Submit your Article

Constitutional experts, legal professionals, and students of constitutional law have consistently emphasized that the Constitution of Nepal 2015 was rushed and lacked the necessary time, thorough deliberation, and extensive discussions during its drafting and promulgation. Consequently, it required subsequent amendments, with the first set of revisions made just four months after its promulgation.

Nevertheless, it’s essential to recognize that a constitution is a living document, subject to modifications as societal needs and circumstances evolve over time. In order to ensure its effective functioning and broader acceptance, amendments become a necessary step.

However, it is crucial to approach any constitutional amendments in a manner that aligns with the fundamental principles of the constitution itself. Deviating from these principles can disrupt the constitutional framework and put the entire system at risk.

It is imperative to understand that no one is exempt from the authority of the constitution, and this responsibility extends to every citizen of Nepal. Safeguarding the constitution is a collective duty that falls upon all shoulders, from laymen to politicians. 

The constitution stipulates that in order for it to operate effectively, existing laws and acts must be regularly reviewed, modified, and supplemented. However, necessary legal revisions have not been undertaken. Take, for example, Part 3 of the constitution, which outlines Fundamental Rights and Duties and comprises 33 articles. It expressly states that the Parliament is responsible for enacting legislation to enforce these fundamental rights, yet no such laws have been enacted. This issue is pervasive throughout various sections of the constitution. Despite the nation celebrating the ninth Constitution Day, it is evident that the constitution has not been adequately put into practice.

The ruling coalition appears to be asserting authority above and beyond the constitution itself. Their decisions during meetings are treated as the final word, regardless of legal stipulations. A clear example of this is when the Supreme Court opened a way for an investigation against former Prime Ministers Madhav Kumar Nepal and Baburam Bhattarai regarding their involvement in the Lalita Niwas land-grab. But the ruling coalition decided that such a probe was unnecessary, contending that the former PMs were not culpable. It is the responsibility of the Central Investigation Bureau (CIB) of Nepal Police to conduct the investigation and the court responsibility to determine guilt or innocence. As a result of the ruling coalition’s decision, despite the apex court’s ruling, no case was filed against them, and even the investigators involved were transferred, in accordance with the coalition’s directives. This demonstrates the governments and political parties’ apparent disregard for established legal procedures.

On Aug 22, President Ram Chandra Paudel called a meeting of representatives from all political parties to address the deadlock in the federal parliament. Has the constitution given the president the right to call an all-party meeting with specific agendas? No. President, being the protector of the constitution, didn’t follow it. Was there any national emergency that the president had to get mobilized for a national consensus? No. Or, the president should have justified his move.

According to Sub-article (2) of Article (1) in Part 1 of the constitution, it is the duty of every person to uphold the constitution. Additionally, Article 48 in Part 3 outlines the duties of citizens. The duties, according to our constitution, are: (a) To safeguard the nationality, sovereignty and integrity of Nepal, while being loyal to the nation; (b) To abide by the Constitution and law; (c) To render compulsory service as and when the state so requires; (d) To protect and preserve public property.

However, it raises concerns as to why the prominent leaders of the government and other political factions are not adhering to these constitutional duties and are seemingly disregarding the constitution. Is the constitution meant solely for citizens to adhere to?

Therefore, if the parliament had enacted laws clearly defining the rights and obligations of citizens, government officials, ministers and political leaders, it could have significantly reduced the issue of not adhering to the constitution.

Isn’t it pathetic that those political parties and leaders who drove the citizens for a new political system and new constitution, are not following it?

The prevailing competition among various parties and individuals in disregarding the constitution has led the public to question its durability. These actions are undermining the longevity of the constitution, prompting people to contemplate alternative options to this constitutional and political system, which definitely is not a good sign for anyone.

On the occasion of Constitution Day, I urge all individuals, organizations, political parties and the government to adhere to the constitution. It’s high time to grasp the significance of upholding the charter.

The author is a member of the Supreme Court Bar and has been practicing corporate law for around three decades

Eight years ago today, Nepal officially charted a new course by promulgating a constitution that embraced federalism, republicanism and secularism. The centuries-old monarchy was condemned to history. 

