Nepal

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.

The Nepali population is composed of 126 castes and ethnic groups.[ref]https://mofa.gov.np/about-nepal/nepal-profile/[/ref] According to the 2021 Census,[ref]https://censusnepal.cbs.gov.np/Home/Details?tpid=5&dcid=57d4bc52-50ca-4acb-b7fc-20c8923831e5&tfsid=1[/ref] 81% of the population are Hindu, 9% Buddhist, 4.4% Muslims (the vast majority of whom are Sunni), 3% Kirat (an indigenous religion with Hindu influence) and 1.4% Christians (of whom a large majority are Protestant and a minority Roman Catholic). Other groups, which together constitute less than 5% of the population, include animists, adherents of Bon (a Tibetan religious tradition), Jains, Baha’is, and Sikhs. The number of humanist and non-religious individuals is not recorded. Humanist groups are campaigning for their inclusion in future census data collection.

Constitution and government Education and children’s rights Family, community, society, religious courts and tribunals Freedom of expression advocacy of humanist values
Systemic religious privilege results in significant social discrimination
‘Blasphemy’ is outlawed or criticism of religion (including de facto ‘blasphemy’ laws) is restricted and punishable with a prison sentence
There is systematic religious privilege
Preferential treatment is given to a religion or religion in general
State-funding of religious institutions or salaries, or discriminatory tax exemptions
There is state funding of at least some religious schools
Religious or ideological instruction is mandatory in at least some public schools (without secular or humanist alternatives)
Discriminatory prominence is given to religious bodies, traditions or leaders
Official symbolic deference to religion
Some concerns about political or media freedoms, not specific to the non-religious
Concerns that secular or religious authorities interfere in specifically religious freedoms
Constitution and government
There is systematic religious privilege
Preferential treatment is given to a religion or religion in general
State-funding of religious institutions or salaries, or discriminatory tax exemptions
Official symbolic deference to religion
Education and children’s rights
There is state funding of at least some religious schools
Religious or ideological instruction is mandatory in at least some public schools (without secular or humanist alternatives)
Family, community, society, religious courts and tribunals
Systemic religious privilege results in significant social discrimination
Discriminatory prominence is given to religious bodies, traditions or leaders
Freedom of expression advocacy of humanist values
‘Blasphemy’ is outlawed or criticism of religion (including de facto ‘blasphemy’ laws) is restricted and punishable with a prison sentence
Some concerns about political or media freedoms, not specific to the non-religious
Concerns that secular or religious authorities interfere in specifically religious freedoms
Use of Conscientious Objection clauses resulting in the denial of lawful services to women and LGBTI+ people
Religious or ideological instruction is mandatory in all or most state-funded schools with no secular or humanist alternative
Insufficient information or detail not included in this report
Insufficient information or detail not included in this report

Countries: Kazakhstan

The state is secular, with separation of religious and political authorities, not discriminating against any religion or belief
Insufficient information or detail not included in this report
No fundamental restrictions on freedom of expression or advocacy of humanist values
Insufficient information or detail not included in this report

Countries: no countries relate to this boundary condition

No condition holds in this strand
No condition holds in this strand

Countries: Andorra

No condition holds in this strand
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
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.

Countries: Botswana, Greece, Serbia, United States of America

The dominant influence of religion in public life undermines the right to equality and/or non-discrimination

Applied when the influence of religion on public life undermines others’ rights, such as SRHR, women’s rights, LGBTI+ rights.

May be applied when the influence is overt (i.e. when religious laws are applied to undermine others’ rights) or covert (i.e. where religious pressure groups exert influence to affect policy)

Countries: Andorra, Antigua and Barbuda, Armenia, Bahamas, Belize, Bolivia, Brunei Darussalam, Congo, Democratic Republic of, Croatia, Cuba, Dominica, Dominican Republic, El Salvador, Eswatini, Fiji, Gambia, Ghana, Guatemala, Guinea, Hungary, Iran, Italy, Jamaica, Jordan, Liberia, Lithuania, Mexico, Moldova, Montenegro, Mozambique, Nicaragua, North Macedonia, Oman, Paraguay, Qatar, Romania, Russia, Saint Lucia, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, Saudi Arabia, Senegal, Slovakia, Solomon Islands, Sri Lanka, Suriname, Timor-Leste (East Timor), Trinidad and Tobago, Ukraine, Zambia

The non-religious are persecuted socially or there are prohibitive social taboos against atheism, humanism or secularism
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.

