Nepal has a very young population. Half of the population is aged 25 or under. However, the Constitution and electoral law deny this half of the population the opportunity to participate actively in politics, i.e. to stand for political office at the national and provincial levels. This affects the average age of candidates and, consequently, that of members of parliament.
Today, nine MPs fall into the 25–29 age group, 46 into the 30–39 age group, 57 into the 40–49 age group, and 40 into the 50–59 age group. Only 9 MPs are aged between 60 and 69, and only 4 are aged 70 or over. This represents a significant shift from previous elections and is to the credit of the clear election winner, the RSP, which placed particular emphasis on the younger generation.
Had the electoral law permitted candidates under the age of 25, the average age would likely have been even lower. The RSP candidates had an average age of 43. The average age of candidates for the new SSP was similarly low at 44. The corresponding figure for the remaining four parties ranged from 51 (RPP) to 56 (NC).
Only the RSP fielded a 25-year-old candidate. The youngest candidate for the SSP was 26, whilst the youngest candidates for the UML, NCP, and RPP were 27. The NC stands out, with its youngest candidate being 32. It seems that, following the internal upheaval within the party, it has failed to take greater account of the social inclusion demanded by Gen Z.
Gender
Just over half the population are women, namely 51 per cent. Although there are more women than men in Nepal, the number of registered female voters has been lower than that of men in elections for years, as was the case in the most recent elections. Why is this?
In the current elections, only 388 women stood for election to the House of Representatives under the direct election system, representing 11.4 per cent of the candidates. Only six political parties made it into the newly elected parliament. These six parties had fielded a total of 929 candidates.
“…. to build an egalitarian society founded on proportional, inclusive, and participatory principles in order to ensure economic equality, prosperity, and social justice by eliminating discrimination based on class, caste, region, language, religion, and gender, and all forms of caste-based untouchability” — Preamble of the Constitution of Nepal
Only 64 of them were women, 6.9 per cent. Fourteen of them were elected to parliament, 13 for the RSP and one for the NC. This accounts for 8.5 per cent of the 165 directly elected members of parliament. The RSP still had the highest proportion of women among its candidates at 9.8 per cent, yet even in this party there can be no question of adequate female representation.
The remaining five parties represented in parliament had a proportion of women among their direct candidates ranging from just 4.9 per cent (RPP) to 7.3 per cent (NCP).
As in previous years, the PR system was once again used to ensure the minimum quota of 33 per cent female MPs required by the constitution. Consequently, 82 women, 27 men, and one person of another gender have now been nominated by the parties to the House of Representatives.
Yet there are no social majority groups in Nepal. It is striking that, from one election to the next, the Khas Arya account for an increasing proportion of directly elected MPs. In the current election, for instance, they won six more direct mandates than in 2022.
The 96 women thus account for 34.9 per cent of the 275 MPs. The men at the helm of the political parties are evidently unable to cope with any more women.
In forming the Council of Ministers, the new Prime Minister, Balendra Shah, has limited himself to 15 ministers for the time being; however, a further one or two may be added. Of the current 15 cabinet members, five are women, thus ensuring the minimum quota of one-third women.
What makes the new cabinet special in this regard is that this minimum threshold was never reached in previous cabinet formations. All ten male ministers were directly elected, whilst the five female ministers, with one exception, entered parliament via the proportional representation system.
Ethnicity
The trend regarding social inclusion is particularly negative from the perspective of ethnicity. Whilst the new constitution of 2015 stipulated that exclusion and discrimination on the basis of ethnicity and caste should be eradicated once and for all, the election results since 2017 demonstrate exactly the opposite.
The Hindu state, once established by the Shah monarchy, enshrined the close link between national identity and that of the so-called high Hindu castes, now referred to as Khas Arya. And it is evidently difficult to break away from this. Anyone who believes that Nepal has, since 2015, achieved greater inclusion and participation of all social groups is proven wrong by the election results since 2017.
