Marginalization in Federalism: The Unresolved Identity Crisis of the Madheshi Community

Madhesh and its people have long struggled with issues of exclusion and marginalization, dating back to the territorial unification campaign of 1769.^[1] Annexed and treated like a colony, Madhesh faced state-sponsored discrimination that profoundly impacted its identity.^[2] Specifically, issues such as denial of citizenship, exclusion from political processes, exploitation of natural resources, and cultural repression left the Madheshi people in a condition of statelessness and crisis. The 2007 Madhesi Uprising marked a turning point, thrusting Madheshi identity politics into the national and international spotlight. Despite the promise of federalism to address these ethnic and regional disparities, the identity crisis remains unresolved, as Madheshis continue to feel alienated from the rest of Nepal, living as a community distinct from the national identity.

The Promise with Federalism and Madheshi Aspirations

Nepal’s complex social fabric, historically governed by the Hindu social order, became more exposed with the dissolution of the monarchy. This shift made diversity-based identity a highly contested issue and left social cohesion fragile. Historically, Indigenous, minority, and disadvantaged caste groups have claimed they were denied a voice in a society structured by a hierarchical system. Federalism was introduced with the promise of addressing these disparities, decentralizing power, and offering marginalized communities, like the Madheshis, a chance for political representation.^[3]

Madheshis, who constitute over one-third of Nepal’s population, have long demanded political and economic representation proportional to their numbers. Their demands gained momentum following the Maoist rebellion (1996-2006), which paved the way for their first major uprising in 2007 against the interim constitution. The Comprehensive Peace Agreement (CPA) of 2006 marked a new era, as it acknowledged structural discrimination and underdevelopment as root causes of Nepal’s conflicts. Unlike previous political changes, post-2006 reforms offered hope for genuine structural transformation rather than simply changing leadership, sparking early optimism about federalism’s potential to reshape the state’s relationship with marginalized groups.^[4]

Unmet Expectations Through Federalism

After a decade-long armed conflict and the 19-day People’s Movement, Nepal entered a new phase of constitution-making, aiming to be democratic, federal, and inclusive. Though the idea of federalism surfaced in the 1990s, it was sidelined, as Nepal’s political discourse focused on multi-party democracy and a parliamentary system.^[5]

Despite the sweeping political reforms brought by Nepal’s constitutional changes, many within the Madheshi community (and beyond) strongly opposed them due to unresolved issues. Chief among these were concerns about Nepal’s political map, restrictive citizenship rights, and their implications on the Madheshi people’s right to self-determination and public participation. Over the past five years, efforts to address these issues have been frustrating, with notable developments in 2020.^[6] However, despite legal guarantees of equal participation, structural flaws within Nepal’s constitutional framework have effectively disenfranchised the Madheshi population.

The Madheshi community continues to protest frequently, demanding their political and economic rights, yet their grievances are often treated as temporary issues. Strikes and road blockades in the Terai region have crippled economic activities, severely impacting trade and industry. Despite the economic disruption and attention drawn to their cause, Madheshi concerns are often discussed for a short time and then forgotten, with no long-term solutions provided. Further, frequent portrayal and misrepresentation of their demands as aggressive and uncivilized by the mainstream media fuel a sense of hatred of the nation towards Madheshis.

Stigmatized for their perceived ties to India, Madheshis have borne the brunt of fears about Indian migration altering Nepal’s ethnic composition. Restrictive citizenship laws have left millions without the rights of citizenship, preventing them from holding higher administrative or security posts, and further curbing their political influence.

While the 2015 Constitution introduced federalism with the potential to enhance Madheshi political participation and self-determination, it has largely failed to deliver on this promise. Beyond constitutional limitations, the government has actively restricted Madheshi participation, targeting their self-determination movement, especially between 2016 and 2018.^[7] Despite federalism’s promise of equal participation, Madheshis continue to face significant obstacles, leaving them effectively disenfranchised within Nepal’s democratic system.

Systemic Issues within Federalism

Nepal’s federal structure was designed to empower provinces like Madhesh, but it still suffers from systemic issues that perpetuate the centralized dominance of power. Despite the intent to decentralize, significant decision-making authority remains concentrated at the national level, undermining the autonomy of provincial governments. For Madhesh, this centralization is particularly detrimental, as it prevents the province from addressing its distinct regional concerns, especially around identity and inclusion.

One of the major flaws is the lack of genuine decentralization of resources. Key financial decisions, administrative powers, and resource allocations are heavily influenced by the central government, which leaves provinces like Madhesh dependent on Kathmandu. This limits their ability to govern effectively and meet local demands, whether in infrastructure development or policy innovation tailored to the region’s needs. For Madhesh, this results in continued underdevelopment, hampering the identity and rights-based claims that sparked the federal movement.

Political instability only exacerbates these issues. Frequent government changes, both at the central and provincial levels, disrupt the smooth functioning of provincial governments. Madhesh, in particular, has been vulnerable to central interference, where federal authorities exert influence over local political dynamics. This interference dilutes the provincial leadership’s ability to make autonomous decisions and weakens the overall effectiveness of governance in the region.

Thus, while federalism in Nepal was supposed to resolve the Madheshi identity crisis and regional grievances, centralized power and instability have rendered the system ineffective in delivering real change, deepening the struggle for autonomy and inclusion.

Conclusion and the way forward

Federalism in Nepal has not yet met the expectations of the Madheshi community, as their identity crisis remains unresolved. The promise of greater political inclusion and self-determination has been overshadowed by the persistence of centralized power and political instability, preventing Madhesh from achieving meaningful autonomy.

Madhesh has previously fought for separate nationhood due to these ongoing issues. If not addressed effectively and in a timely manner, this could lead to heightened social conflict within Nepal. The Madheshi population is a significant segment of the country’s demographic, residing in the economically vital Terai region, which accounts for almost 70% of Nepal’s industries and 65 percent of agricultural production. The region is strategically crucial, serving as the gateway to India, with key transportation routes running through it. Any disturbance involving the Madheshis has the potential to jeopardize the national economy.

Importantly, it is not just a matter of madheshis. This misinterpretation could have serious implications for national unity and further development. The Madheshi struggle is rooted in a fight against the state’s discriminatory politics, advocating for recognition of their political, cultural, and economic rights. To bring about real change, Nepal must reform its federal system to ensure genuine decentralization of power and resources. Stronger political representation for Madheshis, along with greater cultural recognition, shall be essential to address the region’s historical marginalization. Only through these reforms can federalism truly resolve the Madheshi identity crisis and promote inclusion within the broader Nepali state.