Countries: North Korea

Expression of core Humanist principles on democracy, freedom and human rights is brutally repressed
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
There is significant social marginalisation of the non-religious or stigma associated with expressing atheism, humanism or secularism
Religious or ideological indoctrination is utterly pervasive in schools
There is a nominal state church with few privileges or progress is being made toward disestablishment

Countries: Bulgaria, Norway, Peru, Rwanda

The non-religious are barred from some government offices (including posts reserved for particular religions or sects)
‘Apostasy’ is outlawed and punishable with a prison sentence

Countries: Bahrain, Comoros, Jordan, Kuwait

‘Apostasy’ or conversion from a specific religion is outlawed and punishable by death
Some religious courts rule in civil or family matters on a coercive or discriminatory basis
Religious authorities have supreme authority over the state

Countries: Iran

State legislation is partly derived from religious law or by religious authorities
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, Equatorial Guinea, Eritrea, Ethiopia, Finland, Germany, Ghana, Guatemala, Guyana, Haiti, Iceland, India, Indonesia, Ireland, Israel, Italy, Jamaica, Japan, Kuwait, Kyrgyzstan, Liberia, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Madagascar, Malawi, Malaysia, Mali, Malta, Mauritania, Mauritius, Montenegro, Mozambique, Nepal, New Zealand, Nigeria, North Macedonia, Oman, Panama, Paraguay, Peru, Philippines, Poland, Qatar, Romania, Rwanda, San Marino, Serbia, Seychelles, Sierra Leone, Singapore, Slovakia, Solomon Islands, Sri Lanka, Tajikistan, Tanzania, Timor-Leste (East Timor), Tunisia, Turkey, Tuvalu, United Kingdom, Vanuatu, Venezuela, Zimbabwe

There is a pattern of impunity or collusion in violence by non-state actors against the nonreligious
State-funded schools provide religious education which may be nominally comprehensive but is substantively biased or borderline confessional
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.

Countries: Bangladesh, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia

State legislation is largely or entirely derived from religious law or by religious authorities
Anomalous discrimination by local or provincial authorities, or overseas territories
Religious or ideological instruction is mandatory in at least some public schools (without secular or humanist alternatives)
‘Blasphemy’ or criticism of religion is outlawed and punishable by death
Government figures or state agencies openly marginalize, harass, or incite hatred or violence against the non-religious
Government authorities push a socially conservative, religiously or ideologically inspired agenda, without regard to the rights of those with progressive views
It is illegal to advocate secularism or church-state separation, or such advocacy is suppressed
Prohibitive interreligious social control (including interreligious marriage bans)
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
There is a religious tax or tithing which is compulsory, or which is state-administered and discriminates by precluding non-religious groups
The non-religious are barred from holding government office
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.

Countries: China, Congo, Democratic Republic of, Cuba, Equatorial Guinea, Ethiopia, Guinea, Guyana, Italy, Kazakhstan, Laos, Madagascar, Mexico, North Macedonia, Romania, Serbia, Tajikistan, Togo, Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan, Zimbabwe

It is illegal or unrecognised to identify as an atheist or as non-religious
It is made difficult to register or operate an explicitly Humanist, atheist, secularist or other non-religious NGO or other human rights organization
Legend
 
Severe Discrimination
Systemic Discrimination
Mostly Satisfactory
More information about rating table

Constitution and government

In 2015, a new “secular” Constitution[ref]https://www.mohp.gov.np/downloads/Constitution%20of%20Nepal%202072_full_english.pdf[/ref] was announced following years of civil war. The move replaced the 1990’s Hindu monarchy. This came after a comprehensive peace agreement between democratic parties and a belligerent Maoist-led party. At the time of its creation, there was significant pressure from Hindu nationalists to revert to a Hindu state. Article 4 of the Constitution defines secular as “protection of religion and culture handed down from the time immemorial.”

