Part 2 of the Constitution of Nepal

This clause guarantees citizenship as a constitutional right, which means that it cannot be arbitrary taken away or denied by the state. The criteria for one to become the “citizen of Nepal” is explained in Article 11. It ensures no citizen is arbitrarily left stateless within the country

Clause 2 of Article 10 clarifies that a Nepali can have only one citizenship where provincial identity will be preserved. There are no separate provincial citizenships. It reflects the unity of Nepal as a single nation, even under federalism.

Article 11 of the Constitution of Nepal (2015) is the most comprehensive provision on citizenship eligibility, laying out who qualifies as a citizen of Nepal by descent, naturalization, or honorary. The first two types are continued from all previous constitutions. The provision for citizenship by birth, which was introduced in the Interim Constitution, 2007 has been removed. This article addresses complex issues like gender, parentage, birth within Nepal, and foreign spouses, while also exposing contradictions and controversies in its implementation.

Clause (1) of Article 11 ensures legal continuity and protects existing citizens. Those who already have Nepali citizenship at the time of the Constitution’s commencement, i.e. September 20, 2015, and are qualified, remain citizens.

Those permanently residing in Nepal at the time of the Constitution’s commencement can be citizens by descent if:

• They had citizenship by descent before; or
• Either parent was a Nepali citizen at their birth.

This clause confirms citizenship for a wide range of people, but only if they or their parents already had it before 2015.

The provision of Article 11(2)(b) is continuation from the Article 8(2)(b) of the Interim Constitution, 2007. It aims for gender equality. The 1961 Constitution also granted Nepali citizenship to the one whose either parent (father or mother) was born in Nepal (Article 7(b)). However, the Citizenship Act, 1962 seems regressive and contradictory to the Constitution under which it was made since it allowed a person to be a citizen by descent only if the father was a Nepali. The 1990 Constitution had continued the provision of the Act.

Clause (3) of Article 11 allows a child of a citizen by birth (before September 20, 2015) to acquire citizenship by descent upon reaching adulthood if both parents are Nepali citizens.

The provision for citizenship by birth was made in the Article 8(5) of the Interim Constitution of Nepal, 2007:

Any person born and living permanently in Nepal before the end of Chaitra, 2046 (mid April, 1990) shall acquire the citizenship of Nepal by birth in accordance with the existing law.
Provided that application to that effect shall be submitted once in accordance with existing laws within the prescribed timeframe.

The Citizenship Act, 2007 and Regulations, 2008 further clarify the procedure for obtaining such a citizenship. An applicant (sixteen years old or above) had to apply to the Chief District Officer “before holding of the election for Constituent Assembly” or within two years from the commencement of the Act (i.e. November 25, 2008) along with the evidence of settlement (recommendations from the local level and land or electoral documents).

This provision was extremely controversial with fiery accusations from the opposition that foreigners (especially Indians) could easily become the citizens of Nepal and that the original citizens by descent could be outnumbered in the future. The fear has found its way in Article 11(3) of the 2015 Constitution.

As mentioned above, the new constitution has discontinued the provision for citizen by birth. But because their children cannot be denied citizenship according to Article 10, the children can now obtain citizenship by descent. However, there is a condition: Not one but both the parents should have be Nepali citizens. Whereas Article 11(2)(b) allows the children of citizens by descent to obtain such a citizenship when either parent is present and Articles 11(4) and 11(5) provide citizenship by descent to orphaned or whose father is unknown, by strictly requiring both parents, Article 11(3) creates a severe administrative bottleneck for children of citizens by birth.

To ensure a child does not become stateless if his/her father was a citizen by birth but currently absent, the 2025 amendment of the Citizenship Act, 2007 allows the child to obtain a naturalized citizenship after the self-declaration on the absence of the father from the applicant and the mother. However, because the constitution has not been amended and also because according to Article 289(1) a naturalized citizen cannot hold the offices of the President, the Prime Minister, Vice-President, Chief Justice, Speaker of the House of Representatives, Chairperson of the National Assembly, provincial heads, Chief Ministers, Speakers of Provincial Assemblies and chiefs of security bodies, controversies persist.

These provisions can create a problem of unequal citizenship. Suppose, A and B are two eligible applicants, the parents of both are citizens by birth, and both their fathers are absent. A has adequate evidence to prove that his father is a citizen by birth. He is eligible to become citizen by descent according to Article 11(3) of the Constitution and Section 3(4) of the Citizenship Act.

