Prior to a civil war between Maoist rebels and the government in 2006, the country was officially a Hindu state. In 2008, Nepal became a secular democratic republic. The new constitution as of 2015 retains “secularism” but places restrictions on freedom of religion or belief.
Constitution and government |
Education and children’s rights |
Family, community, society, religious courts and tribunals |
Freedom of expression advocacy of humanist values |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Constitution and government
Education and children’s rights
Family, community, society, religious courts and tribunals
Freedom of expression advocacy of humanist values
The state is secular, with separation of religious and political authorities, not discriminating against any religion or belief
Countries: Barbados, Belgium, Brazil, Central African Republic, Chile, Congo, Republic of the, Ecuador, Estonia, Fiji, Gabon, Guinea-Bissau, Japan, Kenya, Kosovo, Mexico, Mongolia, Namibia, Nauru, Netherlands, São Tomé and Príncipe, Sierra Leone, Slovenia, South Africa, South Sudan, Taiwan, Ukraine
Insufficient information or detail not included in this report
Religious or ideological instruction is mandatory in all or most state-funded schools with no secular or humanist alternative
Countries: Afghanistan, Algeria, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Belarus, Brunei Darussalam, Comoros, Croatia, Egypt, Eritrea, Ghana, Iran, Iraq, Kenya, Lebanon, Malaysia, Maldives, Mauritania, Morocco, Nigeria, Qatar, Russia, Saudi Arabia, Somalia, Sri Lanka, Sudan, Syria, Tunisia, Turkey, United Arab Emirates, Yemen, Zimbabwe
No formal discrimination in education
Countries: Albania, Antigua and Barbuda, Belgium, Benin, Burkina Faso, Cape Verde, Congo, Republic of the, Djibouti, Ecuador, France, Gabon, Honduras, Iceland, India, Japan, Korea, Republic of, Mali, Mexico, Mozambique, Namibia, Nauru, Netherlands, São Tomé and Príncipe, South Africa, Sweden, Taiwan, United States of America, Uruguay
Insufficient information or detail not included in this report
Countries: Andorra, Angola, Azerbaijan, Bhutan, Bolivia, Congo, Democratic Republic of, Côte d'Ivoire, Cuba, El Salvador, Equatorial Guinea, Guinea-Bissau, Kyrgyzstan, Madagascar, Montenegro, South Sudan, Tonga, Turkmenistan, Tuvalu, Viet Nam
Religious courts or tribunals rule directly on some family or ‘moral’ matters; it is legally an opt-in system, but the possibility of social coercion is very clear
Countries: Cameroon, Comoros, Dominican Republic, Ethiopia, Jamaica, Kenya, Lebanon, Niger, Philippines, Senegal, United Kingdom
No religious tribunals of concern, secular groups operate freely, individuals are not persecuted by the state
Countries: Albania, Antigua and Barbuda, Belgium, Belize, Benin, Bulgaria, Burkina Faso, Canada, Chile, Congo, Republic of the, Dominica, Ecuador, Estonia, France, Ghana, Guatemala, Iceland, Japan, Korea, Republic of, Kosovo, Latvia, Luxembourg, Mexico, Micronesia, Monaco, Mozambique, Namibia, Nauru, Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Palau, Saint Kitts and Nevis, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, San Marino, São Tomé and Príncipe, Sweden, Taiwan, Uruguay, Venezuela
Insufficient information or detail not included in this report
Countries: Austria, Bhutan, Congo, Democratic Republic of, Côte d'Ivoire, Cuba, Czech Republic, El Salvador, Grenada, Guinea, Guinea-Bissau, Honduras, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Lesotho, Lithuania, Mongolia, Montenegro, Nicaragua, Saint Lucia, Seychelles, South Africa, South Sudan, Suriname, Togo, Trinidad and Tobago, Turkmenistan, Vanuatu, Viet Nam
No fundamental restrictions on freedom of expression or advocacy of humanist values
Countries: Belgium, Costa Rica, Dominica, Estonia, France, Iceland, Liechtenstein, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Marshall Islands, Micronesia, Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Palau, Romania, Slovenia, Sweden, Taiwan, United States of America, Uruguay
Insufficient information or detail not included in this report
No condition holds in this strand
No condition holds in this strand
Countries: no countries relate to this boundary condition
No condition holds in this strand
No condition holds in this strand
Countries: no countries relate to this boundary condition
Localised or infrequent but recurring and widespread social marginalisation or prejudice against the non-religious
This condition is unusual in that it is applied in cases where there is some social discrimination, but it is not pervasive or nationwide. This condition is applied when there is sufficient background evidence to warrant the assertion that discrimination is not anomalous but widespread, and this condition may be applied for example even where if there is no legislative discrimination or where the non-religious may have legal recourse against such discrimination. However, societal discrimination (i.e. discrimination by peers, as opposed to state or legal discrimination) is not easily measured, and for this reason the Report does not currently have similar more severe boundary conditions to capture higher levels of social discrimination per se. In principle these may be introduced in future. However, we consider that countries with actual higher levels of social discrimination against the non-religious will generally already meet other higher level (more severe) boundary conditions under this thematic strand.