Such a definition of secularity permits the government to invest heavily in religion, and may in fact be interpreted to privilege “indigenous” religious traditions such as Hinduism over “Western imports” such as Christianity. The Nepalese government funds Hindu temples and ceremonies from a federal to local level, whereas very little in comparison is spent on Buddhist and Muslim causes, and there is no public spending in place for other religions or non-religious groups.[ref]https://humanists.international/wp-content/uploads/2021/01/SOCH-Nepal-UPR-Submission-on-Kuriti.docx.pdf[/ref]

There are public holidays recognizing various religious traditions, including Buddha’s birthday, Christmas day, and Eid al-Adha.[ref]https://www.state.gov/reports/2021-report-on-international-religious-freedom/nepal/[/ref]

Article 26 of the Constitution outlines the right to “freedom of religion”:

(1) Every person who has faith in religion shall have the freedom to profess, practice and protect his or her religion according to his or her conviction.
(2) Every religious denomination shall have the right to operate and protect its religious sites and religious Guthi (trusts). Provided that nothing shall be deemed to prevent the regulation, by making law, of the operation and protection of religious sites and religious trusts and management of trust properties and lands.
(3) No person shall, in the exercise of the right conferred by this Article, do, or cause to be done, any act which may be contrary to public health, decency and morality or breach public peace, or convert another person from one religion to another or any act or conduct that may jeopardize other’s religion.”

The new constitution protects against discrimination on the grounds of religion or belief. Article 18(3) reads:

“The State shall not discriminate citizens on grounds of origin, religion, race, caste, tribe, sex, economic condition, language, region, ideology or on similar other grounds.”

This is further enshrined in Article 18 the Nepali Civil Code.[ref]http://www.moljpa.gov.np/en/wp-content/uploads/2018/12/Civil-code.pdf[/ref] However, various forms of discrimination do persist, including in law.

A great deal of emphasis is placed throughout the Constitution on the promotion and protection of harmony. Indeed, the Constitution makes the promotion of mutual understanding, tolerance, and solidarity among various caste, ethnic, religious, linguistic and cultural groups and communities a State priority (Article 51). As such, the law prohibits both proselytism (Article 158 of the Penal Code) and “outraging the religious feelings” of any caste, ethnic community, or class (Article 156 of the Penal Code).[ref]http://www.moljpa.gov.np/en/wp-content/uploads/2018/12/Penal-Code-English-Revised-1.pdf[/ref]

Further, Article 269 (5) states that:

“No political party shall be registered if its name, objective, symbol and flag is of a character that may disturb the country’s religious or communal unity or is divisive in character.”

However, according to the US Department of State,[ref]https://www.state.gov/reports/2021-report-on-international-religious-freedom/nepal/[/ref]

“right-wing religious groups associated with the BJP in India continued to provide money to influential politicians of all parties to advocate for Hindu statehood.”

Registration of religious groups

According to the US Department of State’s 2021 Report on International Religious Freedom:

“Except for Buddhist monasteries, all religious groups must register as NGOs or nonprofit organizations to own land or other property, operate legally as institutions, or gain eligibility for public service-related government grants and partnerships.”

Impunity

According to Human Rights Watch,[ref]https://www.hrw.org/world-report/2022/country-chapters/nepal[/ref]

“A pervasive culture of impunity continues to undermine fundamental human rights in the country. Ongoing human rights violations by the police and army, including cases of alleged extrajudicial killings and custodial deaths resulting from torture, are rarely investigated, and when they are, alleged perpetrators are almost never arrested. […]

“Both the Oli and Deuba governments continued to block justice for conflict-era violations. The mandates of the two transitional justice commissions were once again extended, although neither has made progress since being established in 2015 to provide truth to victims, establish the fate of the “disappeared,” and promote accountability and reconciliation.”

Education and children’s rights

The Constitution guarantees free education up to secondary level (Article 31). Basic education is compulsory.

Religious Education is not part of the public school curriculum. Nevertheless, 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. In order to operate a private school, Christian groups must register as an NGO.[ref]https://www.state.gov/reports/2021-report-on-international-religious-freedom/nepal/[/ref]

Child marriage

Despite being illegal since 1963, according to UNICEF, Nepal still has the 17th highest prevalence rate of child marriage in the world. The practice is driven by a complex web of factors, but key among them is gender discrimination, especially when combined with poverty. Discriminatory social norms mean that girls are often seen as a “burden” to be unloaded as early as possible through marriage. Traditional beliefs and social pressures also encourage child marriage. In some communities it is believed that women will go to heaven if they marry before their first period.[ref]https://humanists.international/wp-content/uploads/2021/01/SOCH-Nepal-UPR-Submission-on-Kuriti.docx.pdf[/ref]

According to Human Rights Watch,[ref]https://www.hrw.org/world-report/2022/country-chapters/nepal[/ref]

“Nepal has one of the highest rates of child marriage in Asia, with 33 percent of girls marrying before 18 years and 8 percent married by age 15. Among boys, 9 percent marry before the age of 18. This situation worsened during the [COVID-19] pandemic, as children were pushed out of education and families faced increased poverty.”