Although the Khas Arya make up only 30 per cent of Nepalese society, they completely dominate the country’s politics. In fact, we are really only talking about the men in this group—that is, just under 15 per cent of the population—as, as described above, women are scarcely involved.
The Khas Arya are the only social group to have won a higher proportion of direct mandates in every election since 2017, which is, of course, also linked to the enormously high number of candidates from this social group. This was already the case before the new constitution was adopted, but that was precisely what was supposed to have changed.
Thus, in 2026, the Khas Arya once again completely dominated the direct election system. Sixty-one per cent of directly elected MPs come from this group, which is more than twice the number of MPs they should ideally have under the envisaged inclusive system. The political elite is very fond of referring to all other social groups as minorities.
Yet there are no social majority groups in Nepal. It is striking that, from one election to the next, the Khas Arya account for an increasing proportion of directly elected MPs. In the current election, for instance, they won six more direct mandates than in 2022.
They did not enter parliament through the favour of the voters, but through that of their party leaders. They must decide whether to represent the interests of their social groups in parliament or those of their parties.
The census lists the Janajati as the second-largest group; these are the country’s numerous ethnic groups, which, according to official statistics, account for just under 29 per cent of the total population. This is due to the fact that the Tharu (6.5 per cent), who have regarded themselves as belonging to the Janajati groups since the early 1950s and are members of the Nepal Adivasi Janajati Mahasangh (NAJM), are listed as a separate group.
Otherwise, the Janajati would in fact be Nepal’s largest social conglomerate. Both the Janajati and the Tharu have seen a more or less steady decline in the number of directly elected MPs since 2017. Today, 16 per cent of MPs are Janajati and 4 per cent are Tharu. In the direct constituencies alone, nine fewer Janajati and two fewer Tharu were elected this time than in 2022.
According to the census, the third-largest group are the Madheshi, accounting for 16 per cent of the population. They are the only group that consistently maintains a proportion of directly elected MPs roughly in line with their share of the population, despite the otherwise severe discrimination faced by this population group and the recent decline of the Tarai parties.
This may be linked to the fact that the Tarai is the region with the highest population share in the country. The RSP, in particular, has understood how to take this into account when selecting candidates.
The most severely discriminated-against social group in the country are the Dalits, who, according to the census, make up 13.5 per cent of the population. Only one Dalit was directly elected. According to my own analysis, the six parliamentary parties had fielded a total of just six Dalit candidates.
This reflects the extreme marginalisation and oppression that this social group experiences in everyday life as well. Including the proportional representation MPs, the Dalits make up only 6 per cent of the 275 MPs.
The treatment of Muslims, who, according to the census, make up just under 5 per cent of the population, is similarly discriminatory. Whilst no Muslim had been directly elected in 2022, this time there were an astonishing four. Including the PR seats, however, this social group accounts for only 3.5 per cent—albeit the highest proportion since 2017.
Conclusion
By relying heavily on young candidates, the RSP has taken on board a significant proportion of Gen Z’s demands. This may well have contributed to its overwhelming success. In this regard, the established parties have made no progress whatsoever. Thanks to the RSP, this parliament has brought about a generational shift that was long overdue and offers hope for a modern approach to the numerous tasks ahead.
However, when it comes to gender and ethnicity, the shortcomings are similar across all parties. The proportion of women is ensured solely through nominations via the proportional representation system. It must also be borne in mind that MPs elected via proportional representation are held in lower esteem than their directly elected counterparts.
They did not enter parliament through the favour of the voters, but through that of their party leaders. They must decide whether to represent the interests of their social groups in parliament or those of their parties.
Furthermore, the parties’ refusal to take social inclusion into account when selecting direct candidates ensures that women, Janajati, Dalits, and Muslims remain far from adequately represented in parliament and thus find it difficult to raise their social concerns. Here, the RSP-dominated House of Representatives could demonstrate that it is prepared to make the necessary amendments to the constitution and laws.
Comment