Citizenship potentially provides a framework, which enables all people to participate in political life at all levels from the village to the state parliament and beyond that to global community. Its potential for liberalization is enormous because it legitimizes people´s access to public resources and allows their participation in public life. In Nepal, citizenship has always been gendered in the sense that women and men have stood in a different relationship to it, to the disadvantage of women.
The granting of nationality and citizenship of children through the male line is one of the clearest manifestations of discrimination against women and children. The limitation placed on married women in their ability to pass on their nationality to their children is an area where discrimination has been legally enshrined for a long time. So, following this trend and neglecting the achievements of women rights movement, the aforementioned high-level taskforce forwarded its decision against the principle of gender equality and human rights.
The committee has decided that both the parents should be Nepali citizens for a child to receive Nepali citizenship. If both the parents are to be the citizens of Nepal, then there might arise some serious legal vacuums for a child to receive her/his citizenship. A child born to parents of whom one is foreigner and who would not like to take Nepali citizenship would be deprived of Nepali citizenship even if the child would like to take one. Similarly, if a child is born or adopted by a single mother, then the possibility of such a child of becoming stateless remains high. Hence, the child should receive the citizenship on the basis of descent from either mother or father.
Similarly, the committee decided that foreigner husband will have to wait for Nepali citizenship for 15 years in order to receive naturalized citizen after marrying a Nepali woman whereas a foreign woman marrying a Nepali citizen will immediately get naturalized citizenship upon voluntarily relinquishing her existing foreign citizenship. This decision is against the principle of equality. The constitutional provision should be equal for both men and women marrying Nepali citizens. It is very important for a mother to be a source of citizenship. Denying such rights to a mother or putting conditions on her rights is a violation of equality.
It is very important for a mother to be a source of citizenship. Denying such rights to a mother or putting conditions on her rights is a violation of equality.
A child should be able to retain her/his Nepali citizenship received on the basis of descent from her/his mother at all the time. According to the committee, a child born to a Nepali mother and a father whose nationality is unknown is entitled to receive citizenship through descent through the mother. However, later, if the father is identified as a foreigner, then the citizenship of the child would be converted to naturalized, thus stripping her/his from competing for important public positions. It will be better if the child is given the discretion to choose her/his nationality upon reaching the age of maturity. The child’s citizenship should not be changed by the state from her/his earlier descent status to naturalized one. This will be against the dignity of the child and will be a violation of basic human rights and could bring many social challenges in the days to come.
According to our existing interim constitution, a child is entitled to receive a Nepali citizenship from her/his Nepali citizen mother on the basis of descent. The high-level taskforce decision is, therefore, inconsistent with the interim constitution and against the principle of equality. This is a huge violation of women rights and a big blow to the women rights movement that was able to establish Nepali women as one of the sources of citizenship in Nepal.
Similarly, Nepal has adopted and signed various international human rights conventions, so it becomes the obligation of the government to implement all provisions contained in the convention. The Human Rights Committee, which monitors state compliance with the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, established that state parties “are required to adopt every appropriate measure, both internally and in cooperation with other States, to ensure that every child has a nationality when she is born” (General Comment 17). The Convention on the Rights of the Child has recognized the identity and equality principle of the children and gives the state obligation to provide the right to acquire and preserve their nationality right from the birth.
Hence, the decision of the high-level taskforce on issues related with citizenship referred to by the Fundamental Rights and Directive Principles Committee of the CA is against national laws and national consensus that was reached after the People’s Movement II and international standards. It also overrules the basic principles of democratic norms, specifically the principle of gender equality. Nepali laws discriminate women in the distribution of citizenship certificates. Women do not have right to claim citizenship for her and her children in Nepal and have to depend on either their father or husband for getting this important document. This has relegated women to secondary status. Now, the time has come for the civil society to advocate collectively for women rights. The so-called "progressive and democratic forces of the country" must make it clear to the people that the mantra being chanted by them is not merely rhetoric but reality.
Writer is Advocacy Program Coordinator at WOREC Nepal
advocacy.vaw@worecnepal.org
Related story
Clash between Citizenship-less Struggle Committee and Police at...