Complete tyranny precludes all freedoms of expression and thought, religion or belief
Applied when overriding acts of oppression by the State are extreme, to the extent that the question of freedom of thought and expression is almost redundant, because all human rights and freedoms are quashed by authorities.
The non-religious are barred from some government offices (including posts reserved for particular religions or sects)
Countries: Algeria, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Comoros, Eritrea, Lebanon, Malaysia, Mauritania, Morocco, Myanmar (Burma), Nigeria, Saudi Arabia, Somalia, Syria, Thailand, Tunisia, United Arab Emirates, Yemen
There is systematic religious privilege
Countries: Algeria, Argentina, Armenia, Bahrain, Belize, Botswana, Brazil, Cambodia, Chile, Costa Rica, Croatia, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Denmark, Dominican Republic, Egypt, El Salvador, Eritrea, Finland, Georgia, Germany, Greece, Guinea, Guyana, Haiti, Honduras, Iceland, Ireland, Israel, Italy, Jamaica, Latvia, Libya, Liechtenstein, Lithuania, Madagascar, Malta, Moldova, Palestine, Papua New Guinea, Peru, Philippines, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Russia, Rwanda, Saint Lucia, Serbia, Slovakia, Spain, Sri Lanka, Thailand, Timor-Leste (East Timor), Togo, Tunisia, United Kingdom, Zambia, Zimbabwe
There is a nominal state church with few privileges or progress is being made toward disestablishment
Religious or ideological indoctrination is utterly pervasive in schools
There is state funding of at least some religious schools
Countries: Argentina, Australia, Bangladesh, Belize, Brunei Darussalam, Burundi, Cameroon, Canada, Comoros, Costa Rica, Croatia, Czech Republic, Denmark, Dominica, Egypt, Eritrea, Fiji, Finland, Gambia, Germany, Guinea, Guyana, Haiti, Hungary, Ireland, Israel, Italy, Jamaica, Kosovo, Lesotho, Liberia, Libya, Liechtenstein, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Macedonia, Malawi, Malaysia, Maldives, Malta, Marshall Islands, Mauritius, Micronesia, Mongolia, Morocco, Nepal, New Zealand, Nicaragua, Pakistan, Palau, Papua New Guinea, Paraguay, Philippines, Poland, Romania, Rwanda, Samoa, Senegal, Singapore, Slovakia, Solomon Islands, Spain, Sri Lanka, Suriname, Switzerland, Timor-Leste (East Timor), Togo, Trinidad and Tobago, Tunisia, United Kingdom, Vanuatu, Venezuela, Yemen, Zimbabwe
State-funded schools offer religious or ideological instruction with no secular or humanist alternative, but it is optional
Countries: Austria, Bahamas, Barbados, Belize, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Botswana, Brazil, Bulgaria, Canada, Central African Republic, Chile, Colombia, Costa Rica, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Denmark, Dominica, Fiji, Finland, Germany, Greece, Grenada, Guatemala, Guinea, Italy, Kiribati, Latvia, Liechtenstein, Macedonia, Micronesia, Moldova, Monaco, New Zealand, Panama, Papua New Guinea, Paraguay, Peru, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Rwanda, Saint Kitts and Nevis, Saint Lucia, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, San Marino, Senegal, Serbia, Seychelles, Slovenia, Solomon Islands, Spain, Tanzania, Trinidad and Tobago, United Kingdom, Vanuatu, Venezuela
Expression of non-religious views is severely persecuted, or is rendered almost impossible by severe social stigma, or is highly likely to be met with hatred or violence
The non-religious are persecuted socially or there are prohibitive social taboos against atheism, humanism or secularism
There is significant social marginalisation of the non-religious or stigma associated with expressing atheism, humanism or secularism
Countries: Bangladesh, Cameroon, Colombia, Egypt, Georgia, Ghana, Guyana, Iraq, Macedonia, Malaysia, Niger, Poland, Samoa, Tajikistan, Tunisia, Uganda
Expression of core Humanist principles on democracy, freedom and human rights is brutally repressed
Countries: Afghanistan, Bahrain, Brunei Darussalam, China, Gambia, Iran, Jordan, Kuwait, Mauritania, North Korea, Pakistan, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Sudan, Syria, United Arab Emirates, Yemen
Expression of core humanist principles on democracy, freedom or human rights is severely restricted
Countries: Algeria, Angola, Azerbaijan, Bangladesh, Belarus, Brazil, Burundi, Central African Republic, Congo, Democratic Republic of, Egypt, Equatorial Guinea, Eritrea, Gabon, Guinea, Honduras, India, Indonesia, Iraq, Kazakhstan, Laos, Libya, Madagascar, Malaysia, Maldives, Morocco, Nigeria, Oman, Philippines, Russia, Rwanda, Samoa, Somalia, Sudan, Swaziland, Tajikistan, Thailand, Tunisia, Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan, Venezuela, Viet Nam, Zambia, Zimbabwe