The Nepali people were the new sovereign. The Constitution of 2015 also ensured rights and inclusion of marginalized and disadvantaged communities. But this historic document was by no means perfect. It had many rough edges, so to speak, that needed smoothening. And naturally, it wasn’t universally accepted; out of 598 Constituent Assembly members, 538 voted in favor of the constitution while 60 people voted against it. 

Political parties and people from the historically backward Tarai region in the southern plains outright denounced the constitution, demanding for greater rights and autonomy. There were protests in many Tarai districts and on the streets of Kathmandu. Nevertheless, the Constitution was passed by the assembly, by the hands of the country's first President Dr Ram Baran Yadav, who happened to be of Tarai origin.    

As this year marks the ninth anniversary of the Constitution of the Federal Democratic Republic of Nepal, ApEx spoke with various experts, professionals and commoners to know about their take on the Constitution, about its positives and negatives.   

Neer Bikram Shah, Filmmaker

We often hear critiques of the new constitution, highlighting its perceived shortcomings. However, when we delve into its impact on the film industry, the changes might not be immediately tangible, but there's a profound positive shift on a psychological level. Picture this: the new constitution has breathed life into filmmakers, assuring them of their creative independence and liberating their artistic spirit. It's as if the constraints have been lifted, opening up a world of possibilities in film production. Mentally, everyone involved in the film industry feels the encouragement in the air. But that's not all. The new constitution has also laid out a red carpet of fresh content opportunities, especially catering to the intellectual minds among us. Now, the real magic will happen when we translate these psychological boosts into concrete actions, making the constitution a living, breathing reality in our creative endeavors.

Indra Adhikari, Political Analyst 

Since the enactment of the 2015 Constitution, the subsequent governments have gained legal legitimacy, signifying a government of, by and for the people. This constitution has played a crucial role in implementing a federal structure. Although the provincial governments are yet to operate optimally, the local administrations are functioning efficiently, a feat made possible by this new constitution. This constitution embodies inclusivity and employs proportional representation, granting significant opportunities and respect to women, Dalits and other minority groups. Public involvement stands as a pivotal aspect, fostering empowerment and enhanced political awareness. The appreciation of all religions is held in equal regard. These key aspects brought about by this Constitution serve as vital elements in bolstering democracy.

SC Suman, Artist 

Nepal has been shaped by several political movements over the last decades. Despite the shifts, political instability still looms. There are glimmers of hope: Identity gains prominence, education flourishes. But factories are idle, farms are withering and brain drain continues. Fertilizer shortages and irrigation woes plague us, spawning unemployment. There is a notable absence of robust economic policies. None can forget the governments that couldn't last their tenure. Political instability, meddling, and corruption scar our land. I hope the better days will surely come if our political leaders show integrity, live up to people’s expectations and govern competently.    

Bharat Acharya, Sociologist

The 2015 Constitution has given Nepalis everything, at least on paper. For most, little has changed. This charter has given us a castle of dreams, that’s all. I see no difference between the constitutions of 1990 and that of 2015. Farmers struggle for seeds and fertilizers. Nepalis flee daily to foreign lands in search of better jobs. Freedom of expression exists, yet who listens? We need an accountable government and a society that balances rights with duties. It's time to breathe life into the constitution by focusing on its implementation.

Anjila Shrestha Pradhananga, Tour Executive, Temple Tiger Group of Companies

The 2015 Constitution was a transformative moment in Nepal's history, turning it into a federal democratic republic. It granted essential rights—equality, free speech, and social justice—laying the foundation for a more inclusive society. This constitution's gift of religious tolerance fosters harmony among diverse communities. Inclusivity reigns supreme, with minorities well-represented. It champions natural resource conservation and ecological preservation. No exclusion based on gender or ethnicity. As a guide for the nation’s political and social growth, the constitution has ultimately been crucial in establishing peace and stability in Nepal after years of strife. But we have to remember that this Constitution is a work in progress. Our work of making Nepal just, equitable, and prosperous for all isn’t done yet.

