The ruling and opposition parties might appear divided as they relentlessly attack each other on different issues, but when it comes to criticising the decisions of Sumana Shrestha, the minister for education, science, and technology, they have one voice.

Shortly after taking charge of the ministry, Shrestha started a process of taking action against the teachers and professors involved in party politics. The ministry has sought information on the teachers and professors affiliated to the parties from the Election Commission and the respective district education units.

The initiative was taken as per the Political Parties Act, 2017 which prohibits the teachers, professors and other government employees from engaging in politics.

Similarly, the Patan High Court on October 5, 2021 had ruled that school teachers cannot engage in active politics. Responding to a writ petition, the court said those drawing salaries and benefits from the state coffers should not be involved in partisan politics.

The major parties have disapproved of Shrestha’s move as a large number of teachers are their cadres. For instance, as many as 263 of the 4,743 representatives to the Nepali Congress general convention held in December 2021 were school teachers and staff. The number is above five percent of the total delegates.

The main opposition CPN-UML also had dozens of teachers as representatives in its 10th general congress held in November that year. Hundreds of school teachers are associated with the CPN (Maoist Centre) as well.

Leaders from all these parties have criticised the move directly or indirectly. Speaking in the House of Representatives on Tuesday, Maoist Centre Secretary Devendra Paudel said the principals of many best-performing community schools were affiliated to different parties.

“It is unnecessary to test teachers’ DNA. Let them work,” he said, implying that there was no need to probe whether the teachers are affiliated to a political party.

Another factor antagonising the major parties is Shrestha’s decision to make public the report of the High-Level National Education Commission— more than five years after it was submitted to then-prime minister KP Sharma Oli.

On June 7, she made public the report that Oli and his successors had for years kept under wraps. The government was under the pressure of private schools to keep the report a secret as it envisions converting the schools registered as companies into trusts within 10 years. Converting the existing schools into trusts would mean they will be barred from taking profits home. Several cross-party leaders have investments in private schools.

Oli was so annoyed by Minister Shrestha’s decision to make the report public that he resorted to making personal remarks about her nationality and marital status without naming her.

Now the teachers’ unions of various parties have united against her. The ministry on May 27 endorsed a directive guiding teachers’ transfers. The directive came amid allegations that teachers are being transferred without fulfilling the due procedure.

The directive is accused of encroaching on the authority of the School Management Committee and increasing the ministry’s role in transfers. “Your good education is meaningless if you are doing more harm than good to the education sector,” said Shankar Adhikari, chair of the teacher association close to the Maoist Centre, referring to Shrestha’s foreign degree. “She has a shallow understanding of Nepal's education sector.”

Leaders of other teacher associations have asked the minister to reverse the directive, warning of the consequences of not doing so. “The directive was issued with the mala fide intent of troubling teachers. This is unacceptable,” said Gyanedra Rawal of the Nepal Teachers’ Union, the Congress teachers’ wing.

Some lawmakers and education experts, however, have supported minister Shrestha, saying she is on the right track to improve the country's education sector. Addressing the lower house meeting on Wednesday, independent lawmaker Amresh Kumar Singh said he fully supports the education minister, who is making the necessary intervention. “The education minister is taking the right course. Her works need to be appreciated,” he said.

Those who have followed Shrestha’s work also praise her. “She [Shrestha] is eager to bring about vital changes, mainly in school education,” said Usha Jha, a former member of the National Planning Commission.

However, many officials at the ministry are unhappy with her work. While she is dedicated to her job, she has a habit of not listening to others, they allege. “The minister thinks she knows everything and is not accommodative. This is the reason her decisions are dragged into controversy,” said a senior official at the ministry. “A minister is a team leader who has to take all the staff along. But that is not the case now.”