accountability, and adherence to the rule of law. Ensuring equitable access to public affairs, information, and grievance mechanisms promotes accelerated development (Quraishi, 2014).

Democratic elections are free and encourage active participation, but must meet necessary conditions for true democracy, ensuring regular elections with elected officials accountable to the public (Gyawali, 2008). In fact, an election in democracy is not a competitive game of leadership among limited political parties or political persons but a system of looking for the representative liked by the people (Khadka v. OPCM et al, 2014). Similarly, the Supreme Court of Nepal asserts that adult franchise is the foundation of democracy, and regular and well-run elections are essential for upholding this principle, avoiding controversy (Singh v. Election Commission of Nepal, 2013). The Supreme Court of India noted that democracy functions effectively only when people are free to vote for their preferred candidates through a fair electoral process. (Gandhi v. Narayan, 1975).

Background

The history of democracy is closely linked to elections, as they are crucial for achieving government change. Voters form the foundation, allowing them to participate in representative selection and decision-making. Elections ensure electoral integrity and represent representative government (Belbase, 2012). Elections enable compromise, power transfer, problem-solving, and policy change (Renwick, 2011).

Elections are crucial for conflict resolution, ensuring peaceful power transitions and preventing violence. They are present in all political systems and involve voter registration and voting processes. Elections are interconnected and vital for democratic systems, as they prevent violence and foster stability. They also serve as self-correction, reinforcing the legitimacy of ruling elites through influence, intimidation, and violence (Chopra, 1998; Kumar, 2010).

Agu et al. (2013) found that global voter dissatisfaction is increasing, emphasising the need for a sustainable society. Factors like age, occupation, and gender influence voting patterns. While Gautam (2019) emphasised the importance of freedom of speech and voting, as citizens express their views through their choices.

Bartuala et al. (2022) found that youth voters are dissatisfied with political infighting and slow governance, leading to a negative perception of politicians. Similarly, Tariq et al. (2022) found that social media use and behavioural characteristics in Pakistan affect political involvement, with both direct and indirect effects.

Becker’s (2023) studies in Germany in 1998 and 2017 revealed that rational voting, a focus in economic electoral research, is a special case among other modal types like habitual (traditional) voting, norm-related voting, and value-rational voting. Most voters vote based on norms and values, while purely purposive-rational voting is a more general phenomenon.

Azhar et al. (2024) emphasised the importance of new voters in elections, highlighting the Election Commission’s role in engaging them and promoting democracy. Musrifa et al. (2024) emphasise the need for political education and election information in Indonesia, as voter participation remains low, necessitating continuous efforts to educate new voters.

Based on the above, this article has assessed the voter participation in Nepal’s political regime using a historical-analytical research design complemented by quantitative analysis (esp., of voter turnout statistics and election results.

Discussion

In the Nepalese context, public participation in government administration dates to the Licchhavi and Malla periods, particularly in the Karnali and Gandaki regions (Vaidya & Bajracharya, 2055). The modern electoral system began to take shape after 1948, although local-level elections in Nepal can be traced back to 1929-30 AD.

In 1947, during the Rana’s dynastic autocracy, Prime Minister Padma Shumsher Rana established a Constitution Reform Committee led by General Bahadur Shumsher Rana to overhaul the administration. The 1948 Nepal Government Constitutional Law envisioned a bicameral legislature, consisting of a lower house (Rastra Sabha) with 42 elected members and 28 members appointed by the Prime Minister. The law also included provisions for five to fifteen elected village panchayats, ten to fifty elected municipal panchayats, and fifteen to twenty elected district panchayats. Nonpartisan democracy would underpin these elections, and voting rights were to be extended to all adults. Although the law was enacted, it was never implemented in practice. (Election Commission of Nepal, 2017). Nepal Praja Parishad, the first political party of Nepal, was established on June 12, 1936, but modern political activities and electoral processes were not conducted for an extended period.