Sajani Rijal, Founder/Principal, Pahilo Pathshala  

A republic is power for the people, but in Nepal, it feels like a dream. Our dependence on others grows. Violence simmers. Youth flee due to instability and lack of opportunities. We're forced to think twice about food and shelter. The constitution has given us nothing but a terrible life. Subsequent governments after 2015 have failed to give proper platforms to youths, innovators and business owners.

Diwash Ghimire, Student, St Xavier’s College

Only the private sector has been involved in development while the government is sitting idle. Promised rights like healthcare and employment remain elusive. Education quality is also questionable. The government struggles to create a liveable society. Policies must change. The government should create jobs and improve the environment. The constitution must benefit all, not just the connected few.

Bishwas Poudel, Entrepreneur

The 2015 Constitution brought a few positive changes and a lot of negative situations.

Businesses are suffering, instability is rising, and people are migrating to foreign countries. Corruption also continues to thrive. Promised dreams remain unfulfilled. The only positive thing the constitution has given is better life for the politicians and those close to them. The common people meanwhile are facing difficulties because of the poor economic conditions. Nepal needs a brighter path. The constitution must deliver on its promises, ensuring basic rights and needs.

Eight long years have passed since Nepal embarked on the journey of crafting a new federal democratic constitution through the Constituent Assembly (CA), a vision held dear by the people since the 1950s.

As per the constitution's mandate, we have seen two rounds of elections for a three-tier government—federal, provincial, and local— with even parties from the Madhes region embracing the constitution, albeit with initial reservations. Today, there is hardly any prominent political force opposing it outright, though many still harbor reservations.

Yet, despite these advancements, the constitution has fallen short of delivering the much-needed political stability. Over the past eight tumultuous years, we have witnessed six governments led by three different leaders—KP Sharma Oli, Sher Bahadur Deuba and Pushpa Kamal Dahal. There was a glimmer of hope when CPN-UML and CPN (Maoist Center) united in 2018, but that optimism was shattered with their subsequent split.

During this period, the parliament faced dissolution twice, and the ruling alliances underwent frequent changes. Provincial assemblies fared no better. Thanks to the electoral system adopted by the constitution, the chances of a single party securing a majority are nearly nonexistent, and the sustainability of such a majority is uncertain. Parties have become engrossed in safeguarding their interests, leaving the people's agenda in the dust. Ideological positions were abandoned as parties displayed a willingness to form alliances with anyone, anytime. 

In these eight years, parties made systematic efforts to control the judiciary and parliament, undermining the crucial separation of powers principle. The constitutional bodies suffered politicization and paralysis.

The constitution has also failed to ignite the economic prosperity and development it promised. Frequent changes in government, a growing economic crisis, corruption, job scarcity, and poor governance have fueled frustration among citizens.

The disillusionment has driven many youths to seek education and employment abroad, with approximately 2,000 leaving Nepal daily. Those remaining in the country are increasingly losing hope for their careers. Opportunistic royalist and anti-federal forces are meanwhile attempting to capitalize on this discontent.

Constitutional expert Radheshyam Adhikari says that the people's growing frustration is not a reflection of the constitution's failure but rather the ineptitude of those in power. 

“Obviously, people are frustrated because of the working style of the rulers who have failed to deliver. Rule of law has been undermined and economic issues remain unaddressed,” he says. “A constitution is just a tool, not a solution. It is the political parties who must mend their ways.” 

Adhikari adds while there are flaws in the constitution, it can always be redressed after thorough and objective analysis, underscoring that there is no alternative to this constitution.

Another constitutional expert, Nilambar Acharya, shares a similar sentiment. He sees no reason to blame the constitution for the country's current state. 

“Weaknesses and loopholes can be amended, but the constitution itself is not at fault. It's the actors and parties that have made mistakes,” he says. 

The 2015 constitution was a result of compromise among major political players, including Nepali Congress, CPN-UML and CPN (Maoist Center), and various ethnic groups. Madhes-based parties initially disowned the charter, leading to the first amendment to partially address their concerns. Eventually, most Madhes-based parties abandoned their original agenda to join the government.