Expression of core humanist principles on democracy, freedom or human rights is somewhat restricted
Countries: Armenia, Benin, Bhutan, Cambodia, Cameroon, Chad, Congo, Republic of the, Côte d'Ivoire, Cuba, Djibouti, Dominican Republic, Guatemala, Guinea-Bissau, Israel, Italy, Jamaica, Kenya, Kyrgyzstan, Lebanon, Lesotho, Liberia, Macedonia, Malawi, Malaysia, Mali, Mexico, Myanmar (Burma), Nicaragua, Panama, Paraguay, Poland, Singapore, South Africa, South Sudan, Sri Lanka, Tanzania, Timor-Leste (East Timor), Togo, Turkey, Uganda
Some concerns about political or media freedoms, not specific to the non-religious
Countries: Albania, Antigua and Barbuda, Argentina, Bangladesh, Belize, Bolivia, Botswana, Bulgaria, Burkina Faso, Cameroon, Canada, Cape Verde, Chile, Colombia, Croatia, Denmark, Ecuador, El Salvador, Ethiopia, Fiji, Georgia, Ghana, Greece, Guyana, Haiti, Hungary, India, Ireland, Jamaica, Japan, Kenya, Kiribati, Korea, Republic of, Kosovo, Kuwait, Laos, Latvia, Lebanon, Liberia, Macedonia, Madagascar, Malawi, Mauritius, Mexico, Moldova, Monaco, Mongolia, Mozambique, Namibia, Nauru, Nepal, Niger, Nigeria, Panama, Papua New Guinea, Paraguay, Peru, Philippines, Poland, Portugal, Rwanda, Saint Kitts and Nevis, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, São Tomé and Príncipe, Senegal, Serbia, Seychelles, Sierra Leone, Singapore, Slovakia, Spain, Sri Lanka, Tajikistan, Tanzania, Thailand, Turkey, United Kingdom, Vanuatu
Religious authorities have supreme authority over the state
State legislation is partly derived from religious law or by religious authorities
Countries: Algeria, Bangladesh, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Comoros, Egypt, Gambia, Indonesia, Iraq, Israel, Lebanon, Malaysia, Morocco, Nigeria, Oman, Pakistan, Palestine, Qatar, Tanzania, Tunisia, United Arab Emirates
Preferential treatment is given to a religion or religion in general
This condition is applied where there are miscellaneous indicators that organs of the state offer various forms of support for a religion, or to religion in general over non-religious worldviews, suggesting a preference for those beliefs, or that the organs of that religion are privileged.
Countries: Albania, Algeria, Andorra, Antigua and Barbuda, Argentina, Australia, Austria, Bahamas, Belize, Bhutan, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Brazil, Burundi, Canada, Cape Verde, Chile, Colombia, Croatia, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Denmark, Dominican Republic, Eritrea, Ethiopia, Finland, Germany, Guatemala, Guyana, Haiti, Iceland, India, Indonesia, Ireland, Israel, Italy, Jamaica, Kuwait, Kyrgyzstan, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Madagascar, Malawi, Malaysia, Mali, Malta, Mauritania, Mauritius, Montenegro, Mozambique, Nepal, New Zealand, Nigeria, Panama, Paraguay, Peru, Philippines, Poland, Qatar, Romania, Rwanda, San Marino, Serbia, Seychelles, Singapore, Slovakia, Solomon Islands, Sri Lanka, Tajikistan, Tanzania, Tunisia, Turkey, Tuvalu, United Kingdom, Vanuatu, Venezuela, Zimbabwe
Official symbolic deference to religion
Countries: Albania, Andorra, Antigua and Barbuda, Argentina, Australia, Belize, Benin, Bhutan, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Botswana, Bulgaria, Cameroon, Canada, Colombia, Croatia, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Djibouti, Dominica, El Salvador, Equatorial Guinea, Finland, Germany, Guatemala, Guyana, Ireland, Italy, Jamaica, Kiribati, Korea, Republic of, Laos, Latvia, Liberia, Malawi, Malaysia, Mali, Malta, Marshall Islands, Micronesia, Moldova, Monaco, Myanmar (Burma), Nepal, New Zealand, Nicaragua, Norway, Palau, Panama, Papua New Guinea, Paraguay, Peru, Philippines, Poland, Romania, Russia, Saint Kitts and Nevis, Saint Lucia, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, Samoa, San Marino, Serbia, Singapore, Swaziland, Tanzania, Thailand, Turkey, Turkmenistan, Uganda, United Kingdom, United States of America, Vanuatu, Zimbabwe
Religious or ideological instruction in a significant number of schools is of a coercive fundamentalist or extremist variety
This condition highlights countries where schools subject children to fundamentalist religious instruction with no real opportunity to question fundamentalist tenets, or where lessons routinely encourage hatred (for example religious or ethnic hatred). The wording “significant number of schools” is not given a rigid quantification (sometimes the worst-offending schools are unregistered, illegal, or otherwise uncounted); however the condition is not applied in cases where only a small number of schools meet the description and may be anomalous, as opposed to being indicative of a widespread problem.
