Connect with us

Nepal: New Prime Minister Must Keep Promise To LGBTI Community

Published

on

Last week marked the coming out party for one of the world’s newest heads of state. Baburam Bhattarai, the newly-elected Prime Minister of Nepal, visited New York and Washington, D.C. to meet and greet world leaders, and introduce himself to the United Nations.

Bhattarai has had a lot on his plate since taking office, so leaving the country was a questionable move in the first place. The deadline for Nepal’s new constitution, just two months away, looms on the horizon, and the Constituent Assembly — the 600-some strong body charged with delivering the draft of a new constitution for the Himalayan nation — has been mired in deadlock for nearly a year. In addition, Bhattarai makes this trip on the heels of his first bold proclamation that has human rights groups reeling: he wants blanket amnesty for all crimes committed during the ten-year internal armed conflict that wracked Nepal until 2006. (Bhattarai’s party, the Maoist Party, emerged out of the Maoist rebel group that started the “People’s Revolution,” in which over 10,000 people died.)

But while concerns over transitional justice issues will no doubt be on the agendas of many world leaders as they meet Bhattarai in the U.S., another troubling human rights issue lurks, waiting now four years for proper implementation. To put it simply: Nepal should have some of the most gay- and trans-friendly laws in the world, but it doesn’t. Bhattarai holds the keys to making this happen.

In 2007, Nepal’s leading LGBTI rights activist, Sunil Babu Pant, won a Supreme Court Case demanding full, fundamental equality for all sexual and gender minority citizens. It was a landmark, comprehensive decision. The world watched as Nepal, a traditional and conservative society by many measures, emerged onto the global LGBT rights stage as an example of effective activism and advocacy for sexual and gender minorities.

Bhattarai’s power to implement these laws is crucial. Government bureaucracy in Nepal is thick and chaotic; ministries change personnel so frequently that lobbying them can seem pointless. Since the 2007 Supreme Court decision, for example, four people have served as Home Minister. The Home Ministry is responsible for, among other things, issuing citizenship identification cards, without which many basic services are out of reach for Nepali people.

The Court decision mandated that the government issue ID cards that allow citizens to identify as third gender (the term used in Nepal for transgender or binary gender non-conforming people.) To date, only a handful of people have successfully done this, and all succeeded by putting up a hearty fight.

Nepal

A simple directive letter from Prime Minister Bhattarai could change this for the entire country. Just before the Parliament voted on a new PM, Bhattarai promised to do this while seeking support from CPN (United), a party with five votes in the Parliament, one of which belonged to Pant, who has been a Member of Parliament since 2008. Advocates and activists were encouraged by Bhattarai’s promise.

In fact, Bhattarai, when he was Finance Minister in 2008 under the first Maoist regime, did something no other government of Nepal had ever done: he created a budget line for programs geared toward sexual and gender minorities. Sunil Babu Pant’s non-governmental organization, Blue Diamond Society, has been using some of these funds to build a LGBTI community center in Kathmandu modeled on the New York LGBT Center. It would be the first such community center in South Asia.

In an additional progressive move, the 2011 Nepali census was the first in the world to allow citizens to identify as male, female, or third gender. The process was highly flawed, and the inclusion of the category appears to have been mostly a superficial gesture at this point (the data on people who identified themselves as third gender is not linked to any other demographic numbers), but such steps toward implementation indicate a growing level of acceptance of the LGBTI community in Nepal, and presage the comprehensive reform expected.

As a Member of Parliament and the Constituent Assembly, Sunil Pant sits on the fundamental rights chapter drafting committee in the Constituent Assembly. The fundamental rights chapter is finished, and follows the Court’s orders to be completely inclusive of LGBTI citizens in all rights and protections. Now it sits rotting as a special sub-committee debates the details of power sharing and state structure. Since the constitutional deadline was last extended, Pant has refused to take his salary from the government, saying he cannot take money if no work is being done on the draft.

Whether the constitution drafting process will be completed by the extended deadline – just over two months away – is certainly on Bhattarai’s mind. But in the meantime if he wants to show the Nepali people that he takes human rights and his own judiciary seriously, he has an easy way to do that: a flick of his pen could order all administrative offices across the country to obey the law and recognized third gender citizens.

The Court decision demonstrated substantial progress, but the LGBTI community has been waiting for too long for something real to happen.