House of Representative Election, 1959: The first and historical general election of Nepal took place from February 18, 1959 to  April 3, 1959 with a total of 1,791,381 voters, with a 42.19 percent turnout, following the Constitution of Nepal, 1959, adopted on February 12, 1959 to elect the 109 members of the first House of Representatives, the lower house of the Parliament of Nepal (Joshi & Rose, 1966; Nohlen et al., 2001; Election Commission, 2017).

The Nepali Congress Party won 74 out of 109 seats in a historic election, securing a two-thirds majority with 37.23 percent of the vote, with a total of 786 candidates competing in the election. Bishweshwar Prasad Koirala became the first democratically elected Prime Minister of Nepal. Members from nine registered parties and four independents made up the inaugural House of Representatives, with Krishna Prasad Bhattarai from the Nepali Congress serving as Speaker. The parliament’s term commenced on May 27, 1959, and was dissolved on December 15, 1960 (Election Commission, 2017) following a royal coup by King Mahendra.

House of Representative Election, 1991: In December1960, King Mahendra imposed the Panchayat system banning political parties and replacing the democratically elected prime minister with a four-tier structure. The Nepalese people, along with banned political parties, continued their struggle against the undemocratic Panchayat regime. In 1990, the Panchayat System was abolished as a result of the first People’s Movement, and on November 9, 1990, the Constitution of Nepal was promulgated, establishing a democratic system under a constitutional monarchy. The House of Representatives election on 12 May 1991 saw a 65.15 percent voter turnout from a total of 1,191,777 voters, with 20 registered parties and three independents elected where 1,270 candidates competed for 205 seats. The Nepali Congress won 110 out of 205 seats, receiving 39.50 percent of the vote. Girja Prasad Koirala became Prime Minister (Election Commission, 2017). In July 1994, Koirala requested King Birendra to dissolve the parliament, hence it could not complete its five-year tenure.

House of Representative Election, 1994: On November 15, 1994, Nepal held general elections to elect House of Representatives members. King Birendra requested fresh elections following the collapse of the previous Nepali Congress government. Manmohan Adhikari from the Communist Party of Nepal-CPN (UML) became prime minister, leading a minority government. The CPN-UML won 88 out of 205 seats, with a total of 12,327,329 voters, a turnout of 61.86 percent; out of 1,442 candidates from 24 political parties along with 385 independent candidates (Election Commission, 2017). Party fragmentation, particularly within the Nepali Congress and UML, led to faction groups contesting against parent parties. Prime Minister Adhikari failed to form a majority government, resulting in the UML becoming the first democratically elected communist administration in Asia and the first communist government under a constitutional monarchy, lasting tenure of only nine months.

House of Representative Election, 1999: General elections were held in Nepal on May 3 and 17, 1999. According to the report of Election Commission, 2017, the Nepali Congress emerged victorious, winning 111 out of 205 seats. A total of 2,238 candidates from 39 political parties, along with 633 independent candidates, contested the election. The total number of voters was 8,894,566 with a turnout of 65.79 percent. Following the 1999 elections, political parties struggled to find a unified strategy to address the Maoist insurgency, leading to King Gyanendra’s dismissal of Prime Minister Sher Bahadur Deuba and parliament dissolution in 2002. The House of Representatives was restored in 2006, following the 19-day Second People’s Movement and all major parties, except the royalist Rastriya Prajatantra Party, joined forces in the Seven Party Alliance to demand democracy reinstatement.

Fall of Monarchy and Rise of Republic: Nepal faced a Maoist insurgency beginning on February 13, 1996, which caused significant political instability and resulted in thousands of deaths. In 2001, King Gyanendra ascended the throne after a royal massacre, triggering widespread protests and leading to the dissolution of parliament. The Second People’s Movement in 2006 demanded the restoration of parliament and an end to autocratic rule. This movement succeeded in forcing King Gyanendra to relinquish absolute power and reinstate parliament. In 2008, Nepal declared itself a Federal Democratic Republic, officially abolishing the monarchy on May 28, 2008, after a peace agreement and Constituent Assembly elections.

