IMAGE: KHABARHUB
IT WAS his own programme. His own ministers had drafted it. His own president was reading it out on his behalf. And yet, half an hour into a speech that lasted over an hour, Nepal’s prime minister stood up and walked out. Balendra “Balen” Shah, a former rapper turned populist firebrand, left the parliamentary session while President Ram Chandra Paudel was still presenting the government’s annual policy address. He did not return. By leaving his own dinner party, Mr Shah showed a contempt for the very institutions he now leads.
Mr Shah’s defenders call this authenticity. His supporters, mostly young and digitally native, elected him to bulldoze a sclerotic political class. As Kathmandu’s mayor he governed like a wrecking ball—demolishing illegal structures, bypassing journalists, speaking directly to millions on social media. That style worked on a municipal scale. But the prime minister now commands two nuclear-armed neighbours, a fragile economy and a fractious voter base. And he cannot bear to sit still for an hour.
The details are damning. According to lawmakers present, Mr Shah remained in the session for roughly 30 minutes, seated beside his finance minister, before abruptly leaving while the president continued reading.
Under normal parliamentary practice, the head of government stays for the entire address. The prime minister did not. He handed the policy document to the president by placing it on the table and walking away before Mr Paudel had fully risen. He wore casual attire, not the national dress expected at such functions, and reportedly chatted for 15 minutes while the president was speaking. Each gesture, taken alone, might be dismissed as minor. Together they form a portrait of a man who finds the choreography of democracy unbearable.
The opposition has pounced. The Nepali Congress has formally demanded a clarification, calling the walkout a breach of constitutional tradition. Even the Speaker has been dragged into the mess: on May 12th the president summoned him for an urgent meeting.
Yet the bigger damage is this. When a prime minister cannot bear to hear his own government’s agenda, he sends a message: that parliamentary ritual is a waste of time. That message is catastrophic for a young democracy like Nepal, where already institutional loyalty is fragile.
Populist leaders everywhere find legislative ceremonies tedious. But they usually have the discipline to endure it. Mr Shah appears to lack even that minimal self-control. His walkout was a tantrum. And the only person he embarrassed was himself. ■