Deuki Pratha

Deuki Pratha is an ancient custom practiced in a rural western part of Nepal, where a young girl is offered to the local temple. Though the practice is in decline, there are still reports of girls being offered as deukis. Girls who are abandoned by their families to become deukis are deprived of educational and economic opportunities, and many deukis are forced to turn to sex work for survival.[ref]https://humanists.international/wp-content/uploads/2021/01/SOCH-Nepal-UPR-Submission-on-Kuriti.docx.pdf[/ref]

Family, community and society

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 Humanists International) have been criticized by right-wing political parties such as the Rastriya Prajatantra Party (RPP).

Caste-based discrimination

Caste-based discrimination is criminalized in Nepal, although it continues to be practiced in society.[ref]https://www.hrw.org/news/2020/06/01/nepal-ensure-justice-caste-based-killings; https://news.un.org/en/story/2020/05/1065102 [/ref] Inter-caste marriages and relationships are frequently punished by the community.[ref]https://humanists.international/wp-content/uploads/2021/01/SOCH-Nepal-UPR-Submission-on-Kuriti.docx.pdf[/ref]

Although Nepal’s 2015 Constitution established a National Dalit Commission to promote the rights of the Dalit community, the Commission has remained “toothless” as the government has not appointed any commissioners, according to SOCH Nepal.[ref]https://humanists.international/wp-content/uploads/2021/01/SOCH-Nepal-UPR-Submission-on-Kuriti.docx.pdf[/ref]

Harmful traditional practices

Various traditional and cultural practices, known as ‘kuriti’, are carried out in violation of fundamental human rights. Kuriti are regarded by many as “holy” matters, forming part of the identity of a particular society. Being perceived as a vital part of Nepalese culture, they often go unquestioned within Nepali society, despite their brutal and degrading character and the grave suffering they cause.[ref]https://humanists.international/wp-content/uploads/2021/01/SOCH-Nepal-UPR-Submission-on-Kuriti.docx.pdf[/ref]

Violence resulting from kuriti is one of the major social problems of Nepal. The victims are mainly members of marginalized groups, such as women, children, ‘untouchables’ (according to the “caste” system) and other economically deprived members of society.

The Nepalese Ministry of Women, Children and Social Welfare has identified fifty-seven kuriti in Nepal. These include the persecution of individuals accused of practicing witchcraft (Boksi Pratha), child marriage, forcing women to stay in a tiny hut far from their own house during the time of their menstruation (Chhaupadi Pratha) and the offering of a girl child to a Hindu temple (Deuki Pratha).

Nepal has ratified a number of treaties relevant to its obligations to prevent and punish acts of kuriti. Nepal has ratified the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women, the Optional Protocol to the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women, the Convention on the Rights of the Child, and the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment.

There is also domestic legislation in place that purports to end certain forms of harmful traditional practices. This includes the Witchcraft Allegation (Offense and Punishment) Act 2016, Article 168 of the Penal Code, the law against dowry in the Social Practices (Reform) Act, 1976 and the law against child marriage in the National Code, Chapter on Marriage.[ref]https://redcross.eu/uploads/files/Positions/Humanitarian%20aid/SGBV%20in%20disasters/Gender%20SGBV% 20Report_%20Nepal%20HR.pdf [/ref] In August 2018, a law criminalizing chaupadi was passed by the Nepali parliament,[ref]https://foreignpolicy.com/2019/01/06/in-nepal-tradition-is-killing-women-chhaupadi-womens-rights-menstruation/[/ref] however, effective implementation remains a challenge.[ref]Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women, Concluding observations on the sixth periodic report of Nepal, 14 November 2018, UN doc no. CEDAW/C/NPL/CO/6[/ref]

In Nepal, attitudes and beliefs about menstruation place severe restrictions on women and girls, as menstrual blood is seen as a source of pollution. Deeply rooted in culture and religion, these restrictions stem from a desire to avoid ‘impurity’ that originates from the Hindu religion. Of the different forms of menstrual restrictions in Nepal, chhaupadi is the most extreme form. Chhaupadi is a form of menstrual exile where women and girls sleep in small huts (chhaugoth) or animal sheds during menstruation and immediately after childbirth.