Religious schools have powers to discriminate in admissions or employment
Countries: Argentina, Armenia, Bangladesh, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Canada, Eritrea, Estonia, Finland, Gambia, Germany, Haiti, Ireland, Israel, Italy, Jamaica, Lebanon, Macedonia, Malawi, Malaysia, Maldives, Malta, Mauritius, Morocco, Myanmar (Burma), Sri Lanka, Uganda, United Kingdom, Zimbabwe
State-funded schools provide religious education which may be nominally comprehensive but is substantively biased or borderline confessional
There is a pattern of impunity or collusion in violence by non-state actors against the nonreligious
Systemic religious privilege results in significant social discrimination
Countries: Afghanistan, Angola, Bangladesh, Belarus, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Brazil, Brunei Darussalam, Central African Republic, Chad, Comoros, Djibouti, Egypt, Equatorial Guinea, Eritrea, Gambia, Guyana, Hungary, India, Indonesia, Iran, Iraq, Israel, Jordan, Kuwait, Lebanon, Madagascar, Malaysia, Mauritania, Morocco, Myanmar (Burma), Nigeria, Oman, Palestine, Paraguay, Qatar, Russia, Samoa, Saudi Arabia, Serbia, Somalia, Sri Lanka, Sudan, Swaziland, Syria, Thailand, Tunisia, United Arab Emirates, Yemen, Zimbabwe
Some religious courts rule in civil or family matters on a coercive or discriminatory basis
Countries: Bangladesh, Comoros, Egypt, Haiti, Jamaica, Malaysia, Nigeria, Palestine, Philippines, Russia, Singapore, Turkey
‘Apostasy’ or conversion from a specific religion is outlawed and punishable by death
Countries: Afghanistan, Iran, Malaysia, Maldives, Mauritania, Nigeria, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Somalia, United Arab Emirates, Yemen
‘Apostasy’ is outlawed and punishable with a prison sentence
Criticism of religion is restricted in law or a de facto ‘blasphemy’ law is in effect
Countries: Australia, Austria, Barbados, Brazil, Finland, Italy, Jamaica, Lebanon, Libya, Malaysia, Montenegro, Papua New Guinea, Philippines, Poland, Portugal, Saint Lucia, South Africa, Spain, Switzerland, Thailand, Uganda, United Kingdom, Vanuatu
Concerns that secular or religious authorities interfere in specifically religious freedoms
Countries: Angola, Azerbaijan, Bulgaria, Burundi, Cameroon, Canada, Chile, China, Congo, Republic of the, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Denmark, Ethiopia, Germany, Ghana, Haiti, Hungary, Italy, Jamaica, Kenya, Kyrgyzstan, Laos, Lebanon, Madagascar, Malawi, Malaysia, Malta, Mauritania, Mexico, Nepal, North Korea, Paraguay, Peru, Philippines, Poland, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, Serbia, Singapore, Tajikistan, Tonga, Turkey, Turkmenistan, Tuvalu, Ukraine, Uzbekistan, Vanuatu, Venezuela, Viet Nam, Zambia
State legislation is largely or entirely derived from religious law or by religious authorities
Countries: Afghanistan, Bahrain, Brunei Darussalam, Iran, Jordan, Kuwait, Libya, Maldives, Mauritania, Saudi Arabia, Somalia, Sudan, Syria, United Arab Emirates, Yemen
There is an established church or state religion
Countries: Algeria, Argentina, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Belarus, Brunei Darussalam, Cambodia, Costa Rica, Denmark, Djibouti, Dominican Republic, Finland, Georgia, Haiti, Iceland, Indonesia, Iran, Israel, Italy, Jordan, Kuwait, Libya, Liechtenstein, Malaysia, Maldives, Malta, Mauritania, Monaco, Morocco, Myanmar (Burma), Oman, Pakistan, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Slovakia, Tunisia, Tuvalu, United Kingdom, Yemen, Zambia
Anomalous discrimination by local or provincial authorities, or overseas territories
Countries: Cameroon, Canada, Chile, Dominica, Ethiopia, France, Ghana, Guinea, India, Jamaica, Malawi, Malaysia, Micronesia, Mongolia, Niger, Paraguay, Peru, Philippines, Rwanda, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, Switzerland, Thailand, Ukraine, United Kingdom, United States of America
Religious or ideological instruction is mandatory in at least some public schools (without secular or humanist alternatives)
