Executive Summary

ANFREL’s Pre-Election Assessment Mission (PEAM) Report on Nepal’s 2026 House of Representatives elections presents an early, risk-focused snapshot of the country’s electoral environment ahead of polling on 5 March 2026, situated in the wider political transition that followed the September 2025 Gen-Z protest wave. The PEAM is the first stage of ANFREL’s three-part engagement in Nepal – (i) pre-election assessment; (ii) International Election Observation Mission (IEOM) and (iii) structured post-election follow-up to support reform dialogue and longer-term institutional improvement.

The PEAM was conducted from 21–30 January 2026 and drew on 32 structured stakeholder interviews conducted within a compressed operational window. Stakeholders engaged included Election Commission of Nepal (ECN) and government officials; accredited domestic observer groups and CSOs/NGOs; media and journalists; women’s rights, disability rights, LGBTQ+ rights, and broader marginalized-rights advocates; political parties/candidates; and youth/Gen-Z initiatives, among others. Findings were triangulated across interviews and field verification where feasible, and assessed against ANFREL’s normative framework – regional commitments (Bangkok Declaration, Dili Indicators, Bali Commitment, Colombo Pledge, post-pandemic memorandum, Kathmandu Declaration) and global standards (DoP, DoGP, Code of Conduct) – with specific anchoring in the Model Commitments for Advancing Genuine and Credible Elections (2024). 

Accordingly, the PEAM assesses not only technical readiness for voting, counting, and results management, but also the broader conditions for political competition, inclusion, security, and the information environment, including the implications of the 2025 social media restrictions. Rather than serving as an exhaustive nationwide observation, the PEAM aims to proactively identify potential risks and emerging patterns in the pre-election period, highlighting areas that may persist into Election Day and the post-election phase so they can be closely monitored and addressed during the IEOM.

Watch ANFREL’s presentation of the findings of its pre-election assessment mission in Nepal.

The PEAM’s first finding is that election administration is operationally on track, but compliance is fragile. A majority of interlocutors expressed confidence in the ECN’s capacity to deliver an orderly election despite the shortened timeline and institutional constraints, including vacancies within the Commission. The ECN’s operational calendar indicates advanced preparations across voter-list management, polling-center finalization, training cascades, and voter education rollout. At the same time, the credibility benchmark under the Model Commitments hinges on consistent, neutral, and timely enforcement – particularly of the Code of Conduct and protections against intimidation, interference, and coercion. Stakeholders pointed to persistent implementation gaps in areas such as accessible polling infrastructure, uneven voter education reach, and the practical effectiveness of enforcement mechanisms at local levels.

Second, the mission finds that political competition is expanding in form – yet representation and internal access remain constrained by “old gatekeepers.” Stakeholders described a crowded contest with more parties, independents, and campaigns adopting youth-forward branding in the post-protest environment. However, this does not automatically translate into meaningful youth entry and influence as candidates. Minimum age thresholds, centralized party nominations, “electability” filters, and resource dependence continue to shape who can realistically contest. In practice, youth remain central as voters and symbols, but are still structurally filtered as contestants – raising a de facto equality concern under participation standards. Similar dynamics were observed for women and marginalized aspirants, for whom nomination pathways and campaign resource barriers remain decisive, particularly in First-Past-the-Post (FPTP) races where power is most directly contested.

Third, political finance remains the system’s pressure point, with stakeholders consistently describing a wide gap between legal spending ceilings and actual campaign spending. While the formal framework requires dedicated campaign accounts and post-election expense reporting, interlocutors repeatedly cited weak enforcement and minimal deterrence, reinforcing a perception that expenditure limits do not meaningfully constrain the real campaign economy. The consequence is twofold: integrity risks linked to vote-buying, patronage, and inducements; and unequal contestability, as money politics disproportionately disadvantages women and candidates from marginalized communities. Under the Model Commitments, the integrity of competition depends not only on formal rules, but on transparency, enforceability, and equal opportunity to compete without financial exclusion.

