The president of Nepal recently returned a bill meant to amend the Citizenship Act of 2006 to the lower house of the Nepal Parliament for reconsideration. This event stirred up renewed discussions about citizenship, identity and gender justice in the Himalayan nation. The proposed changes were designed to address several legal ambiguities that have left many Nepalese people stateless.
The Historical Context of the Citizenship Act
Nepal underwent significant political changes in 2006 when the monarchy fell and the country transitioned into a democracy. With the introduction of a multiparty system, a new constitution was adopted in 2015. As per this constitution, all Nepalese citizens born prior to its adoption were granted naturalised citizenship. However, their children were left without citizenship. The legislation necessary to govern their citizenship had not yet been put in place. The purpose of the recent amendment was to create a pathway to citizenship for many of these stateless young people and their parents.
Gender Justice Concerns Raised by the Amendment
However, the proposed amendment has sparked a controversy, particularly on grounds of gender justice. According to the new amendment, a person born to either a Nepalese father or a Nepalese mother can obtain citizenship by descent. In addition, a person born to a Nepalese mother who has resided in the country, and an unidentified father, can also acquire citizenship by descent. However, for the latter to apply, the mother’s spouse must admit to his unknown status. This requirement is deemed humiliating by some as it does not apply to fathers in similar situations.
Contradictions in the Amendment
The amendment also presents contradictions regarding the naturalisation of citizenship. According to the proposed law, a child born to a Nepalese mother and a foreign father is eligible for naturalised citizenship. However, this is dependent on the permanent residency status of both the mother and the child. Thus, the place of residence becomes the determining factor in granting citizenship, which goes contrary to the general principles of nationality law.
The Flawed Nature of the Law
The amendment’s flaws extend beyond its contradictions. For instance, a person born to a Nepalese mother and an unidentified father may receive citizenship by descent under current legislation. Yet, if the unidentified father turns out to be a foreigner, this citizenship must be changed to naturalised citizenship.
Reasons for Proposing the Amendment
The suggested amendment came as a response to ongoing societal issues. Many Nepalese men, particularly from the Terai region, have been marrying women from northern India. This practice, known as “Beti-Roti,” raised concerns around Nepalese identity being undermined. As per previous rules, these women had to undergo a seven-year cooling-off period before they could apply for Nepal’s citizenship, leaving them stateless. Similarly, children from these families were often found without Nepalese citizenship. The new amendments proposed to eliminate this cooling-off period, benefiting such stateless women and their children.