Countries: Argentina, Armenia, Belize, Burundi, Cambodia, Chad, China, Dominica, Dominican Republic, Gambia, Georgia, Germany, Guinea, Haiti, Hungary, Indonesia, Ireland, Jamaica, Jordan, Kosovo, Kuwait, Liberia, Libya, Malawi, Malaysia, Myanmar (Burma), Nepal, Nicaragua, Niger, Oman, Palestine, Peru, Philippines, Samoa, Swaziland, Switzerland, Thailand, Timor-Leste (East Timor), Togo, Turkey, Uganda, United Kingdom, Zambia
Government figures or state agencies openly marginalize, harass, or incite hatred or violence against the non-religious
Countries: Afghanistan, Brunei Darussalam, Egypt, Gambia, Iran, Malaysia, Maldives, Mauritania, Morocco, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Sudan
Government authorities push a socially conservative, religiously or ideologically inspired agenda, without regard to the rights of those with progressive views
Countries: Afghanistan, Algeria, Brazil, Brunei Darussalam, Burundi, China, Fiji, India, Iran, Iraq, Israel, Italy, Macedonia, Madagascar, Malaysia, Morocco, Nigeria, Pakistan, Panama, Poland, Russia, Saudi Arabia, Sri Lanka, Sudan, Tanzania, Turkey, Uganda, United Arab Emirates, Yemen, Zimbabwe
Discriminatory prominence is given to religious bodies, traditions or leaders
Countries: Algeria, Andorra, Argentina, Armenia, Bahamas, Bahrain, Benin, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Brunei Darussalam, Bulgaria, Cambodia, Cameroon, Canada, Cape Verde, Central African Republic, Chad, Chile, Colombia, Costa Rica, Croatia, Cyprus, Denmark, Egypt, Equatorial Guinea, Eritrea, Ethiopia, Finland, Gambia, Georgia, Germany, Haiti, Indonesia, Iran, Israel, Italy, Jamaica, Jordan, Kiribati, Liberia, Libya, Liechtenstein, Madagascar, Malawi, Malaysia, Maldives, Mali, Malta, Mauritania, Mauritius, Moldova, Morocco, Myanmar (Burma), Nepal, Nigeria, Oman, Philippines, Portugal, Qatar, Romania, Russia, Samoa, Sierra Leone, Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain, Sri Lanka, Swaziland, Thailand, Timor-Leste (East Timor), Tonga, Tunisia, Tuvalu, Uganda, Ukraine, United Kingdom, United States of America, Yemen, Zambia, Zimbabwe
‘Blasphemy’ or criticism of religion is outlawed and punishable by death
‘Blasphemy’ is outlawed or criticism of religion is restricted and punishable with a prison sentence
Countries: Algeria, Antigua and Barbuda, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Brunei Darussalam, Comoros, Cyprus, Egypt, El Salvador, Eritrea, Ethiopia, Finland, Gambia, Germany, Grenada, Guyana, India, Indonesia, Iraq, Israel, Jordan, Kazakhstan, Kuwait, Lebanon, Malaysia, Maldives, Morocco, Oman, Palestine, Poland, Qatar, Russia, Rwanda, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, San Marino, Singapore, Somalia, Sri Lanka, Sudan, Suriname, Tanzania, Thailand, Tunisia, Turkey, United Arab Emirates, Yemen, Zambia, Zimbabwe
Quasi-divine veneration of a ruling elite is enforced, or a single-party regime holds uncontested power, subject to severe punishment
Legal or constitutional provisions exclude non-religious views from freedom of belief
It is illegal to register an explicitly Humanist, atheist, secularist or other non-religious NGO or other human rights organization, or such groups are persecuted by authorities
Countries: Afghanistan, China, Egypt, Eritrea, Indonesia, Iran, Jordan, Kuwait, Maldives, Morocco, North Korea, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Sudan, United Arab Emirates, Yemen
Prohibitive interreligious social control (including interreligious marriage bans)
Countries: Afghanistan, Algeria, Bangladesh, Burundi, Djibouti, Egypt, Indonesia, Iraq, Israel, Libya, Maldives, Mauritania, Morocco, Myanmar (Burma), Pakistan, Qatar, Russia, Saudi Arabia, Somalia, Sri Lanka, Sudan, Syria, Tunisia, United Arab Emirates, Yemen
Religious groups control some public or social services
Countries: Algeria, Argentina, Australia, Bolivia, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Canada, Central African Republic, Chad, Denmark, Eritrea, Germany, Haiti, Hungary, Indonesia, Ireland, Israel, Italy, Jamaica, Malawi, Malaysia, Malta, Marshall Islands, Papua New Guinea, Peru, Philippines, Romania, Rwanda, Solomon Islands, Switzerland, Tunisia, United Kingdom