Fourth, the PEAM identifies the digital information environment as the highest-velocity integrity risk, where mis/disinformation, hate speech, and AI-enabled manipulation are evolving faster than institutional oversight capacity. Stakeholders repeatedly framed online campaigning and content amplification as a decisive battlefield shaping perceptions, participation, and polarization. The ECN’s establishment of the Information Integrity Promotion Centre (IIPC) and platform-facing coordination were acknowledged as meaningful steps, but stakeholders raised concerns about scale, speed, transparency, and public trust. A particularly sensitive point is the perception of securitization in aspects of online monitoring; under the Model Commitments, counter-disinformation measures must remain rights-consistent, transparent, and civilian-led, ensuring that interventions do not become pathways for intimidation, discriminatory targeting, or opaque restriction of political speech. Effective digital complaint-handling – clear standards, timely action, notice and review pathways, and public reporting – is therefore a central legitimacy test.

Fifth, the PEAM notes that domestic observation is substantial in presence, though varying in depth and capacity across areas. Nepal has a large and diverse ecosystem of accredited observer organizations, reflecting strong civic engagement and demand for electoral scrutiny. Yet stakeholder consultations highlighted recurring constraints: reliance on volunteers with inconsistent training; limited methodological depth beyond election-day checklists; weak safety protocols; and uneven ability to conduct issue-specific monitoring such as political finance, information integrity, and GEDSI-focused observation. This gap matters because the Model Commitments emphasize that credible citizen observation strengthens transparency and public confidence, but only when it is methodologically robust, coordinated, and able to document patterns – particularly in sensitive processes such as opening, closing, counting, and tabulation. The mission therefore underscores the value of targeted capacity-building, shared minimum standards, and structured coordination to improve the evidentiary value of domestic observation.

Sixth, the PEAM finds that inclusion frameworks are well established, though their practical implementation remains limited with persistent barriers for women, persons with disabilities, elderly voters, Indigenous nationalities, Dalits, marginalized communities, and mobile/migrant voters. Nepal’s constitutional and legal framework embeds inclusion architecture – particularly through Proportional Representation (PR) requirements and gender thresholds – yet stakeholders consistently pointed to the “constitution-to-practice” gap. Practical barriers include uneven access to documentation, limited accessibility of polling sites and information formats, and insufficiently tailored voter education. Mobility emerged as a critical fault line: the absence of out-of-district and overseas voting continues to exclude internal migrants, overseas workers, and students away from their registered district; stakeholders also highlighted the constraints faced by duty voters, including security personnel, who may be unable to fully exercise their franchise. Under the Model Commitments, participation rights must be realized as de facto equality – requiring proactive measures, reasonable accommodations, and practical access rather than formal eligibility alone.

Overall, the PEAM finds that Nepal’s 2026 elections will take place within a comprehensive legal and institutional framework, but credibility will depend on whether implementation meets the law’s guarantees of integrity and inclusion, particularly in the post-Gen-Z upheaval context. At stake is public confidence in electoral institutions, the acceptance of results by competing political actors, and the stability of the country’s democratic trajectory.

Accordingly, ANFREL’s IEOM will prioritize scrutiny of enforcement neutrality and compliance, political finance and inducements, digital integrity and rights-consistent responses, observation quality and coordination, and practical inclusion at polling centers and in voter education. The IEOM will assess the process across the pre-election period, Election Day, counting and tabulation, and the immediate post-election phase, and will support evidence-based reforms through structured follow-up after polling day.

DOWNLOAD THE FULL REPORT HERE: “Pre-Election Assessment Mission Report: 2026 House of Representatives Elections in Nepal” | “ANFREL निर्वाचनपूर्व मूल्यांकन मिशन प्रतिवेदन: नेपालको २०८२ (५ मार्च २०२६) प्रतिनिधि सभा निर्वाचन“