Academicians wanted loosening of government control of universities. Yet the prime minister’s grip has only tightened

The recent wave of university reforms initiated by the Balendra Shah-led government has ignited a firestorm of criticism from Nepal's academic community. While the administration touts these changes as a move towards depoliticization and meritocracy, a significant chorus of educationists, professors, and civil society leaders contend that the reforms have, in fact, tightened the prime minister's grip on higher education.

At the heart of the controversy are ordinances that have led to the removal of vice-chancellors, rectors, and registrars across numerous universities. The government's justification—that these actions are necessary to dismantle partisan influence—rings hollow to many who see a clear pattern of centralized power. The prime minister's ex-officio role as university chancellor, a position long debated for its potential to politicize academic affairs, is now seen as the primary conduit for this increased control.

“

Making the prime minister chancellor was a flawed idea from the beginning. The prime minister must be removed from the role. Changing university officials whenever the government changes is completely wrong.

This situation revives a persistent national conversation about the role of politics in Nepal's universities, a topic that has been the subject of numerous reports and recommendations, including a significant 2018 High-Level National Education Commission report. That commission had explicitly advised separating the prime minister from the chancellorship and establishing academic-led boards. The current government's actions appear to move in the diametrically opposite direction, consolidating power rather than dispersing it.

From our perspective at the Kathmandu Post, the erosion of institutional representation within university senates is particularly alarming. The previous system, which included nominees from bodies like the Nepal Professors’ Association and the Tribhuvan University Teachers’ Association, provided a crucial layer of checks and balances. Replacing this with direct nominations by the prime minister risks stifling dissent and debate, turning senates into rubber-stamp bodies. This move is not merely an administrative reshuffling; it represents a fundamental shift in the governance of higher education, one that many fear will undermine academic autonomy and intellectual freedom in Nepal.

“

One of the senate’s roles was to question decisions and give room for dissent. Now the prime minister will appoint the members, present the agenda and influence decisions. Direct political control is likely to grow stronger.