Report on the Political Crisis in Nepal and its Implications for the Sustainable Development Goals

Executive Summary

Recent events in Nepal, culminating in the establishment of an interim government, present a critical juncture for the nation’s progress towards the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). A series of violent youth-led protests against corruption and restrictions on fundamental freedoms has led to significant loss of life and a political transition. This report analyzes these events through the lens of the SDGs, with a particular focus on SDG 16 (Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions), and outlines the responsibilities of all stakeholders in ensuring a future aligned with international human rights law and sustainable development principles.

SDG 16: Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions Under Threat

The recent crisis has severely challenged Nepal’s commitment to SDG 16, which seeks to promote peaceful and inclusive societies, provide access to justice for all, and build effective, accountable, and inclusive institutions at all levels.

Breakdown of Public Order and Violence (Target 16.1)

The period between September 8 and September 12, 2025, saw a significant regression from the goal of reducing all forms of violence. Key events included:

• The killing of at least 19 people and injury of hundreds by police forces on September 8 during a youth-led protest.
• Retaliatory attacks by crowds on police officials, politicians, and government buildings, including the parliament and Supreme Court.
• The escalation of the death toll to 51 by September 12.
• The deployment of the army to restore order, raising concerns about the potential for excessive use of force.

Corruption and Institutional Failures (Targets 16.5 & 16.6)

The protests were fundamentally a response to failures in governance, directly contravening the targets for reducing corruption and developing effective, accountable institutions.

• The youth-led “Gen Z” movement was sparked by public anger over endemic corruption, which undermines economic and social rights and erodes public trust.
• The government’s imposition of a sweeping ban on 26 social media sites on September 4 demonstrated a lack of responsive and participatory decision-making (Target 16.7).

Erosion of Rule of Law and Fundamental Freedoms (Targets 16.3 & 16.10)

A long-standing culture of impunity has undermined the rule of law and laid the foundation for the recent abuses. This impunity must be addressed to ensure equal access to justice.

• The social media ban was a direct assault on the protection of fundamental freedoms, specifically the right to freedom of expression and access to information (Target 16.10).
• Successive governments have failed to ensure accountability for past human rights violations, including those documented by the Malik Commission (1990), the Rayamajhi Commission (2006), and the Lal Commission (2015), as well as grave abuses from the 1996-2006 civil conflict. This systemic failure to uphold the rule of law (Target 16.3) has enabled further violations.

Stakeholder Responsibilities and Recommendations for SDG Alignment

The Interim Government

The interim government, led by former Chief Justice Sushila Karki, has a critical responsibility to restore stability and align the nation’s path with the SDGs. Key actions must include:

1. Conducting prompt, thorough, independent, and transparent investigations into the use of force by police and the violence committed by protesters.
2. Holding all individuals responsible for human rights abuses and criminal acts to account, thereby ending the cycle of impunity and strengthening SDG 16.3.
3. Taking decisive action to investigate allegations of corruption and hold perpetrators accountable, directly addressing SDG 16.5.
4. Upholding all international human rights obligations and ensuring the protection of fundamental freedoms ahead of fresh elections.

The Nepalese Army and International Partners

The military and the international community play crucial roles in supporting Nepal’s transition.

• The Nepalese Army: Must operate in strict adherence to the rule of law, respect human rights, and use lethal force only when necessary to protect life. Its conduct will impact Nepal’s standing as a major contributor to UN peacekeeping missions, a key element of global partnership under SDG 17.
• International Partners: Foreign governments and the United Nations should actively support Nepal by urging the interim government to uphold the rule of law and protect human rights, reinforcing the principles of SDG 17 (Partnerships for the Goals).

Opportunities for Progress on Sustainable Development

Despite the crisis, this turning point offers an opportunity to reinforce commitments to the SDG framework.

Advancing Gender Equality (SDG 5)

The appointment of Sushila Karki to lead the interim government is a significant, positive development. It represents a tangible step towards achieving SDG Target 5.5, which calls for ensuring women’s full and effective participation and equal opportunities for leadership in political, economic, and public life.

Rebuilding Trust and Institutions (SDG 16)

This political transition provides a unique chance to dismantle the structures of impunity and corruption that have long hindered Nepal’s development. By ensuring accountability for past and present abuses, the interim government can begin the essential work of building the effective, accountable, and just institutions envisioned in SDG 16, thereby restoring public trust and creating a foundation for lasting peace and sustainable development.

