Kathmandu, September 21
CPN-UML leader Ishwar Pokhrel has urged party Chairman KP Sharma Oli to make way for new leadership, calling for a “respectful departure” in response to the sentiments of party cadres.
In a letter addressed to Oli on the occasion of the UML Central Committee meeting that began on Monday, Pokhrel argued that the party needs institutional reform, collective leadership and a change in leadership to regain momentum.
Pokhrel, who is currently in New Delhi for the medical treatment of his wife Mira Pokhrel, said he was unable to attend the Central Committee meeting. He sent the letter outlining his views on the party’s current situation and its reorganisation.
He said the UML needed to strengthen collective leadership and restore institutional decision-making processes.
According to Pokhrel, party cadres have increasingly raised concerns over the weakening of established procedures and methods within the party.
He argued that the principles of checks and balances, institutional decision-making and internal democracy should be strengthened rather than weakened.
Pokhrel also criticised what he described as a decline in collective ownership of party decisions and said the party’s relationship with working people had weakened as a result.
He said the ongoing debate over “reorganisation, transition and transformation” should be carried out strictly according to party procedures.
“Whatever needs to be done, let us do it only according to the established method and process,” he wrote.
He also called on party leaders and cadres to accept decisions reached through institutional processes, regardless of whether those decisions matched individual preferences.
“Let us all abandon the feeling that ‘the party cannot function without me’ or that ‘I alone am everything’,” he wrote.
‘Respectfully make way for new leadership’
Pokhrel made his strongest appeal to Oli towards the end of the letter, referring to remarks he had made at the closed session of the UML’s 11th General Convention.
He recalled telling Oli at the time that he had already served as party chairman for 11 years and had been prime minister for six years during the decade since the Constitution was promulgated.
Pokhrel said Oli’s tenure had produced both achievements and shortcomings, but argued that the shortcomings had been increasing.
He warned that failing to address them could cause damage to Oli personally, to the UML, to Nepal’s communist movement and to the country.
“The cycle of damage must now be stopped,” Pokhrel wrote, adding that a “respectful departure” for Oli and an institutional transition to new leadership based on Oli’s own plan and proposal was necessary.
Pokhrel said the situation had become increasingly difficult despite several opportunities for the party to make a fresh start.
He referred to the developments following Bhadra 23–24, the UML’s 11th General Convention and the results of the Falgun 21 general election as opportunities that the party had failed to use.
“These were not only setbacks for us, but also challenging opportunities to make a new beginning. Unfortunately, we could not accept them,” he wrote.
He then directly urged Oli to step aside.
“Whatever happened in the past, happened. At this point, there is no other option that can inspire hope than your respectful departure and moving towards new leadership through the established process,” Pokhrel wrote.
He added that Oli’s own positive role in facilitating the transition was necessary.
Criticism and internal democracy
Pokhrel also called for greater space for criticism and self-criticism within the party.
He said rejecting criticism outright was wrong and argued that a party committed to a particular political ideology needed an active culture of critical debate.
Pokhrel said the absence of such debate could lead to an “intellectual drought” within the party.
He also questioned why many leaders who had played important roles in the party’s history and development had become increasingly inactive.
“Either one had to speak in support, or one had to come under a hostile gaze or face punishment,” he wrote, asking Oli to reflect on whether this had happened within the party.
Pokhrel said the reorganisation process should not be reduced to a question of whether individuals wanted or did not want a particular change.
He argued that reorganisation should encompass the party’s ideology, procedures, organisational structure, leadership, working style and decision-making process.
He described the process as an opportunity to move the party forward.
The UML has been engaged in an intense internal debate over reorganisation following the party’s poor performance in the March 5 election. A task force formed to review the election and recommend party reorganisation collected views from leaders and cadres across the country.
The task force subsequently produced differing views on Oli’s leadership. General Secretary Shankar Pokhrel’s report called for leadership change, while Vice Chairman Ram Bahadur Thapa prepared a separate report arguing that Oli should remain chairman.
The dispute has now reached the Central Committee, which began its meeting in Lalitpur on Monday.
