Nepal’s Interim Government to Insure Public Infrastructure After Gen Z Protests

The interim government of Nepal has decided to launch a program to insure public infrastructure and properties. The Cabinet meeting held on Aswin 5, 2082 (September 21, 2025) approved the plan, citing the need to rebuild damaged assets after the Gen Z protests, restore public services, and manage election-related expenses.

This decision comes in the aftermath of the Bhadra 23–24 protests, during which several government buildings were damaged, including Singha Durbar, the Supreme Court, local administration offices, and ward offices. Since most of these properties were uninsured, the state must bear the full reconstruction cost without compensation, placing a heavy burden on public finances.

Although the government has promised to insure its assets many times in the past, actual implementation has been minimal. Only a few critical structures were ever insured, while the majority of state-owned assets remained unprotected. Experts stress that this negligence is especially concerning in Nepal, a country highly prone to earthquakes, floods, and landslides.

Industry leaders have voiced sharp criticism of past inaction. Birendra Baidawar, President of the Nepal Insurers’ Association and CEO of Siddhartha Premier Insurance, argued that the absence of insurance coverage has cost the government billions of rupees. Similarly, Nirmal Adhikari, Director of the Nepal Insurance Authority, revealed that his office had repeatedly advised the government to insure public assets, but those recommendations were ignored. He added that insurance companies are ready to provide coverage if the government supplies accurate data and a clear legal framework.

The Insurance Authority has already started studies on the issue, but progress has been slow due to several barriers. First, the government does not have complete records of damaged assets or their reconstruction costs. Second, there are legal and policy gaps—no comprehensive law currently requires the insurance of state-owned infrastructure. Third, valuation of assets like roads, bridges, and heritage sites is complicated by wide differences in design, construction quality, and geographic conditions.

If successfully implemented, the insurance of public assets could significantly reduce the government’s fiscal burden during disasters. It would provide immediate funds for reconstruction, reduce unexpected financial shocks, and improve the efficiency of maintenance and rehabilitation. It could also help the government create updated records of public assets, which would improve long-term planning and transparency.

Nepal already has a strong legal and policy foundation for such a program. The Constitution of Nepal (2015) requires the state to manage disaster risks. The Insurance Act 2079 makes it mandatory for property within Nepal to be insured with licensed insurers. The National Insurance Policy 2080 specifically emphasizes insuring government assets to reduce fiscal stress. Other laws and directives, including the Public Procurement Regulations 2064 and the Property Insurance Directives 2080, already set conditions and premium rates for insuring roads, bridges, and government buildings.

The timing of this initiative is significant. The Gen Z protests exposed the vulnerability of Nepal’s public assets, forcing the government to act. Experts interpret this decision as both a financial safeguard and a symbolic step toward modernization. However, they caution that unless the government addresses data shortages, risk assessment challenges, and policy gaps, this decision risks becoming another unfulfilled promise.

In summary, Nepal’s interim government has taken a long-awaited step toward insuring public assets. If fully implemented, this could shift Nepal’s disaster management approach from reactive spending to preventive planning, ensuring financial resilience and better protection of public infrastructure.