After eight years, one would expect the constitution and federal structure to have strengthened. However, doubts are emerging about the constitution's sustainability and core principles. Even within major parties, voices are growing in favor of scrapping the federal structure.

Secularism faces more threats than ever, with major parties wavering in their commitment. Pro-Hindu forces are pushing for a return to a Hindu state, and social harmony and religious tolerance are under strain. Recent incidents in Dharan and Lahan serve as examples, where tensions flared. The only way to quell anti-constitution sentiments is through effective governance and action from political parties.

Despite these challenges, it is high time to review the constitution and assess the performance of political parties. This doesn't mean the constitution must be discarded; rather, parties need to course-correct immediately. The constitution was a step toward progress, but the journey requires the right guidance and determination to succeed.

Autism Spectrum Disorder, a neurodivergent condition that impacts social interaction, affects an estimated 250,000-300,000 people in Nepal, with 60,000-90,000 people classified as severely affected. Autism Spectrum Disorder, or ASD, has been thought to predominantly affect males, with a male-female diagnosis ratio of 4:1. However, recent studies have proposed  that this ratio is closer to 3:1, with a considerable population of females being diagnosed late or undiagnosed.

To understand the cause behind poor diagnoses, it is essential to understand the early days of autism research. The term ‘autism’ was coined by the Swiss psychiatrist Eugen Bleuler in 1911 and was used to describe a set of schizophrenia symptoms that involved withdrawal from the external world and increased focus on oneself. 

Later, in the 1940s, researchers Leo Kanner and Hans Asperger used the term to describe a group of children who displayed similar social and communication difficulties but did not fit the profile of schizophrenia. These two  researchers played a crucial role in highlighting autism as a separate developmental disorder. However, these studies were performed with a sample size unrepresentative of autism as a whole. 

The first study (1943) had a sample of 11 children: three girls and eight boys. The  following study was entirely composed of boys. Male-centric research is not just a problem of the past. The current ascertainment bias towards males is 15:1, with males being 15 times more likely to be chosen in a study for autism than females. As most of the existing data focuses on autism in boys, the measures used to define and diagnose autism are also more applicable to male behavior, leaving many girls with late or no diagnosis that can affect them for the rest of their lives.  

To tackle this issue, a recent study analyzed autistic behavior in a sample of both boys and girls. After careful evaluation, they created a list of ASD symptoms that varied from gender to gender. However, there were limitations to the study. Although the focus of the study was to search for symptoms in girls without intellectual disabilities, the ratio of diagnosed boys to girls was an astounding 11:1. They discovered that:  

● Girls were better at adjusting their behavior to fit social contexts.  

● Girls exhibit fewer patterns of similarity concerning restricted, repetitive behavior. 

● Girls were more aware of social conventions and codes of conduct and more influenced by peer pressure. 

● Girls have stronger communication skills. 

● Girls develop significantly fewer routines in specific interests. 

● Girls were less distressed in noisy, crowded places. 

● Girls had fewer non-verbal communication issues compared to boys. 

While this is just the result of one study, it proposes that autism presents itself slightly differently in girls than boys, with girls having fewer social hindrances and lacking the stereotypical repetitive behavior that currently characterizes autistic behavior. These differences are unaccounted for in diagnostic manuals, further hindering a clinician's ability to make a sound diagnosis.  

Diagnosing autism isn’t as easy as putting a patient into an MRI machine. Clinicians must refer to the DSM-5, the diagnosis and statistical manual, to confirm if their patient checks  the boxes for autism. As mentioned earlier, the DSM and most other checklists are based on male-centered studies and are more applicable to men than women. For example, one of the possible requirements for autistic behavior is, as stated: “Stereotyped or repetitive motor  movements, use of objects, or speech (e.g., simple motor stereotypes, lining up toys or flipping objects, echolalia, idiosyncratic phrases).” Some of these behaviors, such as hand wringing, rocking, and restrictive repetitive movements, appear more in boys than girls.

