A complete mockery of gender equality: Draft of the Constitution of Nepal


As I try to understand the Draft Constitution of Nepal (as tabled by the Constituent Assembly on July 7), I realize how vulnerable I am as a woman in my own country. Clearly, the Constitution is treating me as a ‘second class citizen’ just because I am born a girl.

First- a mother- I have no power to provide citizenship to my own child if I do not have a Nepali husband or a Nepali man who is willing to give his name to my child. Article 12(1) grants citizenship only to children, if both mother ‘AND’ father are Nepalese. Possibly, the Constitution is assuming that a woman will never give birth to a child without a husband. There are still thousands of children born to abandoned or raped mothers; and they do not know who their fathers are. There are many women who do not want their children to be associated with their fathers (for whatever reasons), or fathers might refuse to recognize their children. This restriction in the provision for citizenship by descent threatens to leave millions of such children stateless.

Second- a wife- I have no power to provide naturalized citizenship to my foreign husband. Article 12 (1) includes another example of discrimination as “foreign women who marry Nepali men will be automatically granted citizenship but the same does not apply to foreign men who marry Nepali women (such husbands have to wait for 15 years to get citizenship). Which means, their children will possibly remain stateless because of “and” clause as described above. Possibly the Constitution is trying to tell me that I am to migrate to my husband’s house after marriage, and my brother ‘brings’ his wife to live with his family. The unequal recognition of women’s husband’s right to naturalization is particularly problematic mainly because of the magnitude of cross border marriages between Nepal and India. If political leaders are so concerned about the open border, then why are children of Nepali daughters a threat, but not those children of a foreign woman married to a Nepali man? It is up to me, as a woman, if I want to migrate to my husband’s house or if my husband wants to migrate to my country- but at least- give me and my foreign husband (and our children) the same choices, benefits and opportunities that are given to my brother and his foreign wife (and their children). (Just a reminder, in America, a foreign spouse immediately receives Green Card as soon as he/ she is married to an American citizen irrespective to the gender).

Third- a daughter- I cannot enjoy the benefit of being my parents’ descendants as my brothers do as the draft is very vague about it (based on my marriage). Article 43 (6) recognises that “couples have equal rights to family property” but the draft is silent on single women’s access to parental property. Tomorrow, if my husband abandons me, I am not sure if I can legally challenge my brothers if they decide not to give me the share of my parental property. It does not matter I am also born to the same parents as they are, as I will have no constitutional rights to access my parental property because I am born a girl.

Fourth- a woman- I cannot decide freely and responsibly the number, spacing and timing of my children and to have the information and means to do so. The Draft does not see it important that women have the right to attain the highest standard of sexual and reproductive health as it has shamelessly curtailed women’s reproductive health rights. It seems to me that the patriarchal drafters only took “married women” into consideration, and regarded women as “baby-making machine” once they are married. It talks about women’s healthy motherhood, but that’s about it. The Draft completely ignores woman’s choice to marry or not marry; her choice of sexual partner; her right to safe sex; and easy access to contraception or family planning. The Draft does not even provide women any right to make decisions about unwanted pregnancies and the number of children women want to have.

The biggest insult to every woman comes in this sentence, “ending all forms of discrimination and oppression created by the feudal, repressive, centralized and unitary state structure.” Shockingly, the draft removes the word “patriarchal” from the preamble, which was in the early draft. Basically, the drafters are either denying that women are affected by patriarchal mindset of our society or they are thinking women can be oppressed as long as patriarchal values and norms allow it. Whatever their reasons are, as a woman, I am offended that these regressive drafters do not value me as a woman.

If law is a reflection of society, then it is high time we tell the Constituent Assembly that we do not endorse their regressive provisions. Possibly you choose to keep quiet because these Articles are not affecting your life today. You have a Nepali husband, your children can get citizenship, you do not want to share your husband’s property with his sisters, and you do not care about your reproductive rights because clearly you do not even know what it is. But this Constitution is not about you and me. It is about our daughters’ future. A group of extremely regressive creators of this draft has outrageously violated Nepal’s previous national and international commitments to women’s rights. It is high time we acknowledge that women are no longer defined by their relationship to men. We have our own identity and it is high time our Constitution (at least) values us as an individual.  Let us not allow a patriarchal mind-set prevail and at least, for our own sake, let us not allow the Constitution define our existence based on our relationships with men.

