Eleven years after Nepal adopted its Constitution, the debate over its amendment is becoming more heated, which is natural given the criticism directed at it. A charter drafted over eight years by two Constituent Assemblies was intended to resolve long-standing disagreements over power, identity, and representation. However, many citizens continue to struggle to see its benefits in their everyday lives. The first consideration for political leaders is whether they have given the Constitution a fair opportunity to function.
The charter altered Nepal's political structure. It created a federal democratic republic, granted access to public institutions previously denied to marginalized people, and guaranteed rights to education, health, housing, and social justice. Elections have been held at all three levels of government. These are significant gains. However, an elected parliament, both at federal and provincial levels, has little value if it is unable to manage its staff, exercise its powers, or plan resource management. That is where constitutional promise and political practice have diverged the most. Federal civil service and police arrangements remain unfinished. Provinces have protested that Kathmandu has retained control that was meant to be shared. Local governments face uncertainties about education, natural resources, and income. Councils formed to resolve disputes between governments seldom convene. When every issue is sent back to the center, federalism becomes a costly office structure rather than a vehicle for bringing decisions and choices closer to people.
Govt recommends president to issue five ordinances
Various rights enshrined in the charter face a similar problem. A family without a home gains little from a constitutional guarantee if the law lacks working rules, a responsible agency, and a funded program. Commissions created to protect women, Dalits, and other communities need staff, resources, and the freedom to investigate. Parliament should set deadlines for the laws still required, while governments should publish what each right will cost, who will deliver it, and how citizens can seek a remedy when delivery fails. Poor governance has also weakened faith in the charter. Young people facing unemployment, costly services, and corruption will judge democracy by what it enables them to do, not by speeches on Constitution Day. The answer calls for accountable public spending, reliable schools and healthcare, and a fairer path to work at home. Constitutional rights become durable when people can use them.
None of this means the Constitution must be frozen. Madheshi, Tharu, and indigenous groups have raised concerns about representation and boundaries since its adoption. Those concerns deserve a hearing. So do proposals to make elections and government more effective. But political parties should test each proposed change against evidence. The March election showed that the mixed electoral system can produce a clear parliamentary majority. It would be unwise to blame every unstable government on the voting system while ignoring how parties form coalitions, select leaders, and conduct themselves in office.
Several parties stayed away from or withdrew from the amendment discussions, yet the government’s amendment task force has proposed changes to 245 of the Constitution’s 308 articles. Changes on that scale deserve careful public debate. Parliament should publish the full proposals, explain why each change is needed, and hear from provincial governments and the communities whose rights or representation may be affected. It should also seek agreement across parties. If leaders rush into a deal among themselves, they risk adding to the mistrust they claim to want to address. Nepal should amend the Constitution where experience has exposed a real flaw. But its future also depends on efforts that political leaders have put off for years: passing the required laws, handing over powers, funding promised rights, settling disputes between governments, and answering to voters. Eleven years on, the strongest defense of the Constitution is to make its promises work in people’s lives.
