Ignoring criticisms both within and outside the party, former vice-president Nanda Bahadur Pun has finally returned to active politics.
Having served two terms as vice-president of the Federal Democratic Republic of Nepal, he has now rejoined active politics as vice-chairman of the CPN (Maoist Center).
Pun, who gained recognition as a military commander during the Maoist armed insurgency and was known by the alias "Pasang," has also crafted a new identity as a former "honorable" figure returning to active politics after the establishment of the republic.
According to the country's order of precedence, the president holds the highest rank, followed by the vice-president in the second position.
Pun served as vice-president—the country's second-highest position—from November 1, 2015, to March 19, 2023 . Two years after leaving office, he has made a comeback to active politics by assuming the role of Maoist Center vice-chairman.
His desire to return to active party politics was approved by the Maoist office-bearers' meeting held on March 31 and April 1.
"He had been attending party meetings as well. The latest meeting decided to assign him the responsibility of vice-chairman," General Secretary Dev Prasad Gurung told Setopati immediately after Pun's nomination.
Similarly, Bidya Devi Bhandari, who served as president during both of Pun's vice-presidential terms, is now also maneuvering to return to CPN-UML politics.
Bhandari's return to active politics is being discussed both within and outside the UML. Interestingly, talks of the return of both Bhandari and Pun—who once held the country's two highest positions simultaneously— to active politics began around the same time.
In an unspoken competition over who would return to active politics first, Pun has outpaced Bhandari.
While former president Bhandari has been actively participating in UML events without any official responsibility, former vice-president Pun had also been attending party meetings as an invited member without any formal role.
Pun's return to active politics comes at a time when the new generation appears highly dissatisfied with the old leadership. At a time when there are growing demands for generational change in leadership within parties, the decision to bring figures who have already held prestigious positions back into politics risks fueling further discontent, warn some people within political circles.
CPN (Maoist Center) central member Lekhnath Neupane argues that such decisions heighten the risk of strengthening right-wing tendencies. As he points out, royalists’ activities have surged in the country lately. A narrative that leaders themselves have become “kings" has taken root. At such a juncture, parties and their leadership should make decisions and take actions that inspire hope in the new generation, Neupane says, but they are failing to do so.
There were, and are, strong opinions both in public discourse and within parties against former presidents and vice-presidents returning to active politics. However, these dissenting voices were sidelined in the face of the Maoist headquarters and Pun's personal ambitions.
The view that former vice-president Pun should not return to active politics was strongly held even within the Maoist Center.
Pun’s impending return to active politics faced opposition during the party’s central committee meeting held in the last week of December.
"The return of a former vice-president to politics does not send a good message. Let’s not put a 12-foot Saraswati in a 3-foot temple,” central member Sudan Kirati said during the meeting.
At the time, Kirati argued that someone who has already held a prestigious position in the country returning to politics would not send a good message.
Kirati wasn't alone in holding this view at the Maoist meeting. Leaders like Lekhnath Neupane and Indra Angbo also argued that "honorable" figures should not return to active politics. They even questioned why someone who has already served as vice-president would want to enter politics again.
We asked Kirati, a House of Representatives member from Bhojpur who expressed such views at the central committee meeting, "In your own words—it seems the 12-foot Saraswati has ultimately chosen the 3-foot temple. What do you have to say about this?"
Kirati initially hesitated to comment on the party headquarters' decision, but he didn't hide his view that the party's move to welcome the former vice-president as a vice-chairman was not right.
"It is in the central committee itself that we can comment. The party headquarters must have made the decision deeming it appropriate under the necessary circumstances," Kirati said. "But in terms of culture, this isn't good. We should have looked at what the Maoists are doing, rather than what others are doing. Our actions should have built—and must build—a culture. We need to show what kind of culture the Maoists are establishing in Nepal's politics."
He maintains that it's not good for someone who has reached a prestigious position in the country to descend back into politics.
