Honourable Prime Minister, continuity of citizenship by descent may come in time if a constitutional amendment is possible. But what can be done right now, without amending the constitution, is the full implementation of the non-resident Nepali (NRN) citizenship provisions already guaranteed within it. Please do that. That alone would mean a great deal. What non-resident Nepalis need at present is not a big reform, but a small, practical step.

Just as Nepalis at home contributed to bringing the Rastriya Swatantra Party (RSP) to power, Nepalis abroad contributed equally. In the early days in particular, they generated the momentum for the party in the digital sphere. Families back home changed not only their sentiments but also their votes. The bell did not merely tinkle—it rang loud and clear. As a result, with an unprecedented mandate, the Balen government was formed.

During the election, the RSP did not only make 100 promises to the public; it also entered into a five-point agreement. If one revisits both these documents today, one can clearly see, under point 99 of the manifesto and point 5 of the agreement, the commitments made to non-resident Nepalis.

For the record, let us quote them here.

Promise

Respecting the emotional bond of non-resident Nepalis expressed in the phrase “Once a Nepali, always a Nepali”, we will, barring certain specific exceptions, stand in principle for dual citizenship and immediately remove administrative hurdles related to property rights.

Agreement

Current situation—weak implementation of NRN citizenship. Our goal—continuity of citizenship by descent. Whether in the manifesto or the agreement, both clearly mention continuity of citizenship by descent for non-resident Nepalis. In simple terms, this means dual citizenship. It was said that these promises and conditions would be fulfilled upon securing a majority. But now, not only has a majority been secured, but there is also nearly a two-thirds mandate.

Another point worth recalling is the background of RSP’s leader, Rabi Lamichhane. He himself was once a non-resident Nepali who lost both his parliamentary seat and his position as deputy prime minister due to the lack of continuity in citizenship by descent.

That was the past—the promises, agreements, and the personal background of the leadership in relation to non-resident Nepalis.

Now let us turn to the present. Ten days have already passed since the government was formed. The government has carried out what could be described as surgical strikes in areas such as arrests and disciplinary actions. But when it comes to the promises and agreements made with non-resident Nepalis, nothing has been done.

Those who must remind have begun doing their part. Officials of the Non-Resident Nepali Association have already visited the concerned ministers with delegations. Advocates have spoken out. Even on social media platforms of non-resident Nepalis, signs of disappointment are beginning to emerge.

Yet, despite all this, the government appears largely unmoved. It may have said, “We will do it.” But saying “we will do it” is an old habit. This government stands on the grave of that very habit. The public expects not assurances, but implementation. Not a big promise, but a small action. Overall, it expects delivery—and that too on time. But in the case of NRN citizenship, expecting on-time delivery is like hoping for the impossible. The process of obtaining it is so complicated and painful that it exhausts anyone.

Such is the ordeal of the process: To obtain this citizenship, one must first go to the district where one originally received citizenship. Most non-resident Nepalis have long since migrated elsewhere from that district. They may not have any relatives left there. Even reaching the district headquarters is not enough. To obtain a police clearance certificate and a ward recommendation, one must travel to remote villages. In hill districts especially, such villages may be miles away and require two to three days of travel. Some wards may not even have a police office, requiring officials to be brought from another municipality for verification.

Even obtaining a ward recommendation alone can cost up to Rs10,000. This is excessively high. In some wards, there may be no one who recognizes the applicant; in others, records may show that the entire family has already migrated. In such cases, ward chairs may refuse to recommend, and police may refuse verification. The resulting complications are deeply distressing.

Moreover, anyone arriving from abroad to obtain NRN citizenship is often treated as a source of extraction by local wards and police offices. The compulsion to “please” officials in order to get work done quickly and smoothly is even more disheartening. After completing all this, one must again return to the district office, where witnesses are required—something that is also difficult to arrange.

After completing all these steps, the office of the Chief District Officer that originally issued citizenship by descent provides a certificate confirming its renunciation. With that, one must then go to the district office that issued the most recent copy of the citizenship certificate. Only then does the process of obtaining NRN citizenship begin. Even this involves numerous complicated procedures—moving from one office to another, being told something is missing, and being compelled to pay extra. “Come tomorrow,” is often said—and to turn that tomorrow into today, additional payment becomes necessary. Only after completing this entire marathon of procedures does one finally obtain NRN citizenship.

