10 key points of that needs to be raised to review on the draft constitution

1. Preamble of the Constitution There is no mention of secularism in the Preamble of the draft constitution. Although Nepal is a Hindu dominated country, it is a multireligious country and there is no justification not to incorporate secularism in the Preamble, the soul of the constitution. 2. Definition of state: Federalism has not been mentioned in the definition of Nepali state. Federalism remains at the key of empowerment of marginalised communities of Nepal including Madhesis, Dalits and indigenous nationalities. Therefore, federalism must be mentioned in the Preamble of the constitution. 3. Women's reproductive health right has not been deleted from the draft constitution though it was the agreed issue of the first CA. 4. The draft constitution proposes that children seeking citizenship by descent must prove that their father and mother both were Nepali citizens at the time of their birth. This 'and' provision could create many children stateless as there are many cases when one spouse leaves other spouse, a father does not accept a child or a parent does not help the children get Nepali nationality. In some families, the husband does not help wife get Nepali citizenship fearing that she might claim a share in his property. Children of Nepali nationals married to foreign national may get naturalized citizens after fulfilling certain conditions, but that cannot be deemed right. Either father or mother should have the right to transmit Nepali nationality to their children.

5. Article 282 to censor people. Article 282 says that only citizens by descent will be entitled to hold the post of President, Vice President, Speaker, Chair of Rastriya Sabha (the Upper

House), Chief of Pradesh (province), Chief Minister, Speaker of Pradesh Assembly and chiefs of security agencies. Article 282 (2) (1) states that in order to qualify for other constitutional posts, citizens by birth will b have to live in Nepal for at least five years after getting their citizenship by birth and those who have obtained naturalized citizenship will have live in Nepal for 10 years after getting their citizenship. Those who have renounced Nepali citizenship and reacquired citizenship by descent will have to live in Nepal for five years are reacquiring Nepali citizenship in order to be entitled to hold other constitutional posts. When a non resident Nepali holds political positions in the UK, USA or other overseas country, Nepalis feel pride about it but in Nepal they seem to be censuring the Nepali citizens who are not citizens by descent from enjoying full rights. There are three categories of citizenship in Nepal- citizen by descent, citizen by birth and naturalized citizen. The draft the constitution does not have provisions for citizenship by birth. The provision that entitles citizens by descent to hold key constitutional posts including the President, Vice President and Speaker will have adverse impact on cultural and marital relation between Nepali and Indian people. Categorization of citizenship in Nepal will create first, second and third class citizens and Indians who want to marry their daughters in Nepal might not want to have martial relations in Nepal due to fear of second or third class citizen status for their daughters. 6.

Article 231: A dictatorial provision of the new constitution.

Article 231 states that if a province does something against nationality, sovereignty, territorial integrity, independence and peace and order, the President can caution such province and can suspend or dismiss the provincial government or the provincial legislature. The only condition is that this act will have to be endorsed within 35 days by the federal Parliament just with majority vote. This means that the center can interpret this provision as it pleases to dismiss or dissolve the provincial government and the legislature. This means the center can dismiss or dissolve provincial government in anytime in the name of peace and order. 7. On inclusion: Khas Arya group is a deprived diluting inclusion

Article 47 states that all organs of the state will be inclusive but the provisions relating to different government and constitutional bodies do not ensure inclusion. The fact that the constitution was drafted by people with bad intention is reflected in many article of the constitution. Article 47 is a case in point. Everybody knows that Khas Arya group has remained the most advantageous group ever since the unification of Nepal 240 years ago and this is the group that controlled the state affairs in last 240 years but Article 47 places Khas Arya before Madhesis and Muslims. All the drafters of the constitution whether they were politicians or bureaucrats were Khas Arya group and hence they put the word ahead of other marginalised groups. The constitution does not define any other groups but it does define Khas Arya as Chhetri, Brahmin, Thakuri and Sanyasi (Dasnami). Khas Arya group cannot be defined as marginalised group on any basis whether it is HDI or any other government index. 8. Undemocratic provision Article 90 of the draft constitution states that all the provinces will elect at five members to the Upper House of the Parliament. Five members will be elected by the government. There seems to be a tentative agreement among the politicians to have two Pradeshes in Mahdes. This means there will be 10 representatives from Madhes in the Upper House but there will be 30 representatives from the hill areas. Isn't this an injustice? Madhes has more population than the hills. This will affect Madhesis ability to make laws that would be vital to their empowerment and thus Madhes will continue to be a slave of the center. The ideal situation would be if each Pradesh has the right to elect at least one representative to the Upper House and the rest is elected on the basis of population. In India, Sikkim, Arunachal, and Goa send one representative each to Rajya Sabha, the Upper House of the Parliament while UP sends 31 members. Similarly, Bihar and Maharastra send 16 and 19 members to the Upper House respectively. 9.

Press freedom Although Article 24 of the draft constitution tries to ensure guarantee of press freedom the same article also said that the government can make laws to Radios, Televisions, online or any other kind of digital or electronic equipment, press or other means of communication. This provision provides several grounds to the state to curtail press freedom. These provisions may be misused by illiberal governments, to curtail press freedom and hence these should be removed from the constitution.

10. Violation of the Supreme Court The Supreme Court issued an interim order on June 19 telling the signatories of 16 point and the CA Chair not to do anything against Article 1, 82 and 138 of the Interim Constitution. Article 1 of the constitution says that this constitution will be the fundamental law of the land. Similarly, Article 82 states that the CA will cease to exist after the constitution is promulgated and article 138 stipulates that all issues related to federalism, including names, boundaries, lists of the provincial jurisdictions and powers must be settled by the CA. Therefore, none should violate the interim order of the SC. CA like body which has the duty to frame a new constitution should not violate the rule of law. The first draft does not have names, boundaries of the federal units and hence it violates the recent interim order of the SC. CA should stop this process.