Nepal’s citizenship bill is a hornet’s nest

On 22 June, after the ruling Nepal Communist Party (NCP) introduced its revised Citizenship Bill to Parliament, there has been vigorous debate among journalists, activists, and politicians using social media platforms to put forth opposite points of view on the law.

Many are outraged that the bill discriminates against women, and brought to the surface systemic sexism prevalent in the country. Others, including some female politicians from the Nepal Communist Party (NCP), have used the nationalism argument against making it easier for foreign men marrying Nepali women.

The Citizenship Bill is now in Parliament, and could be debated in the House if it is included in the workplan. The revised bill now grants foreign females naturalised citizenship through their Nepali husbands, but only after they spend a minimum of seven years within the country. There is no mention of foreign men marrying Nepalis.

The draft revision was met with public outrage, not because of its seven-year-ruling, which is similar to India’s, but because it failed to grant Nepali females the right to similarly extend their citizenship to foreign husbands.

Nepali women on social media shared stories of transnational marriages that had forced them to lose own their nationality.

Nepal’s suffragette moment, Om Astha Rai

‘After my marriage, everyone expected me to leave and settle down in America. Everyone asked me what I was still doing in Nepal, and I felt that I didn’t belong to Nepal anymore. There is discrimination in how sons-in-law and daughters-in-law are treated, for me this is far more frightening than any seven-year-rule,’ tweeted Nisha Rai, who is married to an American citizen.

Many advocates and activists spoke out against the government’s labeling and categorisation of women, and accused NCP politicians for supporting a discriminatory bill.

‘There is no justice for ordinary women when you designate them as a caste that is meant to leave their homes after they are married,’ tweeted Mansi Poudel.

Some citizens more equal than others, Damakant Jayshi

Journalist Babita Basnet referred to the bill as an attempt to establish unequal, and discriminatory provisions on citizenship. In her Facebook status, she wrote: ‘The belief that one can protect our country’s nationalism by treating our daughters unequally is a result of a discriminatory mindset.’

Mohana Ansari, member of the National Human Rights Commission in Nepal, even cited Article 15 of the 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights on Citizenship to remind the government: ‘Everyone has the right to citizenship, and no one shall be arbitrarily deprived of their nationality, nor denied the right to change their citizenship.’

She added: ‘Patriarachy means the capture of women’s bodies, and the thinking that the marriage of women is linked to national sovereignty is deeply ingrained in most countries.’

Virologist Luna Bhatta Sharma tweeted: ‘A daughter and son from the same mother, but what a difference in the rights they have. Will you be small if you make them equal? Men will benefit if women are equal. They complement each other. Think.’

Parliament, the NCP’s parliamentary committee members, as well politicians and ministers are deeply divided on the issue. Opposition Nepali Congress MP Gagan Thapa has strongly advocated gender equality on the social web.

He wrote in a tweet: ‘Right from the constitution drafting process itself, there are unequal provisions between men and women, but this contradicts constitutionally guaranteed civic rights. Let’s correct this with a constitutional amendment if required.’

Even the NC chair Sher Bahadur Deuba has come out strongly against the revised bill, saying: ‘The constitution guarantees equality between the sexes. Giving sons more rights and daughters less is not acceptable in today’s society.’

The silence of NCP MPs on the issue got widespread criticism from activists like Indira Adhikari who wrote on social media: ‘If parliamentarians cannot come to a consensus to protect its women’s civil rights, there is no reason left for us to boast that 34% of them are women.’

Stateless daughters, Deepti Gurung

The NCP’s own Pampha Bhusal, who used to be a strong advocate of gender rights, has also been roundly criticised for not speaking out strongly enough against the revisions.

Aiming her barbs at MP Bhusal, rights activist Savitri Gautam tweeted: ‘Turns out that comrade has not learnt much from her women’s liberation struggle other than that daughters are a caste meant to leave their own homes and daughters-in-law are simply foreigners living in a home that isn’t their own.’

While MPs from the opposition parties defended constitutional provisions on gender equality, the NCP was put on the defensive. Some female MPs like Binda Pandey reasoned that a party’s position on the bill was all relative to whether they are in power or not.

Statewomanship, Editorial

In a convoluted tweet, she wrote: ‘The problem is not with individuals, but with who is in a position of power. Inequality not seen while in power, is noticed after losing that power. Looking at things from above, everything looks equal.’

Article 11 (6) of Nepal’s Constitution guarantees foreign women married to Nepali men naturalised Nepali citizenship. But the Constitution itself is silent about naturalisation of foreign men married to Nepali women.

Citizenship lawyer Sabin Shrestha explains: “There are many Nepali women married to foreigners who are staying in Nepal with their children, but their husbands will never get citizenship. That is discrimination.” Many activists believe the Constitution has left that issue of foreign husbands out because of a xenophobic fear of Indians inundating Nepal through marriage.

According to Indian law, foreigners marrying both Indian men and women get Indian citizenship after seven years. Says Shrestha: “Nepal can also add certain conditions. After all, foreigners who have lived in Nepal for 15 years are eligible for naturalised Nepali citizenship, why not include men married to Nepali women in that provision?”

Read also:

In the name of the father, Rubeena Mahato

State of limbo, Rubeena Mahato