12 thoughts on “A complete mockery of gender equality: Draft of the Constitution of Nepal

  1. Every parent should do their best to educate their children, boys and girls alike and make them capable of standing on their own two feet. The children should NOT have a right to parental property. The parents should have the right to give their property to any of their children or anyone. But better yet, the parents should be giving their property to organizations that will benefit the community providing education to under-privilege kids regardless if they are tharu, 52, pahadi or whatever. I think, we Nepali tend to wait on the day when we get our parent’s property and forget to work hard. And once you get it – it is ‘easy come, easy go’. Then you are fighting with your own siblings for whatever is left!!!

    1. I agree. We not only forget to work , we also think parents earned with no struggle and we are entitled to their money. Very shameful.

  2. You are not vulnerable. Vulnerable are those who can’t even raise their voices. You’ve (seemingly) the power to influence others via (at least) writing…

  3. aru sabai change garda thikai thiyo,but tyo parental property chahi nagarekai bes, change garyo vane kati dherai buda budi ko haalat ghar ko na ghat ko hunxa,ajai pani nepal ma praye case ma buda bau aama chora sangai basne garxan,ani aba chora chori dubailie sampatti diye, budeskal ma chora haru le sampati maile matrai khako hoina tehi chori le palxe vane, aayenan ta buda bau ama aapat ma, most of the times chori le afno biha ako ghar ma lagera bau aama rakhna sakdainan,in case rakhna mane vane ni bau aama mandaina…kina aayemai haru yo kura bujdainan..yo parental property ma equity vaye thuprai buda bau aama bichalli ma parxan,huna ta ahile ni koi koi lie chora harule herya xaenan,but yo case ma quity vaye aru xora haru ko man ma ni yesto bhawana aauna sakxa..Ani XORI afno ghar ma bau aamako sampatti liyera aaune, XORA maile le matra sampatti khako ho ra vanne ani ti BAUMAMA ko haalat k hola, kasaile sochya xa??? (mero afno opinion matrai ho, manxe anusar farak parla)

    1. It is not only about property or money. Parents’ duty is just to educate their children. It is our responsibility to make our own money or lead our own life. Parents give equal opportunities and education to both sons and daughters, and they are well qualified to take care of their parents when parents grow old. Parental property is about basic rights that you should get as a child. Aajkal chori haru sachyam chan. They are educated, they are earning. They are also taking care of their parents. In my house, I take care of my parents as much as my brothers do. Tapai ko bhanai anusar “chori paraya ho, once married, she is gone” . yo “chori paraya ho” bhanne theory le garda nain aja Constitution pani testai banna pugeko cha. It is high time, we come out of this belief that only sons take care of their parents. Trust me, we daughter are also capable of taking care of our old parents, and we are doing so. Parental property lai “paisa” ko hisab ma naherera teslai rights ko hisab ma hernu paryo.

      1. In my view no one should have right to claim your property unless you willingly giving it to them either it is ur son or daughter or someone else unlike what has been happening traditionally that a son can legally attest for their right on parental property as their own and constitution should address it this way.

      2. I agree to this. 100%. As parents, they have done their duty by educating us and making us competent enough to lead our own lives. That’s it. They should enjoy their money as they want. It is wrong in so many ways when children think that they are entitled to their parents property. There are sons (and their wives) asking for their “share of property” when parents are alive. And there are parents who willingly distribute their property amongst their “sons” when they are alive (if they are generous enough they give some proportion to their daughters), and these parents end up being financially dependent on the same sons whom they have given their life long hard earned money. How wrong it is…! Or rather how foolish it is! Parents should give to their children out of love, not out of compulsion or any law..!! I guess it will take many years for us to evolve.

Leave a Reply to Gaurav Shrestha Cancel reply


WordPress.com Logo


Google photo


Twitter picture


Facebook photo


Connecting to %s