SOCH Nepal estimates that at least 1,860 people are affected by kuriti in Nepal annually. In 2019 alone, SOCH Nepal recorded: 603 cases of girls forced into child marriage, 459 cases of untouchability, 125 cases of chaupadi (isolating menstruating women and girls), at least 3 cases of deuki (offering girls to deities to fulfil religious obligations), and at least 12 cases of torture of women in the name of witch-hunting. The gravest kuriti in Nepali society is ‘human sacrifice’. In 2019, 1 ‘virgin girl’ was set for sacrifice; fortunately police could rescue her shortly before she was set to be sacrificed.[ref]https://humanists.international/wp-content/uploads/2021/01/SOCH-Nepal-UPR-Submission-on-Kuriti.docx.pdf[/ref]

Women’s rights

Under Article 38(3) of the Constitution:

“There shall not be any physical, mental, sexual or psychological or any other kind of violence against women, or any kind of oppression based on religious, social and cultural tradition, and other practices. Such an act shall be punishable by law and the victim shall have the right to be compensation as provided for in law.”

The same article enshrines each woman’s right to reproductive health. Following Nepal’s Universal Periodic Review at the UN, the government began consultations to update the criminal code to better safeguard the recognized right to abortion.[ref]https://www.jurist.org/news/2021/08/nepal-dispatches-government-of-nepal-moves-to-decriminalize-abortion-in-response-to-rights-campaign/[/ref]

The Safe Motherhood and Reproductive Health Rights Act 2018[ref]https://lawcommission.gov.np/en/wp-content/uploads/2019/07/The-Right-to-Safe-Motherhood-and-Reproductive-Health-Act-2075-2018.pdf[/ref] permits women to seek abortion for any reason up to 12 weeks of gestation, and up to 28 weeks in cases of rape or incest. Abortion is also legal up to 28 weeks of the pregnancy if a licensed medical practitioner identifies a risk to the woman’s mental or physical health or if the fetus is “likely to become non-viable.”

However, both the Citizenship Act 2006[ref]https://jp.nepalembassy.gov.np/wp-content/uploads/2017/11/citizenship_act_eng.pdf[/ref] and the Constitution contain provisions that discriminate against women with regard to nationality and the ability to transmit citizenship through marriage and to their children. In September 2020, three UN Special Rapporteurs wrote to the Nepali State to express their concerns regarding specific amendments to the Citizenship Act under discussion.[ref]https://spcommreports.ohchr.org/TMResultsBase/DownLoadPublicCommunicationFile?gId=25552[/ref]

LGBTI+ 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 LGBTI+ communities that same-sex marriage would be legalized. However, Section 3-1-67, which addresses the topic of marriage, only recognizes heterosexual marriage.[ref]http://www.moljpa.gov.np/en/wp-content/uploads/2018/12/Civil-code.pdf[/ref]

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.[ref]aljazeera.com/indepth/features/2014/03/nepal-third-gender-201431181229222617.html[/ref]

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 (Article 289 of the Criminal Code). Those caught killing cows can be punished with a three-year prison sentence. Police reportedly arrested 39 Muslim, Dalit, and indigenous persons for cow slaughter in nine separate incidents over the course of 2021. In addition, the Society for Humanism Nepal (SOCH Nepal) reported three additional incidents in which 17 individuals were arrested as of October.[ref]https://www.state.gov/reports/2021-report-on-international-religious-freedom/nepal/[/ref]

Freedom of expression, advocacy of humanist values

Freedom of the press, opinion, and expression are guaranteed and direct censorship is unlawful. However, freedom of expression is often stifled in practice, particularly when the government faces criticism.[ref]https://www.amnesty.org/en/location/asia-and-the-pacific/south-asia/nepal/report-nepal/; https://ifex.org/nepal-freedom-forum-welcomes-court-decision-acquitting-comedian-pranesh-gautam/; https://ifex.org/nepal-home-ministrys-statements-breach-citizens-right-to-free-expression-peaceful-protest/; https://ifex.org/freedom-forum-expresses-concern-over-the-grilling-of-journalists-by-the-supreme-court-over-a-news-report/ ; https://ifex.org/nepali-singer-pulls-anti-corruption-song-after-receiving-threats/ [/ref]

In March 2022, Reporters Without Borders condemned a new decree that, on the pretext of “regulating” online videos, has the effect of preventing media outlets, journalists and ordinary citizens from posting video news reports on the Internet.[ref] https://rsf.org/en/nepali-government-wants-censor-online-videos; https://ifex.org/amendment-of-the-national-broadcasting-regulation-could-curtail-free-speech-in-nepal/ [/ref]

