Introduction
Citizenship in Nepal is a complex and sensitive issue. On one hand, many struggle to obtain it; on the other, those who already have it risk losing it due to outdated laws. The Nepali Citizenship Act of 2063 BS (2006) has created a crisis—especially for Nepalis abroad—by automatically revoking citizenship if they acquire foreign nationality. This law has sparked debates about identity, economic loss, and national security.
In a recent discussion, senior advocate Balkrishna Neupane and social activist Khagendra Pathak (leader of the Vansajko Nepali Nagarikta Nirantarta Maha Abhiyan) highlighted how this law harms Nepal’s diaspora and the country itself.
The Problem: Citizenship Act 2063’s Controversial Clause
1. Dual Citizenship Denied
Before 2063 BS, Nepal unofficially allowed dual citizenship. Nepalis abroad could hold foreign passports while retaining Nepali citizenship, enabling them to invest, return, and maintain ties. However, Section 10 of the 2063 Citizenship Act stripped this right, declaring:
“If a Nepali acquires foreign citizenship, their Nepali citizenship is automatically revoked.”
This left thousands of Nepalis abroad—especially in the UK, USA, Gulf, and Australia—stateless in their own homeland.
2. Economic Consequences
-
Loss of Investment: Many NRNs hesitate to invest in Nepal due to legal uncertainties.
-
Property Rights Issues: Families face difficulties transferring ancestral property to children who lost citizenship.
-
Brain Drain: Skilled Nepalis abroad avoid returning, fearing bureaucratic hurdles.
Khagendra Pathak argues:
“If Nepal allowed dual citizenship, billions in remittance and expertise would flow back. Instead, we’re pushing away our best minds.”
Political Motivations Behind the Law
Balkrishna Neupane points out that the 2063 law was influenced by Maoist-era politics, aiming to:
-
Marginalize Nepali diaspora while favoring certain groups (like those under the 1950 India-Nepal Treaty).
-
Weaken Nepal’s demographic balance, as unchecked citizenship grants in border areas raise concerns of foreign influence (similar to Sikkim’s annexation).
“This law was designed to isolate genuine Nepalis while allowing others to exploit loopholes.” — Balkrishna Neupane
The Way Forward: Solutions & Demands
1. Amend Section 10
The primary demand is to restore dual citizenship or grant permanent residency rights to NRNs, as seen in India (Overseas Citizenship of India).
2. Economic Incentives
-
Fast-track investment policies for NRNs (like Citizenship by Investment in Caribbean nations).
-
Legal safeguards for property inheritance.
3. Political Unity
-
Activists urge NRNs to unite beyond party lines and lobby collectively.
-
Pressure the government to address this in the upcoming parliamentary session.
Conclusion: Will Nepal Listen?
Nepal’s diaspora is a strategic asset, not a liability. Retaining their citizenship ties could boost the economy, strengthen global ties, and preserve cultural identity. As Khagendra Pathak warns:
“If we don’t act now, Nepal will lose its people, money, and future.”
The ball is now in the government’s court. Will they amend the law, or let Nepal’s potential continue to drain away?
What do you think? Should Nepal allow dual citizenship? Share your views in the comments!