On Friday, Bhattari spoke at The New School. I asked him via Twitter when he would keep his promise. He replied: “We have in principal agreed that we will provide citizenship – even our Supreme Court has given a ruling in that context. So the government is committed to implement that.”

Hari Phuyal, the prominent Kathmandu lawyer who tried the 2007 Supreme Court case says, “the Court decision came at such a crucial time, when the LGBTI community was misused and mishandled by the law enforcement agencies in Nepal.” The violence against LGBTI people has largely ceased thanks to successful advocacy and publicity, but now is another crucial moment, and there is one man who can make the difference.

 (Image: Baburam Bhattarai)

Kyle Knight is a Fulbright Scholar in Nepal where his research focuses on the LGBTI rights movement. He previously worked at Human Rights Watch, where he focused on children’s rights issue. For three years, he worked as a suicide prevention counselor for LGBTQ youth at the Trevor Project in New York City. He currently sits on the Trevor Project’s Advocacy and Public Policy Committee, is the president of the Duke University LGBT Network, and a is lecturer in Gender Studies at Tribhuvan University, Nepal’s state-run university in Kathmandu. You can follow him on Twitter @knightktm.

Related Topics:
Continue Reading
Click to comment
 
 

Enjoy this piece?

… then let us make a small request. The New Civil Rights Movement depends on readers like you to meet our ongoing expenses and continue producing quality progressive journalism. Three Silicon Valley giants consume 70 percent of all online advertising dollars, so we need your help to continue doing what we do.

NCRM is independent. You won’t find mainstream media bias here. From unflinching coverage of religious extremism, to spotlighting efforts to roll back our rights, NCRM continues to speak truth to power. America needs independent voices like NCRM to be sure no one is forgotten.

Every reader contribution, whatever the amount, makes a tremendous difference. Help ensure NCRM remains independent long into the future. Support progressive journalism with a one-time contribution to NCRM, or click here to become a subscriber. Thank you. Click here to donate by check.

News

Report: House GOP Eyes $2.5 Trillion in Spending Cuts — Social Security, Medicare at Risk

Published

19 hours ago

on

December 20, 2024

By

House Republicans on Friday presented a proposal during a closed-door meeting to implement President-elect Donald Trump’s directive to raise the debt ceiling. The plan proposes increasing the limit on debt by $1.5 trillion, followed by cutting “net mandatory spending” by $2.5 trillion, according to a report from Punchbowl News co-founder Joe Sherman.

Mandatory spending consists largely of programs including Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid, which the government by law is required to fund. These programs are often referred to as “entitlements.” It also includes spending on interest on the national debt, according to the Government Accountability Office (GAO), and programs like SNAP, the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program that helps feed over 40 million participants — including families — each month.

Sherman reported Friday afternoon, amid the impending government shutdown crisis, that “IN THE GOP MEETING — GOP leadership has a slide up that has an ‘agreement’ on the debt limit.”

“The ‘agreement’ says that House Republicans will raise the debt limit by $1.5T in the ‘first reconciliation package’ alongside a promise to CUT $2.5T in ‘net mandatory spending in the reconciliation process.'”

READ MORE: ‘What Constitution Is He Reading?’: Republican’s Interpretation of Role of Congress Stuns

Axios’ Juliegrace Brufke shared what appears to be a photograph of that slide:

A recent, somewhat cryptic remark by President-elect Donald Trump seems to echo Sherman’s and Brufke’s reporting, and that of others: “The United States will cut Hundreds of Billions of Dollars in spending next year through Reconciliation!” Trump wrote on his Truth Social website, early Thursday evening.

Adding more details, and referencing “reconciliation,” The Hill’s Emily Brooks reports Friday afternoon: “The spending cuts-for-debt-limit-increase agreement being presented to GOP members includes a plan to cut mandatory spending. Mandatory spending includes Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, veterans benefits, and more.”

“The agreement being eyed would raise the debt ceiling by $1.5 trillion in exchange for $2.5 trillion in net cuts to mandatory spending, done through a reconciliation package, two sources confirmed to The Hill,” Brooks added. “It is not clear which programs would be cut. The reconciliation process is a special procedure that gets around the Senate filibuster, allowing Republicans who will have trifecta control of government to push through their priorities without needing Democratic support.”

Brooks also explained that “Republicans have long been planning to use this process to advance an ambitious legislative agenda that includes extending Trump’s 2017 tax cuts and addressing border security. The Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, however, notes that while reconciliation can be used to address most mandatory spending program, the Budget Act prohibits using it to change Social Security.”

