Days after the Nepali government banned 26 social media platforms for failing to register with the authorities, youths embarked on an orgy of violence that shocked many at how rapidly it grew in intensity. The immediate cause of the riots was the ban. But the remote cause, as cited by the self-styled Gen Z youths themselves, was unremitting governmental corruption. Protesters torched the house of a former prime minister, leading to the hospitalisation of his wife; parliament building and hotels were burnt; and looting, arson and rape were recorded. Even though the government lifted the ban last Monday, the rioters were not assuaged. More than 22 protesters had died by Tuesday, and 51 by the final tally on Friday. Analysts suggested that rampant poverty, in contrast to the luxury public officials basked in, probably fuelled the protests. By midweek, though the army had begun to intervene, the violence was yet to be extirpated.
The Nepali protests reflect how deeply troubling and dangerous social media had become, not only in Nepal but globally. The youth are hooked on social media, and modern businesses view the platforms as their lifeblood. But social media remains largely unregulated, and now seems obviously impervious to laws and conventions. In 2023, Nepal had introduced comprehensive guidelines and directions designed to regulate the growing influence and use of social media platforms. Under the guidelines, social media platforms were required to register with the Ministry of Communications and Information Technology. Failure to enlist would attract a blanket ban. In April 2024, a digital media entity published texts and audio clips indicating that two chairpersons of top media houses in Nepal met with former and serving Supreme Court justices as well as senior lawyers to undermine some 400 corruption cases, including particularly an April 2021 court verdict. Two days after the digital media publication, the Supreme Court initiated suo moto contempt proceedings against the offending media organisation, and judgement was delivered last August. In the judgement, the Court ordered that social media platforms, whether domestic or foreign, must be mandatorily registered, and mechanisms put in place to evaluate and monitor undesirable content.
READ ALSO: FULL LIST: Countries with largest military air fleets in 2025
On August 28, 12 days after the judgement, the Communications ministry issued a seven-day notice expiring on September 3 that directed all social media platforms to register with the authorities as directed by the Court. TikTok, already registered, was spared the ban. Some 26 others, including the world’s leading social media platforms such as Facebook, Instagram, WhatsApp, and X, among many others, declined and were banned. Protests erupted spontaneously, leading to violence and carnage. The riots, mainly led by youths, continued even after the country’s leading newspaper and Army chief had called for and effected the resignation of Prime Minister KP Sharma Oli. For days no one was in control of the government, but the military eventually restored normality without seizing control of the government. There were arguments that the Nepali government’s approach to regulating the social media was a little too drastic and sweeping, unlike India for instance; but most countries have begun to understand that an unfettered social media could spell disaster. Indeed, the challenge many countries face today is how to balance free speech on the one hand and national security as well as individual privacy rights on the other hand.
After Nepal’s government lifted the ban on the social media last Tuesday, the youths refused to be placated. Instead, they declared that the real reason for the protests all along was the need to end corruption. As is usual in such matters, one concession always leads to more agitations. Recognising that such a demand could not be met under agitation but is a process that extends over a long period, the Army suggested that everyone involved should engage in dialogue. The problem, however, was that as at last Wednesday, no discernible leadership had yet emerged for the protests. The Gen Z mobilisation had been done almost entirely on social media. Recall that the June 2024 Kenyan revolt also started with agitation against the country’s Finance Bill that provided for tax hikes aimed at cutting Kenya’s debt burden of more than $80bn costing the country about half of its tax revenues to service. Even after the finance bill was withdrawn, protesters expanded their demand and began agitating for an end to corruption as well as the resignation of President William Ruto. The cost of the protest made nonsense of the amount saved by abrogating the bill. In Nepal, the army clearly tried to anticipate the demands of the protesters by calling on the prime minister to resign. However, Mr Oli’s resignation did not produce peace until Sushila Karki, a former chief justice, was sworn in as Nepal’s first woman prime minister. However, normality was not restored until Friday.
No matter how long the Nepali protest, corruption will not end in a day, or even in a year. The protests may help to discourage impunity and create bureaucratic conditions and laws to curb corruption, but there will be no overnight miracle. More importantly, if the social media should remain unregulated and no one is held accountable for atrocious news and reports, anarchy would loom larger than any protests can deal with. Nevertheless, the Nepali Gen Z overreach is explicated by the country’s socio-economic conditions. Nepal, a country of about 30 million people with a per capita GDP of a little over $1,400 and a nominal GDP of about $43.6bn, is the 165th least developed country in the world. About 32 percent of the population lives on between $1.90 to $3.20 per day. It is a poor country, with corruption worsening its plight. The protests are, therefore, understandable. But reprieve will not come from burning their parliament building, sacking lawmakers, or torching government buildings, including a part of the Supreme Court. The military has inevitably stepped in, further dampening the enthusiasm of democrats and complicating the country’s tentative and unsteady progress towards economic development and national stability. Neither Nepal nor Kenya provides an enviable template for how protests should be organised or led.
As the protests cooled last Wednesday, Gen Z protesters shamefacedly admitted that various but unidentified interest groups had hijacked the protests, leading to unimaginable destructions, including iconic Nepali buildings. They should have known. By organising a leaderless revolt, it should be expected that untold and unheralded consequences would follow. Jailbreaks, looting, arson, rapes and all sorts of violent crimes accompanied the leaderless protests. Now, taxpayers’ money will have to be allocated to reconstruct or repair the damaged buildings, further retarding the progress and development the protesters advocated. While the Nepali Gen Zs have shown remorse, it is tragic that a few Nigerian human rights lawyers, civil society organisations, and sundry agitators have recommended the Nepali example for Nigeria. Nigeria has a combustible mix of ethnic groups forever engaged in fierce competition for influence and control. Should Nepal’s protests, which flamed for two days of madness, take hold of Nigeria, there is no predicting what the short-term or long-term consequences would be. This is why it is urgent for Nigeria to find a novel way to regulate what is increasingly becoming a complex and ungovernable social media space, and to conjure a formula that balances free speech with national security interest and stability. Nepal escaped the ethnicisation and religionisation of the protests partly because the country is over 80 percent Hindu. Nigeria may not be so lucky should it embark on a mindless and foolish imitation.
