The Tamesis
Nowhere else in the world are nearly 2 billion people (nearly 40 percent of humanity living under democratically elected governments) so stubbornly committed to a project of self-government. This is a region of constitutional invention, resilience and renewal, as I argue in my new book The Heartland of Democracy: Inside the Struggle for Power in South Asialearning.
Each of the eight countries in South Asia—Afghanistan, Bangladesh, Bhutan, India, Maldives, Nepal, Pakistan and Sri Lanka—has something unique to teach the others.
Of these, Nepal’s story is perhaps the most dramatic. Few countries have been able to change their political systems so radically in one generation. From an absolute monarchy to a federal democratic republic, from civil war to inclusive peace, Nepal has come a long way in a very short period of time. It did so not through external imposition but through its own political will, with citizens taking to the streets to demand that sovereignty be returned to them.
Nepal is a country that has achieved in two decades what others have taken half a century to achieve: built a democracy from the ashes of conflict and hierarchy. Nepal’s transformation is neither accidental nor exogenous. It is the product of popular movements, political negotiations and a willingness to rewrite the rules of power. The 2006 Comprehensive Peace Agreement ended the violent insurgency and launched a new social contract based on inclusivity, secularism and federalism. The 2015 Constitution was enacted after a long and intense debate and became one of the most progressive founding documents in the region. It declares Nepal to be secular, federal and republican with an unequivocal commitment to equality, justice and representation of historically excluded groups.
Nepal’s hybrid electoral system is a central pillar of this design. The House of Representatives consists of 60% of seats elected by majority vote and 40% of seats allocated through proportional representation lists. Proportional lists force political parties to correct the distortions of constituency-based politics by nominating women, Dalits, Janajati, Madhesis and other minorities who may be excluded from power. The result is one of the most inclusive parliaments in South Asia.
The impact is visible on every level. Today, about one-third of the federal parliament is women. One of the two highest offices, president and vice president, must be held by a woman. In local government, gender representation is even more striking: according to the constitution, approximately 75% of deputy mayors are women. This is not symbolic inclusion, but structural reform. Few democracies in the region have a comparable record of women’s participation.
Nepal’s embrace of federalism is equally important. The seven-province model created by the 2015 constitution replaced the old centralized order with a new decentralized structure. Provincial and local councils are now responsible for legislating and managing budgets in education, health, infrastructure and culture. This decentralization brings political life closer to the people and creates new leadership opportunities for communities that have long been excluded from Kathmandu-centric governance. Other South Asian countries, where federalism is often reduced to a slogan, have much to learn from this experiment in grassroots democracy.
Most notable is Nepal’s attitude towards independent institutions. The Election Commission of Nepal is a multi-member body established under the constitution and is not appointed unilaterally but through a constitutional committee consisting of the Prime Minister, the Chief Justice, the Speaker, the Speaker of the National Assembly, the Leader of the Opposition and the Deputy Speaker. As a double safeguard, even the decisions of this high-level body must be scrutinized and accepted by a joint parliamentary committee consisting of 15 members from all parties in both houses of parliament. In a region where such appointments are often partisan, Nepal’s consensus model is a democratic innovation worth emulating.
Nepal has also demonstrated an admirable commitment to peaceful political competition. Despite years of turmoil—frequent changes of government, splintered coalitions and corruption scandals—the political class continues to operate within constitutional bounds. Parties that once pitted themselves against each other in armed conflict now compete at the ballot box. Even amid disruptions from the pandemic and economic pressures, local, provincial and federal elections were successfully held under the new constitution, reflecting enduring confidence in the democratic process.
Of course, democracy in Nepal is still a work in progress. The challenges are real: fragile alliances, slow policy implementation, public resentment over corruption and controversial citizenship provisions. The protests that broke out in the Madhesh region and more recently around digital freedom issues show that inclusion on paper must translate into equity in practice. However, compared to the scale of the transition from monarchy and insurgency to a functioning federal democracy, Nepal’s achievements are remarkable. Democratic habits have taken root.
Nepal offers at least three lessons to its neighbors. First, federalism can be built from the bottom up through negotiation and mobilization rather than imposed from the top down. Second, this inclusivity can be institutionalized through electoral design and constitutional guarantees, not as charity but as justice. Third, democratic institutions can be collectively owned across political differences. These achievements are no small feat in a region often characterized by centralization and political polarization.
At the same time, Nepal can also learn from its neighbors. From India, it may bring the value of uninterrupted constitutional continuity; Sri Lanka tells a cautionary tale of excessive concentration of executive power, and Bhutan tells the virtue of gradual transition. The conversation must be a two-way street.
Nepal’s political journey is one of the most inspiring in the developing world and an encouragement to defend its gains. Its democratic transformation—achieved without foreign occupation, sustained through negotiations, and based on inclusivity—is a story that South Asia should celebrate and learn from.