The executive editor of The American Prospect, David Dayen, wrote: “They’re coming for Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid.”

“Mandatory spending cuts is Republican swamp speak for gutting your hard-earned Medicare,” commented U.S. Senator Ron Wyden (D-OR).

READ MORE: ‘Sick’: Dems Slam Johnson’s Refusal to Negotiate as Government Hurls Toward Shutdown

“Republicans are planning to rob you of your retirement & health care,” observed U.S. Senator Martin Heinrich (D-NM).

What could this mean?

Bobby Kogan, Senior Director of Federal Budget Policy for The Center for American Progress writes that Republicans “have been open about wanting to gut Medicaid and SNAP. $2.5 trillion in cuts could mean: -cutting Medicaid 32% -cutting Medicaid & SNAP 28% -entirely eliminating SNAP, TANF, SSI, and the Child Care entitlement to states.”

TANF, Temporary Assistance for Needy Families, helps “families with children experiencing low-income achieve economic security and stability.”

SSI, also known as Supplemental Security Income, helps “people with disabilities and older adults who have little or no income or resources.”

“If the cut fell entirely on Medicaid,” Kogan added, “it would mean on average about 32 million people were kicked off of Medicaid (depending on how they structured the cuts).”

U.S. Rep. Diana DeGette (D-CO) remarked, “House Republicans just proposed slashing Medicare and Medicaid. I’ll stay in Washington until Hell freezes over to stop them.”

READ MORE: Why Aren’t More Democrats Speaking Out Against RFK Jr.’s HHS Nomination?

Trump during the campaign promised to cut “entitlements” and promised to never cut Social Security or Medicare.

Watch the videos below or at this link.

 

Continue Reading

News

‘What Constitution Is He Reading?’: Republican’s Interpretation of Role of Congress Stuns

Published

23 hours ago

on

December 20, 2024

By

A House Republican’s interpretation of the constitutional role of Congress has left some stunned, after he suggested it is not a co-equal branch of government, but rather, intended to be supportive of “President Trump,” and “implement” his agenda.

The U.S. Constitution is clear: Congress’s role is to make laws, the executive branch’s role is to implement and enforce them.

U.S. Rep. Dan Meuser (R-PA) appeared to get the roles reversed.

“The president was elected by the people. What was on the ballot was the America First agenda,” Congressman Meuser told Fox Business Friday (video below). “The president’s plan is what we should be backing.”

“You know, our role is really to be more of a of a supportive board of directors, so we can implement what the American people voted for,” he claimed, conflating two co-equal branches of government. “Republicans need to get on board with President Trump. He is the commander in chief. He is the president. He is the decider in chief, and he’s the CEO.”

READ MORE: ‘Sick’: Dems Slam Johnson’s Refusal to Negotiate as Government Hurls Toward Shutdown

Meuser also claimed that the original bill Speaker of the House Mike Johnson put forth on Tuesday should have had the provision to extend or eliminate the debt ceiling that President-elect Donald Trump had wanted. Trump notified Congress via a post on his Truth Social platform Wednesday after 5 PM — well after the text of the first bill has been released on Tuesday —that he wanted the debt ceiling language in the bill.

“I mean, this, on the entire problem began because we received almost 1500 pages on Tuesday evening, and there was a lot that was in it that was unexpected, and there were things that were not in it that were expected, apparently, particularly uh, the president’s request for for a debt ceiling. Uh, uh, now we uh we we we’re here at the eleventh hour.”

Meuser also insisted Congress needs to pass a bill “with any revisions that the White House can live with — that President Trump can live with, because again, this is his plan that should be implemented.”

Critics expressed concern over Congressman Meuser’s claims.

“What Constitution is he reading? Because it’s definitely not the American one,” remarked former Obama White House advisor and Deputy Communications Director TJ Adams-Falconer.

READ MORE: Trump Threatens Shutdown, Says Biden Will Be Blamed

“Ah yes, who could forget Article 1 Section 1 of the Constitution, establishing a ‘supportive board of directors,'” snarked Tim Mulvey, who has an extensive resume in government, including serving as communications director for the House Select Committee to Investigate the January 6th Attack on the U.S. Capitol, and communications director for the House Committee on Foreign Affairs.

“Someone should tell @RepMeuser he’s the member of a co-equal branch of government,” commented MSNBC columnist Michael A. Cohen.

Watch the video below or at this link.