First Constitution Assembly: The first Nepalese Constituent Assembly, a unicameral legislature with 601 members, took office in May 2008 after the election of April 10, 2008, abolishing the monarchy. The number of eligible voters was 17,611,832, with a voter turnout of 61.74 percent. The Communist Party of Nepal (Maoist) won 38.1 percent of seats, with Pushpa Kamal Dahal as Prime Minister and Dr. Ram Baran Yadav as the first President, receiving 308 out of 590 votes. However, the first Constituent Assembly was dissolved due to inability to draft a new constitution. A combination of First-Past-The-Post (FPTP) and Proportional Representation (PR) voting systems was adopted for the first time in Nepal’s history to conduct assembly elections with (Election Commission, 2017).

Second Constitution Assembly: After the failure of the first Constituent Assembly, a second Constituent Assembly election was held on November 19, 2013. A total of 6,125 candidates participated, representing 22 political parties and one independent candidate. The number of eligible voters was 12,147,865, with a voter turnout of 78.34 percent. At the start of the second Constituent Assembly, 30 political parties and two independents were represented. The election results favored the Nepali Congress party, which won 105 out of the 240 seats in the First-Past-the-Post (FPTP) system (Election Commission, 2017). The First Constituent Assembly faced challenges in drafting a constitution within the stipulated timeframe following the devastating earthquake in April 2015. The Second Constituent Assembly successfully drafted the Constitution, with 538 out of 598 members voting in favour, while 60 members abstained, including political groups from the Madhesh or Terai belt.

House of Representative Election, 2017 and 2022: Nepal’s first national and state-level elections following the adoption of the 2015 constitution, held in November and December 2017, saw a voter turnout of 68.63 percent, according to the Election Commission (2017). The elections established the lower house of the Federal Parliament and legislative assemblies for the seven provinces. The 275 members of the House of Representatives were elected using two methods: 165 from single-member constituencies through First-Past-The-Post (FPTP) voting, and 110 through Closed List Proportional Representation (CLPR) from a single nationwide constituency. A total of 58 political parties participated, with leaders from five major parties and nine others securing positions through both proportional and FPTP voting. While left and democratic alliances initially emerged strongly, these coalitions did not endure. Following the dissolution of parliament on September 18, 2022, new general elections took place on November 20, 2022. A total of 17,988,750 voters were registered, with a 61 percent turnout for both FPTP and CLPR systems. The Nepali Congress once again emerged as the leading party, securing 89 seats, followed by CPN-UML. Notably, 34 new political parties entered parliament, with the Rastriya Swatantra Party surprisingly securing 20 seats, placing them in fourth position (Election Commission, 2022).

Conclusion

Nepali citizens’ participation in the electoral process has evolved significantly, mirroring the country’s shifting political landscape and growing public engagement in governance. Before the 1951 democratic revolution, Nepal was under the autocratic Rana regime (1846–1951) and the monarchy, with either minimal or restricted political participation and no democratic structures.

In 1959, Nepal held its first general elections, and the Nepali Congress party won a majority, marking the start of a democratic period with high voter turnout (42.19 percent). This era was brief, as in 1960, King Mahendra staged a royal coup, ousting the elected Prime Minister, dissolving parliament, and establishing the party-less Panchayat system that autocratically governed Nepal for three decades.

Despite three decades of political suppression, enthusiasm remained high in subsequent elections following the restoration of democracy in 1990. In the 1994 and 1999 elections, voter turnout was remarkably high, indicating a strong commitment to democracy. However, political instability, government changes, and the Maoist insurgency in 1996 led to disillusionment and a decline in public participation due to violence and fear.

After the 2006 Comprehensive Peace Agreement, Nepal held Constituent Assembly elections in 2008 to draft a new constitution. Despite challenges, voter turnout was high at 61.70 percent. The abolition of the monarchy and declaration of Nepal as a federal democratic republic marked a significant political shift. In 2013, voter turnout increased to 78.34 percent, demonstrating public enthusiasm for the democratic process.

Voter participation is high when political stability and democratic processes are in place. However, instability and dissatisfaction with leadership can decrease turnout. The federal system has revivified voter interest, especially in local elections, as citizens see a direct impact on local governance. Young people are increasingly engaged in advocating for political and social reforms, demonstrating a commitment to shaping the nation’s political future.