"It's better if people who are above criticism don't come down to a level where they face criticism. That would have been better," he added. "But this is Nepal. Others are also saying they'll return. If their return makes things better, then its okay, they are welcome. They have my best wishes. But if their return doesn't bring about significant or substantial change in the situation, then they may also introspect.”
Maoist central member Neupane clearly indicated his dissatisfaction with the party headquarters’ decision to bring Pun back into active politics as vice-chairman.
Inspired by the leftist principle of "freedom in discussion, and unity in implementation after decision," Neupane first said, "Expressing opinions before decisions are made falls under freedom of expression. But once a decision is taken, it is a matter of discipline to adhere to it as a central committee member."
Then he added, "Despite that, my view on this matter remains the same today as it was yesterday."
While stating he had no personal comments on Pun, Neupane emphasized that parties must look for ways to establish specific procedures and implement them.
"Given the public’s negative comments, disillusionment and criticism regarding politics ar present, there's a risk of a shift toward right-wing tendencies. At such a time, such decisions don’t send a good message," Neupane opined. "Parties should be able to convey positive messages. Such decisions only add to the problems."*
According to him, those in politics must eventually pass on responsibilities at some point—otherwise, the path for new entrants into politics remains blocked.
"Once you’re in politics, you might call it a voluntary spirit. But someone has to pass out from responsibilities. If no one exits, no one can enter," he said. "Even if someone manages to enter a big committee at such a time, they won’t get to participate in debates or express opinions. At such a time, those who have already held the highest positions of the state passing out also means ensuring the entry of someone else. Practices like the current one weaken that possibility."
Neupane argues that while someone who assumes office as prime minister may retain party membership, those who take up positions such as president, vice-president, speaker, or National Assembly chairperson are required to relinquish party membership and therefore it would not be appropriate for them to return to party politics immediately after their terms ends.
"Those who say, ‘I’m no longer with the party; I belong to all the people, to the nation,’ and take up honorable positions shouldn’t return to politics," Neupane said. "These actions create the impression that a party is a place to stay until you die. Isn’t it like saying you can be a leader until you die, just as you can be a king until you die?"
Neupane cited the recent general convention of the Communist Party of India (Marxist) as an example of an honorable exit for leaders. "Many senior CPI (M) leaders couldn’t take leadership roles due to a 75-year age limit, and leaders below 75 came into leadership. This is a system. We are advocating for establishing and implementing some system," he explained.
Writer and political analyst Ujjwal Prasai says that in a democratic system, many matters depend on the understanding and judgment of the individual concerned, which is why not everything is bound by laws.
For instance, Nepal’s laws are silent on whether former presidents and vice-presidents can return to active politics.
"In a democracy, it is believed that leaders are guided by high understanding and conduct," Prasai said. "It’s not imagined that those who don’t understand the dignity of such prestigious positions would reach those positions. How many matters should be written in the laws?"
That said, there are plenty of examples in Nepal of laws being violated by exploiting loopholes. Prime Minister KP Sharma Oli himself violated the age limit set for leadership in the UML.
"We developed a culture of breaking laws even when they exist," Prasai added. "When there’s no law, they interpret it as per their convenience. Therefore, former presidents and vice-presidents returning to politics cannot be considered right in any sense. It diminishes the respect for the country’s highest offices, and its negative impact affects the system itself."
It is not only leaders and intellectuals both inside and outside parties that are advocating for stronger internal democracy within parties. Even politicians who have held state responsibilities consider former vice-president Pun’s return to politics to be wrong.
Former chief minister of Koshi province Rajendra Rai says it should be guaranteed that those who have held the country's prestigious positions are not allowed to returned to politics.
"What more can individuals who've already served two terms in the highest positions of the country possibly achieve by returning to politics?" says Rai, now deputy general secretary of the CPN (Unified Socialist). "Nothing spectacular is going to happen when those who could live honorably and do other work return to the vortex of political tug-of-war, controversies, and criticism. It only helps tarnish the dignity of those positions."
