Gagan Thapa's Political Actions Contradict His Rhetoric, Leading Nepali Congress to Weak Position

'Without excuses', 'GenZ', 'Not even one rupee's fluctuation is acceptable' Gagan Thapa had said. As pure as Gagan Thapa appears in words, he has walked a path as murky in deeds. And this difference has brought the Nepali Congress to its weakest position in history today. Elected as General Secretary with 64.57 percent votes in the 14th General Convention, Thapa had promised to hold another General Convention within four years – 'without excuses'. The Mahasamiti meeting in Falgun 2080 had also passed a schedule to hold the General Convention by Mangsir 2082, but by Poush 2081, the lower-level body elections had not even begun. One of the main reasons for this was the dispute over active membership. This dispute could not be resolved for a long time. The organizational affairs and the responsibility of completing the General Convention lie directly on the shoulders of the General Secretary, and the party's General Secretary himself was Gagan Thapa. The inability to complete the work he himself took responsibility for became the direct reason for the continuous delay of the General Convention. However, after his own deadline, deviating from the regular process, he turned the crisis created by the 'GenZ' movement into an opportunity and benefit favorable to him, and became the President on Poush 30, 2082, through a special General Convention. Immediately after the Election Commission legalized the special General Convention, Thapa still had a decision pending regarding registering his candidacy in the House of Representatives. Would he re-contest from Kathmandu-4, which he had won consecutively in 2070, 2074, and 2079, or would he contest from elsewhere? He chose Sarlahi-4. The decision created ripples within the party. His own leaders questioned his background and ethics. The result turned that risk into a mockery. In Sarlahi-4, Thapa was defeated by Amaresh Kumar Singh of Rastriya Swatantra Party by a margin of 12,857 votes. The end of his 18-year parliamentary journey. In Kathmandu-4, which he vacated, Congress's Sachin Timalsena came third with only 8,824 votes, or 17.61 percent. Meanwhile, Pukar Bam of RSP won easily with 29,142 votes, or 58.17 percent. Thus, due to his strategic desire to shift seats, the party lost two seats. In this general election, which was carried out with the slogan of 'Nepali Congress 2.0', the Congress was reduced to its smallest parliamentary group in its history. It had to rely on additional seats from proportional representation just to maintain its opposition status. But the real contradiction is seen in the proportional representation list itself. When the goal was to give opportunities to the youth, to bring about generational change, and to create 'Congress 2.0', what was the political justification for bringing his own 78-year-old father-in-law into parliament through proportional representation? When the claim was to create a new Congress of 'youth' and 'GenZ' by displacing the generation of 80-year-old Sher Bahadur Deuba, 78-year-old Arjun Narsingh KC was sent to parliament from the Khas-Aarya quota in the proportional representation. It is well known that KC is Gagan Thapa's father-in-law. What's more interesting is that Thapa himself publicly clarified regarding the decision to include KC in the proportional representation, stating it was 'against my wishes' and 'against my request and all possible efforts'. However, while saying so, everyone looked with surprise as to why his hands did not falter when the name of Man Bahadur Nepali, who was number one on the preliminary list for Dalits, was removed and his father-in-law's name was added. The question starts from there – when the goal was to give opportunities to the youth, to bring about generational change, and to create 'Congress 2.0', what was the political justification for prioritizing his own 78-year-old father-in-law? If the objective was truly to advance the new generation, why was there a need to give first priority to a 78-year-old father-in-law? Why did the situation arise where questions had to be raised about his style of politics, which uses the name of GenZ but promotes the old generation and relatives in terms of opportunity and representation? And the matter of selecting the parliamentary party leader is even more contradictory. When he was the General Secretary, Gagan Thapa himself used to accuse others of 'simply prolonging meetings'. But to select the parliamentary party leader, he himself prolonged the meeting for almost two months. And, why did Gagan, who is doing politics by saying 'youth-youth', not prioritize young faces at the decisive moment? There is another example regarding youth leadership. The necessary amendment to the statute for the General Convention of the Nepal Students' Union, considered the 'nursery' of the Nepali Congress, was blocked for about a year and a half. Even when students protested demanding this, he ignored them. But later, he gave the ticket to his own favored person. And in ticket distribution, he gave a place to those whom he himself has continuously accused of corruption. Why? It sounds like a continuation of BP's (Bishweshwar Prasad Koirala's) tradition. But the question is about behavior. In this election fought under Gagan Thapa's leadership, there was a buzz within the party that the largest amount of money was distributed to Congress candidates in the history of the Congress itself. Gagan Thapa says – I have had the opportunity to wear BP's shoes. If he has truly had the opportunity to wear BP's shoes, why hasn't he carried the political ethics that came with those shoes? It is heard that in BP's house, even if more smoke came out of the kitchen than usual, questions were asked like 'Why did the firewood burn so much? Where did it come from? What is the account of it?' Metaphorically, that was not just an account of firewood. It was a political tradition of being accountable for every single rupee and every single source in public life. In the light of BP, when Gagan is considered, one anecdote of his must be remembered. He says, 'It is unacceptable for those in public responsibility to misappropriate even one rupee.' It sounds like a continuation of BP's tradition. But the question is about behavior. In this election fought under Gagan Thapa's leadership, there was a buzz within the party that the largest amount of money was distributed to Congress candidates in the history of the Congress itself. Answers to questions about election expenses and financial mobilization have still not been provided. Where did the money come from? How was it raised? Where and how was it spent? Don't these questions require transparent answers? Especially when the full details of the source, income, and expenditure of the special General Convention are not publicly clear, what is the justification for saying to others, 'Not even one rupee's fluctuation is acceptable'? Therefore, there is a strong suspicion that Gagan's 'nepotism' will become even more pronounced in the upcoming General Convention. If we question in BP's style – the tradition of asking for an account when more firewood burns at home, 'Where did the firewood come from?', how can it be unnatural to ask 'Where did this money come from?' when a large amount of money is mobilized in the election today? Wearing BP's shoes is not just about wearing shoes; it is also about carrying the burden of political ethics that those shoes carried. Therefore, the question is simple – is the leadership that claims to have had the opportunity to wear BP's shoes ready to apply BP's standard of accountability to itself? Above all these, the most direct contradiction is exposed in the TikTok data. The word 'GenZ' was repeatedly sold at the slogan level. But in practice, not a single GenZ was given a ticket. Forget 40 percent in the name of youth, not even 2 percent youth were given a ticket. In Gagan's eyes, do only his cronies and father-in-law have the right to be considered youth? Therefore, there is a strong suspicion that Gagan's 'nepotism' will become even more pronounced in the upcoming General Convention. Commitment and deadline, confidence and results, slogan language and institutional outcomes; these are the repeating patterns – in Gagan Thapa's political corridor. To such an extent that when the coordinator of the discipline committee himself went to jail for fraud, it is natural for the actions of Gagan to hurt Congress members across the country. No matter how much they are cleansed through a washing machine or from the threshold of a temple, the politics that Gagan Thapa is doing is deeply hurting the souls of Congress members. In essence, the image of Gagan, once a revolutionary and steadfast, is gradually changing into that of an opportunistic leader who keeps changing his guise and lacks conviction. Seeing a former ideal youth degenerate in this way is pinching me, even in my youth. (Shahi is the former SWSU President of Thapathali Campus.)