Media freedom

While media freedom is guaranteed in theory, in practice freedom of the press has not been consistently protected. Indeed, a series of provisions in the Penal Code adopted in August 2018 hinders investigative journalism and limits criticism of public figures.[ref]https://rsf.org/en/country/nepal[/ref]

According to Reporters’ Without Borders Press Freedom Index,[ref]https://rsf.org/en/country/nepal[/ref]

“The activities of security forces and of some rebel groups are especially sensitive. Lacking adequate security training, many journalists abstain from covering these issues. Protection mechanisms do exist, upheld notably by Press Council Nepal and the National Human Rights Commission. However, they are not quite capable of offering urgent solutions for reporters in danger. Cases of surveillance, threats and intimidation are legion, hence pushing many journalists into self-censorship. Pressures of a more insidious kind may also persuade some reporters to avoid sensitive issues, for fear of being discredited.”

In June 2022, IPI reported that there had been at least seven incidents of attacks or harassment of journalists by public officials in the previous month.[ref]https://ifex.org/nepal-two-journalists-detained-five-others-threatened-and-attacked/[/ref]

‘Hurting religious sentiments’ law

In 2017, Nepal introduced new laws that not only criminalize ‘blasphemy’, but could render any public expression of belief an offense due to the overbroad nature of the formulation of the laws. According to Nepal’s Penal Code, a person convicted of ‘hurting religious sentiments’ could face up to two years’ imprisonment and a fine of up to US$170. The provision reads:

156: Prohibition of outraging religious feelings
(1) No person shall outrage the religious feelings of any caste, race, community, or class by words, either spoken or written, by visible representation or signs or otherwise.
(2) A person who commits, or causes to be committed, the offense referred to in sub-section (1) shall be liable to a sentence of imprisonment for a term not exceeding 2 years and a fine not exceeding 20,000 rupees.

In addition, the broad wording of Article 158, which prohibits proselytizing, could lead to the conflation of proselytizing with ‘blasphemy’ and “hurting religious sentiments”, as changing one’s religion or questioning religious tenets may be perceived as an insult to another’s religion. Of particular concern in this regard is clause 2, which reads:

“(2) No person shall do any act or conduct that undermines the religion, opinion, or faith of any caste, race, or community or convert anyone into another religion, whether by inducement or not, in a manner to so undermine or propagate such religion or opinion with the intention of making such conversion.”

Those who commit offenses under this clause could face up to 5 years in prison and a fine of up to 50,000 rupees (approx. US$430). A foreign national who commits such an offence faces deportation.

A study conducted by the United States’ Commission on International Religious Freedom,[ref]https://www.uscirf.gov/sites/default/files/2020%20Blasphemy%20Enforcement%20Report%20_final_0.pdf[/ref] documented two cases of the application of ‘blasphemy’ laws in the country between 2014-2018.

In March 2020, Pastor Keshab Raj Acharya was reportedly first arrested in Pokhara on 23 March 2020 and charged with spreading misinformation about COVID-19 for stating that “those who follow Christ would not become infected”. He was fined for these statements but remained in jail. According to IIRF (a Christian institute), his phone was searched without his consent during his arrest. The police found information and photographic evidence of him traveling around the country and distributing Christian material. He was subsequently charged multiple times with proselytizing and outraging religious feelings. On 19 April 2020, bail for his release was set at 500,000 rupees ($4,300). However, he was not released and was transferred 400 miles away to face more charges of religious conversion. On 30 June 2020, Acharya was released on a 300,000 rupees bail ($2,600).[ref]https://www.state.gov/reports/2020-report-on-international-religious-freedom/nepal/[/ref]

Freedom of assembly

Although the Constitution enshrines freedom of assembly, according to Freedom House, “security forces have been known to violently disperse protests and demonstrations, particularly in the south, where a large Madhesi population and related secessionist movement exist.”[ref]https://freedomhouse.org/country/nepal/freedom-world/2022[/ref]

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.[ref]thehimalayantimes.com/kathmandu/sc-continues-stay-order-against-protest-ban/[/ref]

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.[ref]nepalireporter.com/protest-ban-on-maitighar-mandala-to-be-strictly-implemented-from-july-15/#.W6Dk3pNKg0o[/ref]