It is illegal to advocate secularism or church-state separation, or such advocacy is suppressed
Countries: Afghanistan, Brunei Darussalam, Comoros, Gambia, Indonesia, Iran, Jordan, Kuwait, Malaysia, Maldives, Pakistan, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Sudan, United Arab Emirates, Yemen
The non-religious are barred from holding government office
There is a religious tax or tithing which is compulsory, or which is state-administered and discriminates by precluding non-religious groups
Countries: Argentina, Denmark, Finland, Germany, Ghana, Haiti, Italy, Pakistan, Peru, Portugal, Rwanda, Samoa, Sweden, Switzerland
Religious control over family law or legislation on moral matters
Countries: Afghanistan, Algeria, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Brunei Darussalam, Comoros, Djibouti, Egypt, Gambia, Indonesia, Iran, Iraq, Israel, Jordan, Kuwait, Libya, Macedonia, Malaysia, Maldives, Mauritania, Morocco, Nigeria, Oman, Pakistan, Qatar, Russia, Saudi Arabia, Somalia, Sri Lanka, Sudan, Syria, Tanzania, Tunisia, United Arab Emirates, Yemen
It is illegal or unrecognised to identify as an atheist or as non-religious
Countries: Brunei Darussalam, Comoros, Egypt, Eritrea, Indonesia, Iran, Iraq, Jordan, Malaysia, Maldives, Morocco, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Somalia, United Arab Emirates
Some concerns about children's right to specifically religious freedom
This condition may apply if specifically religious education, religious materials, or specific religious denominations are so tightly controlled that children are in fact over-protected from exposure to religion and are likely unable to explore or construct their own worldview in accordance with their evolving capacities. This condition helps us to classify states (perhaps with secular constitutions) which have criminalized specifically religious beliefs or practices. This condition is not applied if the restricted beliefs or practices are found to be outlawed due to their being of an extremist variety. While this condition does not directly reflect discrimination against non-religious persons or non-religious ideas, it does represent an overall threat to freedom of thought, conscience, religion or belief; such restrictions could spill over to affect non-religious beliefs later; and they pose a risk of backlash against over-zealous secular authorities or even against non-religious individuals by association.
State-funding of religious institutions or salaries, or discriminatory tax exemptions
Countries: Algeria, Andorra, Angola, Argentina, Armenia, Australia, Bhutan, Brazil, Brunei Darussalam, Bulgaria, Burkina Faso, Cambodia, Cameroon, Canada, Cape Verde, Chad, Costa Rica, Côte d'Ivoire, Croatia, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Denmark, Egypt, El Salvador, Finland, Gambia, Georgia, Germany, Greece, Guinea, Haiti, Honduras, Hungary, Iran, Ireland, Israel, Italy, Jamaica, Jordan, Korea, Republic of, Latvia, Liechtenstein, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Macedonia, Malaysia, Maldives, Malta, Mauritius, Montenegro, Myanmar (Burma), Namibia, Nepal, New Zealand, Nicaragua, Pakistan, Papua New Guinea, Paraguay, Peru, Poland, Romania, Russia, Saudi Arabia, Senegal, Serbia, Slovakia, Spain, Switzerland, Thailand, Timor-Leste (East Timor), Togo, Tunisia, Turkey, Turkmenistan, United Kingdom, Uruguay, Vanuatu, Venezuela, Yemen, Zimbabwe
It is made difficult to register or operate an explicitly Humanist, atheist, secularist or other non-religious NGO or other human rights organization
Countries: Algeria, Azerbaijan, Bangladesh, Belarus, Comoros, Egypt, Eritrea, Malaysia, Mauritania, Nigeria, Pakistan, Palestine, Somalia, Tunisia, United Arab Emirates, Uzbekistan
Systemic Discrimination |
Mostly Satisfactory |
Constitution and government
In 2015, a new “secular” constitution was announced, replacing the 1990’s monarchical constitution. However, various issues of religious privilege remain, including a stipulation that ‘Sanatana Dharma’ (Hindu faith) will be specially protected by the state.