Analysis of Sustainable Development Goals in the Article

1. Which SDGs are addressed or connected to the issues highlighted in the article?

1. SDG 16: Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions
   • The article is fundamentally centered on the themes of SDG 16. It discusses deadly violence, the breakdown of the rule of law, endemic corruption, and the need for accountability and justice. The text repeatedly calls for stakeholders to “uphold the rule of law,” end “entrenched problems of impunity,” and build “effective, accountable and transparent institutions.” The entire narrative revolves around the failure of existing institutions and the subsequent call for justice and peace, which are the core tenets of SDG 16.

2. What specific targets under those SDGs can be identified based on the article’s content?

1. Target 16.1: Significantly reduce all forms of violence and related death rates everywhere.
   • The article directly addresses this target by reporting on the deadly violence that occurred. It states that police “killed at least 19 people” and that by September 12, “the number of fatalities caused by two days of violence had reached 51.” This highlights a failure to prevent violence and protect citizens, making this target highly relevant.
2. Target 16.3: Promote the rule of law at the national and international levels and ensure equal access to justice for all.
   • This target is a central theme. The article describes “widespread impunity for human rights violations in the past” and notes that “victims of serious abuses by the military in the past, including killings, torture and enforced disappearances, are still waiting for justice.” The call for an “independent, credible, time-bound, transparent, and effective investigation” into the recent violence further underscores the need to promote the rule of law and provide access to justice.
3. Target 16.5: Substantially reduce corruption and bribery in all their forms.
   • The article explicitly states that the youth-led protest was organized “against endemic corruption.” It further notes that Nepal has “endured widespread impunity for endemic corruption” and calls on the interim government to “investigate allegations of corruption and hold those responsible to account.” This directly connects the events to the goal of reducing corruption.
4. Target 16.6: Develop effective, accountable and transparent institutions at all levels.
   • The article points to institutional failure as a root cause of the crisis, citing “anger and frustration at bad governance and corruption.” The fact that findings from previous investigative commissions (Malik, Rayamajhi, and Lal) “have never been published” is a clear example of a lack of transparent and accountable institutions. The formation of an interim government to conduct fresh elections is an attempt to rebuild institutional effectiveness.
5. Target 16.10: Ensure public access to information and protect fundamental freedoms, in accordance with national legislation and international agreements.
   • The protests were initially “sparked by anger at a sweeping ban on 26 social media sites.” This action represents a direct infringement on the freedom of expression and access to information. The article also explicitly mentions that “the exercise of the rights to freedom of expression and peaceful assembly… is protected under international law,” reinforcing the relevance of this target.

3. Are there any indicators mentioned or implied in the article that can be used to measure progress towards the identified targets?

1. Indicators for Target 16.1 (Reduce Violence):
   • The article provides a direct quantitative indicator: the number of fatalities. It specifies “at least 19 people” killed by police and a total death toll that “had reached 51.” These figures serve as a baseline measurement of conflict-related deaths.
2. Indicators for Target 16.3 (Rule of Law and Justice):
   • An implied indicator is the lack of accountability for past crimes. The article points to the failure to publish the findings of three major investigative commissions (Malik, Rayamajhi, Lal) and the fact that victims of the 1996-2006 civil conflict are “still waiting for justice.” Progress could be measured by the number of past human rights cases successfully prosecuted or the publication of these commission reports.
3. Indicators for Target 16.5 (Reduce Corruption):
   • The article implies a high public perception of corruption, as evidenced by the “youth-led protest against endemic corruption.” While not a formal statistic, the scale of the protest itself serves as a powerful qualitative indicator of the public’s experience with and perception of corruption. The call to “investigate allegations of corruption” suggests that the number of high-level corruption cases investigated and prosecuted could be a future indicator of progress.
4. Indicators for Target 16.10 (Protect Fundamental Freedoms):
   • A specific indicator is mentioned: the “ban on 26 social media sites.” This is a concrete action that can be measured. The subsequent rescinding of the ban is also a measurable event indicating a restoration of this freedom. This serves as an indicator of government restrictions on fundamental freedoms.

4. Table of SDGs, Targets, and Indicators

Source: hrw.org