What does social inclusion mean for the new federal government?
How important is the agenda of caste discrimination for Prime Minister Balendra Shah?
The new federal government has started its mandate with some bold gestures addressing the historical grievances faced by the Dalit community.
An official apology to the Dalit community has been issued—symbolic, historic, and unique in itself.
It is also worth noting that, in the recent federal budget, provisions were made to better support the nutritional needs of Dalit children in schools by doubling the per-child allowance to Rs 1,000.
It is likely that more such measures will be announced in the coming weeks.
However, to truly address generational caste discrimination, it is essential to confront the so-called “elephant in the room”: affirmative action legislation, a broad term that includes various policies commonly known as reservations.
These policies are often viewed with skepticism, and there is generally a lack of genuine policy enthusiasm around them.
But are reservations really so controversial?
To begin with, it is important to highlight the lack of knowledge and expertise surrounding this complex and sensitive issue.
It is also important to clarify, once and for all, what reservations are not: they are not a means to address the economic vulnerabilities of financially weak citizens.
To address such conditions that cut across society, the state can and must intervene through welfare schemes.
A new social contract in the making? As existing social contrac...
Such welfare policies, if poorly designed or wrongly implemented, can create dependency and may be perceived as populist tools used to gain voter support.
However, when properly designed and implemented, they can make a meaningful difference and become pillars of a modern welfare state.
Reservations, on the other hand, have a different objective: they are a tool of social justice, a reparative mechanism intended to address historical injustices inflicted by the state and ruling elites.
In this sense, reservations can be seen as a means of restoring justice by providing preferential opportunities to groups historically subjected to discrimination.
Consequently, members of these communities have faced consistent and systematic discrimination throughout history.
In academic terms, such measures are considered positive discrimination aimed at creating a level playing field for persistently marginalized groups in the economy and wider society.
In theory, through reservations, individuals can regain dignity and receive a fairer chance to succeed in life.
The distinction between welfare policies targeting economic vulnerability and social justice measures is clear in theory, even if in practice the boundaries may sometimes overlap.
What is essential is to frame reservations as a deliberate attempt to compensate for systemic injustice.
Getting the basics right is essential if Nepal wants to build a truly equity-based society in which historically marginalized groups, including the Dalit community, can exercise full agency and enjoy dignity and respect.
The use of the word “want” is intentional, as addressing one of Nepal’s most complex challenges requires strong political and social commitment.
There is an urgent need to assess whether larger sections of society—especially historically dominant groups—are willing to engage with and address the grievances of Dalits and other marginalized communities.
Although the inclusive transformation of Nepal has begun since the advent of the republic, it is essential to ensure full and unconditional societal buy-in, particularly from groups that may be uncomfortable with discussions on reservations.
Achieving such acceptance is a critical step toward building a nation grounded in equity, equality, and social justice.
Reservations are generally accepted, but often with reluctance and numerous caveats.
While reservation policies already exist in the public sector and have enabled Dalit citizens to enter public service, any discussion about weakening or phasing them out at this stage is misplaced.
Discrimination against Dalits remains widespread and is often tragically violent.
This is why clarity is needed on what reservations are and why they are important—not as a permanent arrangement, but as a necessary corrective and moral obligation.
A national conversation is needed to examine the ethical, social, legal, and practical dimensions of these policies.
Although such a debate may discourage some sections of society, it could also help bridge opposing views and support policymakers in understanding the complexity of these mechanisms.
Reservations should be understood as a form of redress for historical injustice.
In this process, it may be useful to draw lessons from India’s experience with reservations.
Nepal often borrows governance models from its southern neighbour, though this is not always the most effective approach.
However, given India’s long history with caste-based reservations and its extensive legal framework shaped by judicial interpretation, there is value in studying its experience more closely—not only at the national level in Delhi but also across its federal states.
While the need for reservations is broadly accepted in India, debates continue over how to ensure that these mechanisms are not misused.
Reservations remain legal instruments that are not fixed; their implementation evolves through legal interpretation and public debate.
As societies change, so do laws and their application.
The impact of reservations on beneficiary groups can also be studied empirically, leading to further policy refinement.
Understanding India’s experience may not provide all the answers for Nepal, but it can help policymakers and citizens better understand the scope and potential of such policies.
An effective reservation system can also strengthen good governance, which depends on responsiveness and representation.
However, reservations can only succeed if there is broad societal acceptance of their rationale.
Will citizens, including those skeptical of reservations, recognize that an equitable system of positive discrimination can benefit society as a whole?
It is now up to the new federal government to lead this process.
Prime Minister Shah and his cabinet have an opportunity to initiate a difficult but transformative dialogue that can enable historically marginalized communities to reclaim their voice, rights, and dignity, and participate fully in national development.
