As Nepal marks the ninth anniversary of its Constitution, are there significant achievements that stand out?

The Constitution has indeed brought several notable achievements. Firstly, it has established peace in Nepal, with efforts to consolidate this peace ongoing. Federalism and devolution of power have empowered provinces and local governments, bringing governance closer to the people and fostering regional development. The system of proportional representation and inclusivity continues to ensure that marginalized groups such as women, Dalits, Madhesis, and indigenous communities are represented, enhancing the political participation of historically excluded communities.

The Constitution also strengthens guarantees for rights to education, healthcare, and employment, contributing positively to the human rights landscape. Moreover, its focus on social justice and redistributive policies has spurred initiatives in education, health, and employment for the underprivileged. Overall, the Constitution is evolving into a stabilizing force.

Some critics argue that challenges outweigh these achievements. Do you agree?

While the achievements are significant, challenges persist. Implementing constitutional frameworks requires adherence to the norms, standards, procedures, and institutions prescribed by the Constitution. Stability in government is crucial, as is addressing poverty and protecting agriculture from indiscriminate imports. There is also a need to prioritize employment for Nepali citizens and empower them in business and trade. These challenges underscore the necessity for stronger institutional support, political will, and improved governance to fully realize the Constitution’s vision.

How is federalism being implemented under the Constitution?

Effective implementation of federalism requires robust political will from both the ruling elite and the bureaucracy. Efforts should be made to clarify the roles and responsibilities of federal, provincial, and local governments to avoid overlapping authority and enhance efficiency. Adjustments in resource and revenue allocation between these levels of government may be needed to ensure equitable development. Institutional mechanisms for coordination between different government levels should be strengthened to improve cooperation and policy implementation. Provinces must be supported in managing law and order, health, education, and forest management as envisioned by the Constitution, with an emphasis on rapid establishment of provincial civil administration.

Can federalism be sustained without electoral reforms?

Electoral reforms are essential not only for effective federalism but also for ensuring equal and quality representation. Proportional representation must be further consolidated, and laws should focus on better representation and protection of marginalized groups. The first-past-the-post system also needs to be effectively implemented. Continuous refinement of the electoral system, including strengthening rules around election funding and candidate accountability, is necessary to enhance the integrity of the electoral process.

What is your assessment of inclusion in general?

Inclusion has shown some positive effects in public administration, but more effort is needed. In appointments, such as those made by the Constitutional Council, there is often a lack of necessary qualifications, leadership and inclusion. The appointment process sometimes favors politically charged individuals, undermining the constitutional logic of inclusion. The minimum qualifications required have become the maximum in the recommendation and appointment processes, which is problematic.

Some argue that certain laws are still lacking, and the government needs to enact them to fully implement the Constitution.

This is true. For example, the federal government needs to introduce a new law to operationalize Article 56(5) of the Constitution, which allows for the establishment of autonomous regions. Similarly, there is no law yet to implement Article 42(1) of the Constitution, which guarantees specific groups in Nepal the right to proportional inclusion in state structures. These provisions are particularly important for identity-based groups, and without the necessary laws, their full potential remains unrealized.

Has the judiciary been effective in its role?

The judiciary has generally upheld constitutional supremacy and the rule of law, playing a vital role in safeguarding Nepal's constitutional framework. However, it has faced criticisms regarding its slow pace in handling disputes, difficulties in the enforcement of judgments, and occasional accusations of politicization. These challenges, though significant, have not undermined the judiciary’s overall commitment to maintaining justice and protecting constitutional values. However, the role of Constitutional Bench of the Supreme Court as the federal judicial dispute resolution mechanism has become cumbersome. There may be a need to either designate the entire Supreme Court as a constitutional court or establish a separate constitutional court to handle federal disputes, potentially under the chief justice’s leadership. Additionally, amending the Constitution to involve District and High Courts in handling some federal disputes could also be considered.

The current coalition government has plans for constitutional amendments. What areas do you think require amendment?

Grievances from those who opposed the 2015 Constitution continue to influence political discourse, particularly regarding federalism, inclusion, representation, and perceived centralization of power. Concerns include the delineation of provincial boundaries, the creation of provinces that better reflect ethnic and cultural identities, and the uneven implementation of federal provisions. Constitutions often balance ideal governance visions with practical constraints, and while many groups seek full implementation of their visions, practical realities sometimes intervene.

There are extreme positions, with monarchists on one side and identity-based groups on the other, as well as secularists and proponents of a pro-Hindu state. Is reconciliation between these opposing views possible?

Achieving reconciliation between these opposing groups—whether monarchists and identity-based federalists, or secularists and pro-Hindu state advocates—poses a significant challenge. These factions represent fundamentally different visions for Nepal's political structure and governance. While full agreement may be difficult to attain, there are potential pathways to manage these conflicts and work toward a more inclusive political environment. The challenge lies in creating a framework that respects diverse identities and aspirations while maintaining national unity and stability.

How can constitutional satisfaction be ensured in such a diverse society?

Complete satisfaction for everyone is unlikely in a diverse society with conflicting interests. However, the goal should be to ensure that all voices are engaged, heard, and respected in governance, that grievances are addressed through continuous dialogue and reform mechanisms, and that the system remains inclusive and adaptable to future changes. This requires a commitment to open dialogue, compromise, and a shared vision for Nepal’s future.