Here’s another example. “Highly restricted, fixated interests that are abnormal in intensity or focus (e.g., strong attachment to or preoccupation with unusual objects, excessively circumscribed or perseverative interests).” The “restrictive, repetitive patterns of behavior and interest” described often present differently in girls, with girls engaging seemingly ordinary interests like animals, celebrities, or a specific TV show. These interests usually reach a near obsessive level, but they are not “stereotypical” autistic traits, so they often go overlooked. None of these differences are acknowledged by the DSM, as the criteria for ASD show no  variance in gender.  

One final factor in the underdiagnosis of girls is a behavior known as camouflaging. Camouflaging refers to masking social impairment or behaviors to fit society’s standards. Due to gender expectations, women feel more pressure than men to conform to societal norms; therefore, females are more likely to engage in camouflaging behavior. Camouflaging, or masking, can occur in girls as young as 7-8, making it harder for parents to notice and report irregularities in their child’s behavior if they have not already been diagnosed. 

Dr Amit Jha, a doctor at Kanti’s child and adolescent psychiatric unit, observed that family members sometimes normalize symptoms of autism in girls, accounting for a girl’s social withdrawal to being “shy.” Ignoring autism symptoms early on can lead to late diagnosis, which is detrimental to a child’s  health in numerous ways. As mentioned earlier, behaviors like camouflaging can arise and delay  a diagnosis for even longer.  

So what is the importance of an early diagnosis? Younger minds have a higher level of  brain plasticity, or the brain's ability to adapt and change. Therefore, the sooner autism is diagnosed and cared for, the more effective treatment will be. Sita Koirala (name changed) pushed her family to seek a diagnosis for her two-year-old sister after she started developing signs of autism. After much resistance from her family, they booked an appointment, only to be told she was fine. 

As time passed and her symptoms worsened, they booked another consultation and finally got an official autism diagnosis. Now, her sister is receiving treatment and slowly improving her communication and social skills. However, it’s hard not to wonder if further intervention could have occurred if she had been diagnosed correctly the first time around and how a delayed  diagnosis impacted her lifelong development. 

All this new research raises the question of why autism presents differently in females. Dr Supekar and Dr Menon from Stanford School of Medicine sought the answer with a brain  mapping study. His research found discrepancies between the male and female motor cortex, supplementary motor cortex, and a portion of the cerebellum, brain areas responsible for motor function. Dr Supekar hypothesized that these differences could account for the disparity in typical symptoms of autism, such as hand flapping and repetitive behaviors. Another doctor in  the study, Dr Menon, adds: “Girls and boys with autism differ in their clinical and neurobiological characteristics, and their brains are patterned in ways that contribute differently  to behavioral impairments.” 

At the end of the study, Dr Supekar concludes: “The discovery of gender differences in both behavioral and brain measures suggests that clinicians may want to  focus diagnosis and treatments for autistic girls differently than boys.” While this is just a single  study and cannot be used to draw definitive conclusions, it is a promising explanation as to why  autism presents itself differently in male and female brains. 

To put it simply, the existing measures of autism could have a higher validity for boys than girls, resulting in missed and late diagnoses. While part of the ratio between diagnosed  boys and girls with autism is due to biological differences, the global ratio is likely 3:1 rather than the current accepted ratio of 4:1.  The children missed during diagnosis fall into a group that doesn’t show stereotypical autistic traits and risk spending their whole life struggling with an undiagnosed condition.

It should also be noted that while the 4:1 ratio is a global statistic—and there is not  enough data collected in Nepal to create a country-wide metric—it is safe to assume that the ratio of diagnosed girls to boys is even higher due to Nepal’s already gender-biased culture. Mental health is still an emerging field in Nepal. Therefore, if this issue can be addressed sooner  rather than later, the gap can be closed through further research, awareness, and capacity building. To treat our girls and boys equally, their conditions need to be looked at differently. Every stakeholder, from government to clinicians to family members, can help ensure every girl gets the treatment she deserves.