This came after a comprehensive peace agreement between democratic parties and a belligerent Maoist-led party. The interim constitution established Nepal as a secular state, but there was significant social and political debate about what that should mean, or whether Nepal should revert to a “Hindu state”. In October 2014, the Prime Minister, Sushil Koirala’s, made a commitment that the new constitution would guarantee freedom of religion or belief.
The new constitution finally came into force in September 2015, establishing that Nepal will remain a “secular state”, despite significant pressure from Hindu nationalists to revert to a Hindu state. There were mixed messages about whether religious minorities, in particular Christians, were happy with the move, on the one hand welcoming the retention of secularism in order to ensure state neutrality, but on the other hand, objecting that the ban on encouraging “religious conversion” was a restriction on specifically religious freedoms. This has been evident in new criminal cases such as in June 2016 where 8 Nepali Christians were charged with attempting to convert children through the distribution of a ‘religiously themed’ comic book.
<reuters.com/article/us-nepal-protests-secularism-idUSKCN0QA1N620150805#CfidquOOR9ZvLfGP.97>
<christianitytoday.com/gleanings/2015/november/why-church-attendance-plunged-nepal-secular-constitution>
Despite this new constitutional secularity, the government has reportedly continued to invest heavily on religion as such. Hindu institutions, such as the Kumari Cult, organized ceremonies and temples, such as the Pashupati Temple, are prioritized in the allocation of funds. Local municipalities have dedicated portions of their budget to the promotion of Hinduism. In addition, the government has invested on the Muslims annual pilgrimage to Haj and on the protection of Buddhism.
The new constitution does protect equality. Article 11.3 reads:
“The State shall not discriminate among citizens on grounds of religion, race, sex, caste, tribe, or ideological conviction…”
However, various forms of discrimination do persist, including in law.
Ban on religious conversion
Religious conversion is further criminalised in Nepal under the ‘Bill designed to amend and integrate prevalent laws relating to Criminal Offence’ signed into law on 18 October 2017 by Nepali President Bidhya Devi Bhandari. Clause 160 section 9 of the Bill states that:
“Nobody should indulge in any act or conduct so as to undermine the religion, faith or belief that any caste, ethnic group or community has been observing since sanatan (eternal) times or to jeopardise it with or without any incitement to convert to any other religion, or preach such religion or faith with any such intention.”
Offences under this clause is punishable by imprisonment for up to five years as well as a fine of up to fifty thousand rupees.<http://www.csw.org.uk/2017/10/20/news/3762/article.htm>
Nepal’s Central Bureau of Statistics does not collect census data on population levels of atheism, humanism and the non religious. Therefore, the government is not taking non believers into consideration, in a country where more than half of the 601 parliamentarians are members of the Communist Party of Nepal (Maoist Centre). Recent campaigns by Society for Humanism Nepal (the country’s sole Humanist organization and a member organization of IHEU) have been criticised by right wing political parties such as the Rastriya Prajatantra Party (RPP).
Education and children’s rights
Religious Education is not part of the public school curriculum. Nevertheless, Hinduism is taught at schools under the name of Dhyana, or meditation, and many schools have a statue of Saraswati, the Hindu goddess of learning, on school grounds. Children attending public schools are also taught ethics.
Hindu, Buddhist, and Muslim groups are allowed to establish and operate their own schools. Registered religious schools and public schools receive the same level of funding from the government.
Christian schools are not able to register as community schools and thereby they are not eligible for government funding.
<state.gov/documents/organization/256525.pdf>
Family, community and society
Just over 80% of the Nepalese population is identified as Hindu; the rest made up of Buddhists, Muslims, Kirat, Christians and non-religious. It has been estimated that those without any religious affiliation constitute just under 1% of the population (but no census data is taken on the non-religious).
Caste-based discrimination is criminalised in Nepal, although it continues to be practiced in society.
LGBT rights
In August 2018, Nepal introduced a new Civil Code. Based on a ruling of the Supreme Court in 2007, there was widespread expectation from LGBT communities that same-sex marriage would be legalized. However, Section 3-1-67, which addresses the topic of marriage, only recognizes heterosexual marriage.
In 2015, Nepal became one of the world’s few countries to recognize a “third gender” in citizenship documents, thereby establishing self-determination as the sole criterion to identify one’s gender.
