NEPALI CONGRESS AND THE 1986 GENERAL ELECTIONS IN NEPAL : REASONS AND IMPLICATIONS OF ITS NON-PARTIClPATION

This article analyzes the decision of the Nepali Congress, the country's main opposition force, to not participate in the 1986 general elections held under the partyless Panchayat system. It examines the reasons behind the party's boycott, primarily its demand for a return to a multi-party system and its assertion that elections under the existing constitutional framework were not free and fair. The study explores the political context of the time, including the government's crackdown on political activities and the ongoing struggle between the monarchy and pro-democracy forces. The research assesses the implications of the boycott, both for the legitimacy of the Panchayat system and for the strategic direction of the Nepali Congress itself. The paper argues that the non-participation was a pivotal moment that highlighted the deep-seated political divisions in Nepal and foreshadowed the growing momentum for a mass movement to restore multi-party democracy.

The 1986 general elections in Nepal were held under the partyless Panchayat system, a political framework that had been in place for over two decades. A defining feature of this election was the decision of the Nepali Congress, the most significant political force in the country, to boycott the polls. This paper delves into the reasons for and the implications of this critical decision. The analysis first outlines the official position of the Nepali Congress, which argued that participating in an election where political parties were banned would grant a false legitimacy to the undemocratic Panchayat system. The study examines the party's long-standing demand for the restoration of multi-party democracy and its call for fundamental constitutional reforms as a precondition for its participation. The paper then explores the broader political environment, including the monarchy's firm grip on power and the limitations placed on political freedoms, which made a level playing field for the opposition impossible. The second part of the article assesses the consequences of the boycott. While the election proceeded and a new legislature was formed, the absence of the Nepali Congress cast a long shadow over its credibility, both domestically and internationally. For the party itself, the decision to remain outside the system solidified its position as the principal anti-Panchayat force and reinforced its strategy of popular mobilization over parliamentary participation, a strategy that would ultimately culminate in the successful Jana Andolan (People's Movement) of 1990.