- KP Sharma Oli remains CPN-UML Chairman as the Central Committee prioritized internal unity and organizational reform over immediate leadership changes.
- Former President Bidhya Devi Bhandari has rejoined the party as senior leader, ranking second in the hierarchy after an 11-year hiatus.
- Party leadership managed dissent regarding poor election performance through strategic organizational appointments rather than replacing the current chairman.
- The UML is shifting focus toward strengthening its organization for future elections while incorporating Bhandari back into its top decision-making structure.
Kathmandu, Nepal: The debate inside the CPN-UML over replacing Chairman KP Sharma Oli has slowed down for now. The party’s latest Central Committee meeting did not take up any formal proposal to remove Oli. Instead, the leadership has chosen to deal with internal differences while focusing on rebuilding the party and preparing for the next election.
At the same time, former president and former UML vice-chairperson Bidhya Devi Bhandari has returned to the party’s formal leadership after 11 years. The UML has given her the position of senior leader, placing her second in the party hierarchy after Oli.
Bhandari’s return has added a new element to the debate over the party’s future leadership. But there is no decision for her to replace Oli as chairman. For now, Oli remains firmly in charge of the party.
How the debate over Oli began
Questions about Oli’s leadership became stronger after last year’s Gen Z movement. The protests led to wider discussions inside the UML about the party’s leadership, working style and political direction.
The debate grew after the UML performed poorly in the election. Party leaders began calling for a review of the result and changes in the way the organization was being run.
The party also sought suggestions from provincial, district and lower-level organizations. Some called for changes in the party’s policies and organization. Others openly questioned whether Oli should continue as chairman.
To collect and study those views, the party formed a task force led by Vice Chairman Ram Bahadur Thapa.
But the task force could not agree on a common report. Different groups came up with separate reports reflecting their own views on the party’s problems and Oli’s leadership.
A report was prepared by the group led by Thapa, while another came from the side led by General Secretary Shankar Pokharel. A further report was later brought forward through Deputy General Secretary Pradeep Gyawali.
The differences showed that there was no common position within the party on what should happen next.
Central Committee meeting changes the course
The different views were eventually taken to the Central Committee. But instead of turning the meeting into a contest over Oli’s leadership, the discussion moved toward party reform and organizational unity.
Oli presented his political report when the meeting began on Monday. He admitted that the party had made mistakes and said those weaknesses needed to be reviewed.
At the same time, he objected to the idea of removing a chairman elected by the general convention before even a year had passed.
Oli also called for discipline and unity within the party.
He took an active role in running the meeting himself. In the past, the general secretary had generally played that role. Oli’s decision to lead the meeting from the beginning showed that he intended to keep control of the discussion and prevent the leadership issue from taking over the meeting.
Pokharel and Poudel do not push for Oli’s removal
The positions of General Secretary Shankar Pokharel and Vice Chairman Bishnu Poudel were important in determining how the debate moved forward.
Pokharel did not call for Oli’s immediate removal. Instead, he argued that the party should address its weaknesses and improve its organization and political approach.
He also indicated that he would not propose a special general convention to change the chairman.
Poudel took a similar position. He stressed the need to keep the party united and strengthen the organization ahead of the next election.
Their positions made it difficult for those seeking an immediate leadership change to turn their demand into a formal proposal.
Not all leaders agreed, however.
Vice Chairman Prithvi Subba Gurung, Gokarna Bista, Raghuji Pant and Deputy General Secretary Yogesh Bhattarai were among those who argued that Oli should make way for new leadership.
But their views did not gain enough support to become a decision of the Central Committee.
As a result, the meeting ended without a move to change the party leadership.
Oli manages dissent through party appointments
The Central Committee also made several changes to the party organization.
Members who had not yet been nominated after the general convention were added to the Central Committee. Several senior leaders were also brought back into the Standing Committee, including Ishwar Pokhrel.
These appointments have helped bring different groups and senior leaders back into the party structure.
Rather than allowing internal disagreements to turn into a direct fight over the chairmanship, the party has chosen to manage them through organizational changes and the distribution of responsibilities.
Whether this will settle the differences in the long run remains to be seen. Much will depend on how the party performs in the coming months and how its leaders respond to the issues that led to the leadership debate in the first place.
Bhandari returns after 11 years
The decision to bring Bidhya Devi Bhandari back into the party has attracted the most attention.
Bhandari left active party politics after becoming president. She has now returned to the UML’s formal leadership after 11 years.
The party has given her the position of senior leader and placed her immediately after Oli in the party hierarchy.
Her return had been discussed inside the UML for some time. Even the renewal of her party membership had become a matter of debate. Once her membership was renewed, the party could formally give her a leadership role.
Bhandari is not new to the UML’s top leadership. Before becoming president, she served as a senior party leader and vice-chairperson.
Her political links within the party also remain important. At the previous general convention, Ishwar Pokhrel challenged Oli for the chairmanship with support from the Bhandari camp. Oli won that contest and continued as chairman.
Her return now gives her a formal position from which she can take part in party discussions again.
What does Bhandari’s return mean for Oli?
Bhandari’s appointment has raised questions about the balance of power inside the UML. But it would be premature to say that she has been brought back to replace Oli.
There is no such decision.
Oli remains chairman, and no process has been started to hand over the leadership to Bhandari. Her position as senior leader mainly means that she has returned to the party’s top decision-making structure.
Still, her return could matter in future leadership discussions.
She has a long history in the UML and has supporters within the party. Her position immediately below Oli also gives her a higher formal standing than most other senior leaders.
How she uses that position will depend on what happens inside the party in the coming period.
Leadership debate has slowed, but has not disappeared
The latest Central Committee meeting has made one thing clear: there will be no immediate change in the UML leadership.
Oli remains chairman. Pokharel and Poudel have not supported an immediate leadership change. And those leaders who have questioned Oli have not been able to build enough support for a formal challenge.
But that does not mean the concerns behind the debate have gone away.
The UML still has to deal with questions about its election performance, organizational problems and political direction. There are also differences among senior leaders over how the party should change and prepare for the future.
For now, however, those issues are being discussed within the existing leadership rather than through a campaign to remove Oli.
A new phase for the UML
The UML now faces a period in which it will have to manage two demands at the same time: keeping the party together and responding to calls for change.
Oli has retained the chairmanship, while dissatisfied leaders have been given space within the party structure. Bhandari has also returned to a senior position after more than a decade away from active party politics.
This has changed the setting for the leadership debate.
The immediate question of removing Oli appears to have been put aside. The longer-term question of who should lead the UML, and what direction the party should take, remains open.
For now, the party is focusing on strengthening its organization, addressing internal disagreements and preparing for the next election.
Bhandari’s return means that future discussions about the party’s leadership will now take place with another senior figure inside the formal structure. But whether that leads to a new leadership contest will depend on how the party develops in the months ahead.
For the moment, the UML has chosen to keep Oli in place and deal with its internal differences without opening another contest for the chairmanship.
