NextFin News - Four ward members of the Pokhara Metropolitan City have escalated a local administrative dispute to the national level, filing a formal complaint with the National Information Commission (NIC) after being denied access to the official decisions of their own City Council. The petition, submitted by Prakash Koirala, Prakash Karki, Sushil Bastola, and Purnachandra Neupane, marks a rare instance of elected officials seeking legal intervention against their own municipal administration to enforce transparency laws.
The conflict centers on the 18th City Council meeting held on Poush 30 (January 14, 2026). Despite the meeting concluding over two months ago, the metropolitan administration has reportedly refused to provide certified copies of the resolutions passed during the session. According to the petitioning members, the administration has ignored multiple formal requests, leading to allegations that the executive branch is concealing the true nature of the council’s legislative output. Koirala described the situation as "shameful," noting that decisions meant for public implementation are being withheld even from the representatives tasked with overseeing them.
The ward members’ grievance extends beyond mere administrative delay. The appeal alleges that the Pokhara Metropolis has a pattern of "adding unnecessary agendas" to the official record after the council meetings have concluded, effectively altering the legislative history. By withholding the certified minutes, the administration prevents ward members from verifying whether the final documents accurately reflect the debates and votes that occurred on the floor. This lack of transparency has prompted the petitioners to demand not only the release of the documents but also departmental action and fines against the responsible officials under Section 32 of the Right to Information Act.
This internal friction in Pokhara reflects a broader tension within Nepal’s federalized structure, where local governments often struggle with the transition from centralized oversight to autonomous, transparent governance. While the National Information Commission has the authority to penalize non-compliant officials, the enforcement of such rulings at the municipal level remains inconsistent. The outcome of this case will likely serve as a litmus test for the strength of right-to-information (RTI) protections when they are invoked by insiders against the very institutions they serve.
The metropolitan administration has yet to issue a formal rebuttal to the specific claims of agenda-padding, though officials have historically cited "procedural processing" as a reason for delays in publishing council minutes. However, the two-month gap and the subsequent legal filing suggest a breakdown in the internal checks and balances of Nepal’s second-largest city. As the NIC reviews the application, the focus remains on whether the Pokhara Metropolitan City will be compelled to open its books or if the administrative opacity will continue to hinder local governance.
Explore more exclusive insights at nextfin.ai.
