- RSP leaders are questioning Home Minister Sudhan Gurung’s conduct and working style following controversial remarks made at a recent memorial event.
- Party whip Krantishikha Dhital criticized Gurung for his threatening language toward journalists and the inclusion of controversial religious figures at the program.
- RSP leadership has cautioned against political arrogance, stressing the importance of maintaining accountability and the standards the party advocated before joining government.
Kathmandu, Nepal: Dissatisfaction over the working style of Home Minister Sudhan Gurung has been growing within the ruling Rastriya Swatantra Party (RSP), with some party leaders and lawmakers questioning his recent public remarks and conduct.
The issue came into focus again after Gurung’s remarks at a Gen Z Memorial Day program and a subsequent disagreement with party whip Krantishikha Dhital.
The memorial program was held on Bhadra 23 at the old Parliament building in New Baneshwor to remember those who were killed and injured during the Gen Z movement.
Dhital questioned the decision to place controversial religious figures Vijay Bhandari and Shrinivas Acharya on the stage during the program. In a social media post, she asked why people whose involvement had been controversial were given a prominent place at an event organized to remember the victims of the movement.
She also criticized remarks made by Gurung about some journalists during the program.
Dhital recalled that political leaders and activists had taken to the streets last year demanding press and freedom of expression. She said it was inappropriate to use threatening language against people who question the government or political leaders.
Her remarks reportedly led to a response from Gurung in a WhatsApp group involving Gen Z lawmakers.
According to sources, Gurung questioned Dhital’s participation in the movement and compared her with lawmakers who had taken part in the protests.
Dhital responded by objecting to the language used by the Home Minister. She said the Gen Z movement did not belong to any particular individual and that no one should claim sole ownership of it.
Several lawmakers in the group later urged the two to resolve the matter through discussion.
Lawmaker Sushant Vaidik said that continued disagreement among Gen Z lawmakers within the RSP could make it difficult to address the demands of victims outside the party.
The disagreement has also raised wider questions within the RSP about Gurung’s conduct and working style.
Gurung’s remarks at the memorial program about other political parties and some journalists have been particularly discussed within the party. He said the RSP had not entered politics to learn from other parties but to teach them politics.
Some party leaders have disagreed with that approach.
RSP Chairperson Rabi Lamichhane has previously urged party leaders and workers to avoid arrogance and respect the experience of previous generations. He has also said that the party should focus on building future politics rather than simply blaming earlier generations.
General Secretary Bipin Acharya also posted a message on social media saying, “Ahankar: Vinashasya Mulam,” meaning “Arrogance is the root of destruction.” Although he did not mention Gurung by name, the comment has been discussed within the party in connection with the Home Minister’s recent remarks.
Questions about Gurung’s working style had also surfaced earlier.
In the case involving the murder of three-year-old Garima, Acharya had raised objections in Parliament over the recording of a video of the victim’s family after an agreement was reached with them.
The Gen Z Memorial Day program brought further criticism from some sections of the party.
Families of those killed and injured during the movement, as well as families of people who were arrested, attended the event and raised their demands. Among other issues, they called for the release of those arrested during the movement.
According to sources, a young man injured during the movement was taken into custody by security personnel during the program. Sources also alleged that he was mistreated by people supporting the Home Minister. The allegations have not been independently verified, and the response of the concerned parties was not available.
The participation of Bhandari and Acharya also became a subject of criticism. RSP lawmaker Amaresh Kumar Singh questioned why the two were placed at the front of a program organized to commemorate those who died during the Gen Z movement.
There has also been dissatisfaction within the party organization over Gurung’s recent activities.
Pramod Neupane, head of the RSP’s Organization Department, questioned the situation in a social media post, asking whether “those who said they would bring change are themselves beginning to change.”
The developments have drawn attention because the RSP has built much of its political identity by criticizing the working style of traditional political parties. Its leaders have frequently spoken against political arrogance, lack of accountability and the concentration of power among established leaders.
The current disagreements have therefore raised questions about whether the party is maintaining the standards it advocated before entering government.
At the same time, internal disagreement by itself does not necessarily indicate a serious division within the party. Party leaders and lawmakers can have differences over government decisions and public statements. The manner in which those differences are handled will determine whether the issue remains an internal disagreement or develops into a larger political problem.
For now, the dispute appears to have centered on Gurung and Dhital. However, the criticism from other party leaders and lawmakers suggests that concerns about the Home Minister’s public conduct are not limited to one person.
Dhital has said she has no personal problem with Gurung. She also said she was unaware of the reported WhatsApp conversation and maintained that there was no personal dispute between them.
The controversy has nevertheless opened a discussion within the RSP about the conduct of its ministers, the space for criticism inside the party and how its leaders respond when they are questioned by colleagues, journalists or the public.