<aljazeera.com/indepth/features/2014/03/nepal-third-gender-201431181229222617.html>
Travel bans
There have been a number of episodes where the government has prevented certain individuals from travelling abroad, for conferences or seminars, without prior notice on apparently arbitrary grounds.
<thehimalayantimes.com/nepal/nepal-sanskrit-university-vice-chancellor-kul-prasad-koirala-didnt-get-leave-approval-government/>
<thehimalayantimes.com/nepal/former-maoist-child-combatant-lenin-bista-barred-from-flying-to-bangkok/>
The politics of the cow
Although Nepal was pronounced a secular state in 2007 and ceased to be the “only Hindu nation in the world”, Hinduism still influences many aspects of Nepalese culture.
The killing of cows is banned throughout Nepal for all people, regardless of their beliefs (it was illegal according to the previous ‘Hindu state’ constitution, although the ‘secular republic’ constitution that followed continued the ban, explaining that the cow is the country’s “national animal”). Those caught killing cows can be punished with a 12-year prison sentence. In July 2013, six people were sentenced to six years imprisonment for eating cow meat.
<state.gov/documents/organization/222549.pdf>
In October 2012, Pastor Chhedar Bhote Lhomi was arrested after a mob attacked and burned down his home in north-eastern Nepal. He was accused of consuming beef, and of having slaughtered the cow himself. The pastor was later sentenced to 12 years in prison but was released two years later, thanks to the work carried out by several NGOs.
<freethinker.co.uk/2014/09/01/freed-nepal-pastor-jailed-for-eating-beef/>
Freedom of expression, advocacy of humanist values
Freedom of the press, opinion, and expression are guaranteed and direct censorship is unlawful. Nevertheless, in practice freedom of the press has not been consistently protected.
‘Hurting religious sentiments’ law
A Criminal Code bill signed into law 16 October 2017 criminalizes not only religious conversion but “hurting of religious sentiments” (Clause 158 section 9).
<csw.org.uk/2017/10/20/news/3762/article.htm>
Demonstrations ban
In 2018, the government issued a ban against protests and demonstrations in various public places in Kathmandu, but it was stayed by the Supreme Court.
<thehimalayantimes.com/kathmandu/sc-continues-stay-order-against-protest-ban/>
In April 2018, the Maitinghar Mandala, one the most common venues for protests and demonstration, was declared a “no protest zone” and the government allocated seven open spaces in Kathmandu for public protests, in apparent violation of the right to peaceful assembly and freedom of expression.
<nepalireporter.com/protest-ban-on-maitighar-mandala-to-be-strictly-implemented-from-july-15/#.W6Dk3pNKg0o>
Media and online censorship
Although the constitution promulgated in 2015 assures “complete press freedom” and prohibits censorship of any print, broadcast, or digital media, Nepalese Media is nevertheless restricted. The constitution allows “reasonable restriction” of media content which has the potential to undermine national unity, stoke ethnic tension, or damage public morality.
<freedomhouse.org/report/freedom-press/2016/nepal>
The 2015 Online Media Operations Directive includes provisions to impose blocking of online news sites based on decisions of the Department of Information which can be justified in very broad terms, including failure to register, the publication of immoral or illegal content, or publication “without authoritative source or creating misconceptions among the public”.
<samsn.ifj.org/nepal-introduces-repressive-directives-for-online-media/>
In 2015, the general secretary of the Nepal Federation of Indigenous Nationalities, Ang Kaji Sherpa, posted on Facebook photos which depicted a clash between protesters and security forces and criticized state officials. Sherpa was temporarily detained under the Electronic Transactions Act and was accused of disturbing social harmony and misusing social networking sites. He was freed on a bail after several days.
<freedomhouse.org/report/freedom-press/2016/nepal>
Death threats and physical attacks against journalists are common. In August 2015, Singh Rokaya, a reporter for radio, was shot in the leg by police while covering a protest in Surkhet district against the new constitution. In November, Radio Parasi’s office was bombed after receiving threats for what was defined as pro-government reporting.
<kathmandupost.ekantipur.com/news/2018-06-08/ifj-condemns-threat-to-online-journalists-over-news-report.html>
Nepal’s criminal code, introduced in 2018, includes a number of alarming articles on the protection of privacy. According to Article 294, the release of any confidential information without explicit permission represents an offence which could result in a prison sentence. The law caused widespread concern as it poses a serious threat to journalistic practices.
<kathmandupost.ekantipur.com/news/2018-08-16/privacy-and-the-press.html>
In August 2018, a man named Homnath Sigdel shared a morphed image on Facebook of the Prime Minister KP Sharma Oli as a monkey. Sigdel could face up to five years in jail and a fine of £900.
<politics.com.ph/man-arrested-over-facebook-post-depicting-nepal-pm-as-monkey/>