Nepali Congress Turns Up Pressure on PM Balen Shah Over Parliament Absence

Nepali Congress has sharply escalated its criticism of Prime Minister Balen Shah, saying he is not acting responsibly toward the public and is avoiding parliamentary accountability. The dispute centers on Shah's decision not to address the nation on Republic Day, a move the party says breaks with traditional practice and demands explanation.

During a parliamentary party meeting in Kathmandu, Chief Whip Basana Thapa said the prime minister should have publicly clarified why he was absent from the customary address. The party's stance reflects broader frustration inside the opposition, which has been accusing Shah of keeping his distance from the House instead of answering lawmakers directly.

The criticism comes as opposition parties intensify pressure over what they describe as a pattern of non-attendance and weak accountability. According to reporting from Kathmandu, lawmakers have argued that the prime minister has not appeared in Parliament since leaving during the President's presentation of the government's policies and programmes, and they are now demanding that he return to the chamber and answer questions in person.

That frustration has spilled into Parliament itself. Opposition lawmakers have disrupted proceedings and called for Shah's resignation, saying a prime minister who does not face Parliament cannot claim to be fully accountable to the country. The political row has quickly become one of the most visible tests of Shah's leadership style since taking office.

Why the controversy matters

At the center of the dispute is a basic expectation of democratic governance: that the head of government should answer to elected representatives. Nepali Congress is framing Shah's absence not as a scheduling issue, but as a political signal that he is relying on majority strength rather than parliamentary scrutiny.

For Shah, the challenge is less about one missed appearance and more about the image it creates. By skipping a formal national address and staying away from Parliament, he has given opponents a simple and powerful argument: that he is governing without enough public explanation or legislative engagement.

What happens next

The immediate question is whether Shah will respond directly to the criticism and explain his absence, or whether the confrontation in Parliament will deepen. If the opposition continues to coordinate pressure, the issue could remain a recurring flashpoint in the chamber and further sharpen tensions between the government and its critics.

For now, Nepali Congress has made its position clear: it wants the prime minister to be present, to explain himself, and to show that he is accountable not just to his supporters, but to Parliament as a whole.