The government led by Nepal Prime Minister Balendra “Balen” Shah has completed six months in office, a period marked by ambitious governance reform promises, efforts to change established political practices, disaster-response challenges and growing questions over implementation.
Shah became prime minister on March 26, 2026, after the Rastriya Swatantra Party (RSP), which had projected him as its prospective prime minister ahead of the February 2026 House of Representatives election, secured enough seats to form a single-party majority government and came close to a two-thirds majority.
The size of the electoral mandate created high expectations that the new government would move rapidly on governance reform, corruption control, public-service delivery and institutional change.
At its first Cabinet meeting following Shah’s appointment, the government approved a 100-point agenda for governance reform at the Office of the Prime Minister and Council of Ministers in Singha Durbar. The agenda covered administrative reform, good governance, corruption control, legal reform, service delivery and economic issues.
The government later presented the agenda as an early indicator of its commitment to institutional reform. When it publicly reviewed its first 100 days on July 4, government spokesperson Sasmit Pokharel claimed that 87.2 percent of the agenda had been implemented.
According to Pokharel, 70 of the 100 points had been completed, while 17 had achieved more than 80 percent progress and 13 had recorded less than 60 percent progress. He said each activity had been assigned deadlines, responsible ministries and agencies, and performance indicators, with the Office of the Prime Minister and Council of Ministers responsible for monitoring and coordination.
The government subsequently sought to strengthen ministerial accountability. On August 19, Prime Minister Shah signed performance agreements with ministers outlining key tasks and expected achievements for the fiscal year. The Cabinet and the Prime Minister’s Office said the agreements were intended to produce measurable results in good governance, social justice and prosperity.
But the government’s assessment of its performance has not been shared by the opposition, and even some voices within the ruling party have expressed dissatisfaction with the pace of implementation.
RSP spokesperson Jagadish Kharel has described the government’s performance as satisfactory and said it has been working according to the party’s election manifesto.
“The government’s work is satisfactory. It is working according to the manifesto,” Kharel told Ratopati. He said public administration and service delivery could not become effective within six months and noted that the government had also been forced to focus on natural disasters and risk reduction after taking office.
The opposition, however, has questioned both the government’s implementation record and its accountability.
Niskal Rai, chief whip of the main opposition party, said the government’s initial decision to formulate a 100-point governance reform agenda had appeared positive, but he argued that its performance subsequently failed to meet public expectations.
“In its early days, the government prepared a 100-point agenda for governance reform and appeared committed to good governance. We viewed that positively,” Rai said. But he argued that subsequent developments had raised questions about accountability.
Rai said the government had not demonstrated sufficient accountability in implementing its policies, programmes and budget. He also pointed to continuing difficulties involving public services, cooking gas supplies, inflation and digital governance.
“The government has not been as accountable as it should have been regarding its policies, programmes and budget,” he said. “Public distrust in the government itself has increased, and public anger is also growing.”
The assessment from administrative expert Kashi Raj Dahal, chairperson of the Administrative Reform Commission, is more mixed.
Dahal said the government’s early commitments had raised expectations, particularly because the Cabinet’s first meeting had placed good governance, corruption control, fiscal discipline and access to health and education services among its priorities.
He also said Nepal’s previous experience with corruption and irregularities had increased public expectations following the RSP’s large electoral victory.
“If we assess the first six months overall, there have been positive developments,” Dahal said.
But he pointed to important unfinished legal work. Laws concerning school education and the federal civil service, he said, had still not been enacted, despite their importance to Nepal’s federal governance structure.
Dahal also noted that the government’s reform agenda had been affected by circumstances outside its original priorities. The devastating Bhotekoshi flood, which struck the Rasuwa-Nuwakot-Dhading corridor, forced the government to divert considerable attention and resources toward rescue, relief and recovery.
The disaster has become one of the most significant tests of the government’s capacity during its first six months. Search and rescue operations, reconstruction, rehabilitation and the restoration of infrastructure have remained major challenges.
Dahal said the government needed to improve coordination and ensure that ministers’ public statements were consistent with their responsibilities.
“The government is a representative of the people. It is their servant. It must reach people’s homes,” he said, while expressing concern about what he described as casual remarks and a lack of experience among some ministers.