In the case of B, however, the father’s name appears in her school certificates, but she and her family do not have any of his documents. She and her mother self-declare on the absence of the father. She is now eligible for naturalized citizenship. This situation raises a question: Despite coming from similar background as A, should B suffer a lifelong disadvantage in citizenship status, and in turn, opportunities for significant public positions because her family cannot establish her father’s documents (which is not in their control), even where the father was in fact Nepali?

Moreover, Articles 11 and 289(1) seem contradictory to the Right to Equality provision in Article 18(3), which says that “the state will not discriminate its citizens on the basis of origin”. (The fact that Article 18(3) itself promotes “positive” discrimination for social justice is another contradiction, which has both its fierce supporters and opponents.)

Foundlings with unknown parentage found in Nepal can become citizens by descent until parentage is discovered. The rationale behind this clause is to prevent statelessness.

A person born to a Nepali woman, permanently residing in Nepal, with an untraced father, gets to become a citizen by descent. However, if the father is later found to be a foreigner, the child’s citizenship will convert to naturalized.

The issue with this provision is that it presumes the father’s identity as primary, reducing the mother’s status and places burden of proof on the mother and the child. Despite seeming progressive, like Clause (3) this clause is gender-discriminatory and thus, contradictory to the Right to Equality.

A foreign woman married to a Nepali man can acquire naturalized citizenship under federal law if she desires.

A criticism of this clause is that if a foreign man married to a Nepali woman wants to become a citizen of Nepal, he has to fulfill the conditions set forth in the Section 5(4) of the Citizenship Act, 2007. However, the state is not obliged to grant the citizenship. Thus, there is an inherent gender bias in this provision.

If a Nepali woman marries a foreign man, their child may get naturalized citizenship. The child should have resided permanently in Nepal and hasn’t acquired foreign citizenship.

However, if both parents are Nepali citizens at the time of application, the child can get citizenship by descent.

This is another controversial provision because children of foreign fathers face extra hurdles, even if born and raised in Nepal. Also, it reinforces patrilineal bias.

The Government of Nepal may grant naturalized citizenship in other cases, per federal law.

Whereas the criteria for obtaining the naturalized citizenship were mentioned in the constitutions of 1961 and 1990, since the promulgation of the Interim Constitution, 2007, the conditions are outlined only in the Section 5 of the Citizenship Act, 2007.

This reduces rigidity in the constitution but also adds fear that the Act can be manipulated to ease the standards for foreigners to convert into naturalized citizens of Nepal.

Honorary citizenship may be granted to foreigners by the government, as per law. Section 6 of the Citizenship Act, 2007 allows the government to grant such a citizenship to eminent foreigners.

If new territory is integrated into Nepal, its residents may become citizens per Section 7 of the Citizenship Act, 2007.

An applicant who fulfills the criteria for citizenship by descent set forth in Article 11 and federal law may obtain their citizenship certificate in the name of either their mother or father, including their gender identity.

This provision is significant because it empowers individuals to choose to be recognized legally through either parent, supporting gender equality. It also recognizes gender identity, enabling people to declare their gender as per their self-identification.

It’s a progressive feature allowing for matrilineal identification, a rare provision in South Asia, and respecting trans identities.

This article defers to legislation, meaning Parliament must pass detailed laws to specify how:

• Foreign nationals can acquire citizenship;
• Former citizens can regain it;
• Citizenship can be revoked.

The acquisition, reacquisition and termination are regulated according to the Sections 10, 11, and 12 to 14, respectively, of the Citizenship Act, 2007.

Nepal may grant Non-Resident Nepali (NRN) citizenship to people who:

• Are citizens of foreign countries except SAARC nations; and
• Have ancestral ties to Nepal (parents or grandparents were Nepali citizens);

They can enjoy economic, social, and cultural rights, but not political rights (like voting or holding political offices).

The purpose of this proviso is to engage the Nepali diaspora in development while protecting national sovereignty by excluding political rights.

NRNs from SAARC countries (e.g., India, Bangladesh) are excluded, however, largely for geopolitical and demographic reasons.

Issues, such as record-keeping, identity verification, and documentation are governed by the federal law.

The article mandates the creation and maintenance of a national citizenship database. It also emphasizes legal documentation as central to proving identity and rights.

The challenge, however, is the lack of clear rules and digitized records has led to arbitrary rejections, delays, and discrimination, especially among marginalized communities.

The issue of citizenship has always been highly politically charged and controversial in Nepal. Debates arise from nationalism, identity, perception of discrimination, political authority, and state governance and they have continued well after the promulgation of the 2015 Constitution. As we saw in the explanations of Clauses (3) to (7) of Article 11, self-contradictory provisions have entered the constitution, further complicating an already complex issue.

The issues are discussed in detail in the article: Controversies Surrounding Citizenship in Nepal