What should the process be like?

NRN citizenship should be made into a dignified, almost sacred link between the state and its diaspora—a gift that keeps former Nepalis connected to their roots. Its value should reflect the meaning of belonging to one’s birthplace. It should inspire both enthusiasm to obtain it and pride in holding it. It should be accessible through a simple, single-window system. For that, the following steps are practical and achievable:

• Allow issuance through Nepali diplomatic missions abroad.
• Establish a dedicated mechanism within the Ministry of Home Affairs for applicants in Kathmandu.
• Introduce a “one appointment, one desk” system at the district level.
• Issue it immediately upon submission of original Nepali citizenship and passport, along with the foreign citizenship or passport.
• Enable a single online appointment system for the entire process.
• Fix a reasonable one-time fee, transparently administered.

What does one receive after obtaining it?

The constitution guarantees economic, social and cultural rights, excluding political rights. In practice, social and cultural integration is rarely an issue. The real need, however, is economic rights. Yet, paradoxically, this citizenship still lacks full recognition in government offices and courts, especially in matters of land and property. Outdated laws and regulations continue to obstruct it. In some cases, connections or informal payments may help—but that is neither reliable nor just.

One modest step was taken during the tenure of Chief Justice Sushila Karki: NRNs entering Nepal on a visa can obtain a free two-year multiple-entry visa. But this is hardly transformative. Those who paid $500 for an NRN identity card receive a 10-year facility. The disparity is difficult to justify.

What should be ensured?

Former Nepalis who have acquired foreign citizenship should not seek privileges beyond what is reasonable. But the rights guaranteed by the constitution must be delivered in full—without dilution. In practice, the only restriction should be political rights: contesting elections, nominating candidates, representing them, and voting. Beyond these, all other rights must be freely exercisable. This includes:

• The right to enter and reside in Nepal without a passport, similar to citizens by descent or naturalized citizens.
• The ability to enter Nepal using NRN citizenship itself—or, if not feasible, provision of a special travel document.
• Full legal recognition in all institutions and courts concerning economic, social and cultural rights.

Continuity of citizenship is not immediately possible

Despite political commitments, continuity of citizenship by descent cannot be implemented immediately. Nepal’s Constitution (2015) does not allow it. In fact, the current process begins only after renouncing citizenship by descent. In theory, the only difference between the two forms of citizenship is political rights. In practice, however, NRN citizenship fails to deliver even the rights it promises. Legal barriers remain, reforms have not been enacted, and even executive-level decisions have not been utilized.

As a result, obtaining it is difficult—and even after obtaining it, it often feels ineffective. Many describe it as little more than a piece of paper, acquired at the cost of emotional loss.

What can the government do now?

While political intent may exist, bureaucratic resistance remains the central obstacle. It is the bureaucracy that complicates procedures and restricts rights. The government must address this directly by simplifying processes, enforcing accountability, and ensuring that rights are actually delivered. Above all, NRN citizenship must be recognized for what it is: a legitimate form of Nepali citizenship enshrined in the constitution. It must carry dignity. The current absurdity—where its holders still require visas to enter Nepal—must end.

This is what can and must be done immediately. The promise of dual citizenship, or continuity of citizenship by descent, will require constitutional amendment, time, and a two-thirds parliamentary majority. That process cannot be rushed. But the political consensus— “Once a Nepali, always a Nepali”—suggests that such a future is possible.

Hope in Balen

The electorate did not merely vote for a party; it voted for a promise of change embodied in leadership. In many constituencies, voters chose the symbol to deliver that leadership. This mandate is not for incremental reform, but for meaningful delivery. It is not unconditional—it carries expectations.

Non-resident Nepalis may not vote directly, but their influence—on families, on public opinion, and on international perception—has been decisive. The government must now honor that contribution by acting—swiftly and concretely. Ensure that NRN citizenship is easy to obtain. Ensure that it works in practice. Ensure that rights are not just written but lived.

That is what a credible beginning looks like.

Good morning, Honourable Prime Minister.

Continuity of citizenship by descent may come in time through constitutional amendment. But what can be done now—without amending the constitution—is the full implementation of NRN citizenship provisions already in place. Please do that. That alone would mean everything. What non-resident Nepalis need today is not a big reform, but a small, decisive action.