Lawmakers differ on provisions of citizenship bill

KATHMANDU: Lawmakers’ views differed on whether to mention husband’s name in the citizenship certificate of married and divorced women.

Even lawmakers from the same party put forth contradictory views, which made inconclusive the meeting of a parliamentary committee to integrate amendment for finalizing the citizenship bill 2063.

At the meeting of the State Affairs and Good Governance Committee today, coordinator of the subcommittee to integrate amendments on the bill, Bijay Subba, said, “We’re discussing in a way the lawmakers from the same party are expressing dire contradictory views. It needs correction.”

Similarly, Jhapat Rawal demanded probe into the previous distribution that some 4 million non-Nepalis were provided citizenship certificate, which is a sensitive issue relating to the country’s sovereignty.

Yashoda Subedi argued, “Husband is not women’s ancestor, so, it was not necessary to mention husband’s name in woman’s citizenship certificate.” Maheshworjung Gahatraj viewed, “If husband’s name is to be mentioned in woman’s citizenship certificate, why can’t we mention woman’s name in man’s citizenship certificates?”

Earlier, the subcommittee had agreed that the government official could issue the citizenship certificate again if a married or divorced woman applies for next citizenship with the amendment on name, caste, address and other information. While conferring the new one, the previous document could be seized by the administration.

As the committee failed to reach conclusion, it agreed to sit for next time.