The government’s approach to corruption control has also generated debate.
The administration has taken action against several senior political and government figures, including former prime minister KP Sharma Oli and former minister Dipak Khadka. However, those arrested were subsequently released following court orders.
That sequence has raised questions over the government’s ability to build corruption cases strong enough to withstand judicial scrutiny.
Dahal said the government should not confuse arrests with successful enforcement. He argued that investigations must be based on evidence and that prosecution should follow established legal procedures.
“When we talk about good governance, there is a perception that only small fish are being caught while big fish are escaping,” he said. “People should not be arrested without collecting evidence. Whenever the government takes action against any citizen or government official, arrests should be based on evidence, and cases should be prosecuted on that basis. The court will examine the evidence.”
The issue is particularly important for a government that came to power promising a departure from established political practices.
The RSP’s electoral success was closely associated with public dissatisfaction with traditional parties and demands for greater accountability. The government therefore faces expectations that are considerably higher than those attached to an ordinary change of administration.
Dahal said the government should not allow those expectations to diminish.
“In the past, we kept experimenting. We contested elections in alliance with one party and formed governments with another. People have now changed their votes based on the distortions that entered the system in the past. The commitments made by this government must be fulfilled on time,” he said.
There are also signs of unease within the ruling party itself.
A lawmaker close to Prime Minister Shah expressed dissatisfaction with the government’s working style, arguing that the administration had not maintained the pace expected after its electoral victory.
“The government should have worked with a certain pace, but that has not happened in these six months,” the lawmaker said. “It is not only me from the RSP; no one appears satisfied. We cannot speak freely, and there is a feeling of suffocation.”
In recent weeks, ruling-party lawmakers have publicly raised concerns over several issues, sometimes more forcefully than opposition lawmakers. Their concerns have included the problems of landless squatters, delays in search and rescue, relief distribution and reconstruction after the Bhotekoshi flood, the growing number of self-immolation incidents, the prime minister’s engagement with Parliament and the government’s approach to corruption control.
The RSP itself has also acknowledged some of these concerns.
A Secretariat meeting on September 20 concluded that although the government’s intentions were not wrong, its delivery had not matched public expectations. The meeting instructed the government to coordinate with provincial and local governments and immediately begin reconstruction and rehabilitation to address the long-term consequences of the Bhotekoshi disaster.
At the same time, not all assessments of the government’s six months have been negative.
Prime Minister Shah’s proposals at the United Nations General Assembly received positive reactions from lawmakers from both the ruling party and opposition. The government has also attempted to depart from some established political practices, including elaborate inauguration ceremonies, foundation-stone laying events and long motorcades.
These changes have symbolic importance for an administration that came to power promising a different political culture.
However, symbolic changes and policy announcements remain easier to measure than institutional outcomes.
The government’s own first-100-days assessment showed that the 100-point governance agenda had not been completely implemented. Although the government reported 87.2 percent progress at that stage, 13 agenda items had recorded less than 60 percent progress, while the remaining measures had either been completed or were at advanced stages.
No comprehensive six-month performance report has yet been released by the government. As a result, the administration’s first 100-day assessment remains the most detailed public benchmark against which its six-month record can be examined.
That benchmark reveals a government that has moved quickly to announce reforms and establish performance mechanisms, but has also encountered substantial implementation constraints.
The gap between policy commitments and everyday public experience remains particularly important. Digital governance was identified as a priority, yet citizens continue to report difficulties in accessing government services. Problems surrounding cooking gas, inflation and other basic livelihood concerns have also become part of the public debate over the government’s performance.
The Bhotekoshi disaster has further complicated the assessment. A government that entered office with a mandate centred on governance reform has had to devote substantial political and administrative capacity to a major national disaster and its aftermath.
Six months into the Shah administration, therefore, the central question is less about whether the government has announced reforms than whether those reforms are producing measurable changes in institutions and people’s daily lives.
The administration has a strong electoral mandate, a formal 100-point reform agenda and ministerial performance agreements. It has also taken steps in corruption-related cases and sought to alter some traditional practices of government.
At the same time, several important laws remain pending, disaster recovery continues to demand significant government attention, corruption investigations have faced judicial setbacks, public-service problems persist and dissatisfaction has emerged even within the ruling party.