References

Advocate Sunil Ranjan Singh v. Election Commission, Kathmandu et al. (2013). Some decisions of the Supreme Court Nepal, 5, Decision No. 8535. Supreme Court, Nepal. 16.

Agu, S.U., Okeke, V.O.S., & Idike, A.N. (2013). Voters apathy and revival of genuine political participation in Nigeria. Mediterranean Journal of Social Sciences, 4(3), 439-448. https://doi.org/10.5901/mjss.2013.v4n3p439

Azhar, N., Sutiana, Y., & Tresnayadi, B. (2024). Analysis of the understanding and political awareness of new voters in the 2024 election: A Siyasah Dustruriyah Perspective. Al-Adalah: Jurnal Hukum dan Politik Islam, 9(2), 224-244.

Bartaula, R., Adhikari, U., Baniya, P., Thapa, R., Khatiwada, N., Khanal, A., & Khadka, L. (2022). A study on voters’ behaviour and voting. Election Observation Committee Nepal. 

Becker, R. (2023). Voting behavior as social action: Habits, norms, values, and rationality in electoral participation. Rationality and Society, 35(1), 81-109. https://doi.org/ 10.1177/10434631221142733

Belbase, K.  (2012).  Concept and nature of election law. Nyayadoot, 1, 199.

Bikash Lakai Khadka et al. v. Office of the Prime Minister and Council of Ministers et al.  (2014). Some decisions of the Supreme Court of Nepal, 6 (5) Decision No. 9069. Supreme Court, Nepal. p.378.

Chopra, J.K. (1989). Politics of election reforms in India. Mittal Publications.

Election Commission (2017). Nepalko Nirwachan Etihass. Election Commission, Nepal.

Election Commission (2022). Pratinidhi Sawva Tatha Pradesh Sawva Sadasaya Nirwachan Parinam Ghosana Sambandhama Press Bigyapti. https://election.gov.np/admin/public//storage/HoR/Press%20release/press%202079.08.28.pdf

Gautam, G. (2019). Comparative study on democracy and election. Nepal Law Review, 28(1-2), 159–173. https://doi.org/10.3126/nlr.v28i1-2.57527

Gyawali, C.K. (2008). The role of people and their representatives through electoral process in Nepal. Nepal Bar Council Law Journal,7, 140.

Indira Nehru Gandhi v. Raj Narayan (1975). Supp. 1SCC. 198.

Joshi, B.L., &; Rose, L.E. (1966). Democtartic innovations in Nepal: A case study of political acculturation. University of California Press.

Kumar, D. (2010). Electoral violence and volatility in Nepal. Vajar Publications.

Mohanty, P.K. (2013). Comparative government and politics. Wisdom Press.

Musrifah, S., Bulqiyah, H., Fahrian, D., Sumarno, S., Yuliyanti, L. I., Ulandari, S., Wijaya, B. A., Setyawan, H., & Juliansa, E. M. P. (2024). Political education for novice voters to increase voter participation in the simultaneous elections of 2024. Bubungan Tinggi: Jurnal Pengabdian Masyarakat, 6(3), 606-611. https://doi.org/10.20527/btjpm.v6i3.10255

Nohlen, D, Grotz, F., & Hartmann, C. (2001). Elections in Asia and the Pacific: A data handbook, Volume I. Oxford University Press.

Quraishi, S.K. (2014). An undocumented wonder the making of the Great Indian election. Rupa Publications India Pvt. Ltd.

Renwick, A. (2011). The politics of electoral reform changing the rules of democracy. Cambridge University Press.

Tariq, R., Zolkepli, I.A., & Ahmad, M. (2022). Political participation of young voters: Tracing direct and indirect effects of social media and political orientations. Social Sciences, 11(81), 1-21. https://doi.org/10.3390/socsci11020081

Vaidya, T.R., & Bajracharya, B. (2055). Madhyakalin Nepalko Prasasanik Itihass. N.A.A.K.