READ MORE: Trump Orders Senate GOP to Not ‘Fast-Track’ Confirmations — Will Some Nominees Change?

 

Image: Official White House photo by Shealah Craighead, public domain via Wikimedia

 

Continue Reading

News

‘Sick’: Dems Slam Johnson’s Refusal to Negotiate as Government Hurls Toward Shutdown

Published

1 day ago

on

December 20, 2024

By

Republican Speaker of the House Mike Johnson reportedly plans to bring a third spending bill to the House floor for a vote on Friday morning, just hours before an increasingly likely federal government shutdown at midnight. The bill must pass in the House, clear the Senate, and be signed into law by President Joe Biden to avert a shutdown, which would come just days before Christmas as Congress plans to leave D.C. for its holiday recess.

Given Johnson’s razor-thin majority, he will need votes from Democrats, who are furious over his refusal to negotiate with them. As CBS News’ Scott MacFarlane reports, “Democratic votes are needed – no matter what — to avoid a shutdown.”

On Thursday night, 38 Republicans refused to vote for the House GOP’s bill.

Axios’s Andrew Solender reports that Democrats are saying the problem “is not just that [Republicans] killed the original deal – though that’s a big one – but that they’re negotiating with themselves. ‘They keep trying to guess what Dems will vote for, they should just talk to the Democratic Leader,’ says a senior House Dem[ocrat].”

RELATED: ‘Hell No!’: Democrats ‘Unified’ Against Reworked Funding Bill More Favorable to Trump

Thursday evening, Speaker Johnson and House Republicans were warned they needed to include Democrats in their negotiations to keep the government open.

“You know, denial is not just a river in Egypt,” began U.S. Rep. Jared Moskowitz (D-FL), known for his often sarcastic remarks.

“Let’s talk about the last two years. It was the Democrats who raised the debt ceiling, not the Republicans last time. Many of you voted against it. It was the Democrats who kept open the government, not once, not twice, but every single time we needed to keep the government open, it was the Democrats who kept the government open. More of us voted for it than you.”

“And all I’ve heard for the last couple of weeks about is this giant mandate landslide trifecta,” Moskowitz continued. “Put on your big boy pants, pass your own bill.”

“We’re only here because you guys can’t agree amongst yourselves,” he added, to applause. “Democrats will keep government open for the American people. We will mediate the disagreements between that side of the room and that side of the room — we will do that for you, but you’ve got to at least invite us to that meeting. So if you want us to solve your problem because you can’t agree amongst yourselves, reach out.”

Far right Florida Republican Congresswoman Anna Paulina Luna, who tried on Thursday to blame Democrats for any possible shutdown, on Friday morning got in front of the cameras and vowed there will be no negotiations with Democrats.

After denouncing Senate Democratic Majority Leader Chuck Schumer with some colorful language, Rep. Luna declared, “there’ll be no deals with the Democrats,” and “we’re not cutting deals with Democrats.”

READ MORE: Trump Orders Senate GOP to Not ‘Fast-Track’ Confirmations — Will Some Nominees Change?

U.S. Rep. Jasmine Crockett (D-TX), responding to Rep. Luna’s remarks, exclaimed: “So bipartisan means… 2 parties worked together. Unilaterally a bipartisan deal was scrapped, but Nevermind.” She added: “THEY said they weren’t working with us.”

U.S. Rep. Katherine Clark, the House Democratic Minority Whip, declared: “We’re 15 hours away from a government shutdown that would devastate everyday Americans. Troops will be forced to serve without pay. Families will be stripped of food assistance. Travelers will face disruptions — right before the holidays. This is not a game, @HouseGOP.” 

Aaron Fritschner, Deputy Chief of Staff for U.S. Rep. Don Beyer (D-VA), warned, “Republicans are mathematically and procedurally incapable of funding the government on their own without Democratic votes. This was true when they took the majority and will be true next year. When they refuse to deal with us, they are posturing and messaging, not legislating.”

U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-CT) excoriated House Republicans for refusing to negotiate with Democrats: “Democrats control the White House and Senate. You’re just for a shutdown if your position is that you won’t negotiate. They are getting ready to cut off pay for our troops at Christmas. Just sick.”

Watch Rep. Moskowitz’s remarks below or at this link.

RELATED: Trump Threatens Shutdown, Says Biden Will Be Blamed

Continue Reading

Trending

Copyright © 2020 AlterNet Media.