Kathmandu: It was a week of upheaval. Thousands of young Nepalese took to the streets, demanding jobs, dignity and an end to corruption. For many, the ‘Gen Z’ uprising marked the dawn of a “New Nepal”. But while the movement uprooted the country’s deeply entrenched political hierarchy, it couldn’t alter a much older, rigid social order which has long dictated access to resources, status and opportunity in Nepal: caste.
For instance, the country’s interim prime minister, Sushila Karki, carries the Karki surname, a Chhetri designation signalling a warrior or ruling caste. Former prime ministers K.P. Oli and Pushpa Kumar Dahal, also known as Prachanda, once the Maoist insurgency’s supreme commander, are Bahuns, as is his counterpart in the Nepali Congress, Sher Bahadur Deuba, and the country’s Army chief, Ashok Raj Sigdel.
As political analyst and commentator C.K. Lal puts it, “Even after revolutions and constitutional reforms, the ABCD—the Aryans, Bahuns, Chhetris and Dasnamis—still control everything.”
Nepal’s caste system is centuries old. The Muluki Ain, or National Code of 1854, codified a rigid hierarchy, placing Bahuns (Brahmins) and Chhetris (warriors) at the top, Dalits at the bottom, and indigenous Tibeto-Burman groups in the middle. “They (Bahuns and Chhetris) dominate the legislature, executive, judiciary, media and NGOs. The king may be gone, but the old order remains,” Lal told ThePrint, alluding to abolition of the monarchy, and birth of the Federal Democratic Republic of Nepal in 2008.
Until this time, power and land were concentrated at the top: the king and royal family controlled resources, granting tax-free land (‘Birta’) to loyal courtiers and military commanders. Trade, largely absent from the Vaishya class in the hills, was handled by indigenous communities like the Newars, who maintained their own internal hierarchies even after the abolition.
“Although King Mahendra abolished caste-based discrimination in 1963, and the Constitution criminalises untouchability, upper-caste mindsets persist,” said Lalita Kaundinya, a professor at Kathmandu University.
Other analysts agreed. “Nepal’s small size masks immense social complexity,” said Lal, adding that even after the abolition, “concentric circles of power” persisted, leaving some communities, like the Madhesis in the southern plains who were largely ignored in the legal framework, excluded from citizenship rights, fair representation, and recognition.
Although the 2015 Constitution mandates proportional inclusion, with 33 percent of seats for women, 28.7 percent for indigenous groups, 13.8 percent for Dalits and 3.9 percent for backward regions, implementation remains uneven. “Article 38 guarantees Dalits the right to participate in state mechanisms, but political leaders often select candidates based on personal interests rather than genuine inclusion,” said Kaundinya.
Movements like the 1990 Jana Andolan (Peoples Movement), the Maoist insurgency, and the 2006 Jana Andolan II led to the 2015 Constitution and the establishment of bodies such as the National Dalit Commission (2002), the Madhesi Commission (2017) and the Tharu Commission (2017).
But while reservation policies aim to ensure representation for marginalised groups, systemic inequality persists. The 2022 Demographic and Health Survey shows Dalit and Madhesi women rely more on traditional health practices and face higher maternal and child mortality.
Food insecurity is severe among Dalits, particularly in remote provinces like Karnali, the country’s largest province, and Dalit and Madhesi children are less likely to attend school or complete their education due to poverty and discrimination. Dalits, especially in the Terai, face deeper poverty, landlessness and lack of quality education, whereas Dalit women are doubly marginalised, socially and economically.
Also Read: RSS should not give in to narrow political demands. Caste census will divide Hindu society
Shadow of caste
Hinduism is Nepal’s majority religion, shaping its social structure and politics, while Tibetan Buddhism is practiced by some ethnic groups, such as the Newars, often blended with Hindu traditions. Going by the 2021 Nepal Census, 81.2 percent of Nepalese identify as Hindu, situating themselves within the caste system. A 2008 study by sociologists Prof. Dilli Ram Dahal, L. Bennett and Pav Govindsamy on caste, ethnic and regional identity in Nepal, noted that caste historically shaped even non-Hindus.
With Hill Hindus—who were Bahuns (11 percent) and Chhetris (16 percent)—at the top, indigenous janajatis (tribes), including Newar, Tharu, Magar, Tamang, Gurung, Rai and Limbu (35 percent in all), were considered middle-ranking ‘matwali’ (liquor drinkers), and would often internalise caste biases. Madhesis made up 20 percent of the overall population, with Dalits at 14 percent and Muslims at 5 percent.
Communities in the high mountains, on the other hand, were more influenced by Tibetan Buddhism and those in remote valleys and forests followed shamanistic or animistic traditions, after the national codification.
According to Lal, communities cope by remaining loyal, raising their voices or emigrating, all strategies reflected in Nepal’s marginalised populations.
The restoration of democracy in 1951 didn’t change things. Marginalised groups still faced persistent exclusion and this was a gap that even the Maoists exploited during ‘the People’s War’ from 1996 to 2006. During the 1996 Maoist insurgency, leadership was mostly Bahun, while frontline fighters came from Janajati and Dalit communities, drawn by promises of equality. Even in shared camps, top positions remained Bahun-dominated.
This structural marginalisation underpins unrest, such as the 2015 blockade and mirrors challenges faced by permanent minorities worldwide.
Representation on paper
The stakes are similar when it comes to politics. According to activist and founder of the Dalit Lives Matter movement Pradip Pariyar, political representation remains dominated by high-caste elites. “Across major parties—Nepali Congress, UML (Unified Marxist–Leninist), and Maoists—most top positions are held by elites. Minority communities, including Dalits and Janajatis, reach leadership mainly through quotas.”
“In the last parliament, only one directly elected Dalit MP represented 14 percent of the population. Young people struggle to enter politics due to a lack of structured pathways,” he told ThePrint. Even broad-based protests, such as the Gen Z movement, which, according to him, drew participants from all castes, including marginalised groups, did not address this issue.
Dalits and other marginalised groups have historically supported Leftist parties, but proper representation within party structures remains limited. “Revolts reflect rage at monopolised power, but participants often come from elite backgrounds and may not seek systemic transformation,” said Lal.
Agreeing with Periyar and Lal on most counts, Kaundinya held forth a more nuanced view. According to her, an intersectional approach is crucial to understanding Nepal’s social issues. “Hierarchies, inequalities and discrimination exist even within the same caste, meaning that individuals from marginalised groups, nominated through proportional representation, are often limited in their advocacy. Rather than championing their community’s concerns, they tend to remain loyal to party leadership.”
Most representatives from marginalised groups come from the ‘creamy layer’ and often serve party interests rather than their communities, she said. Adding, “Reserved seats exist, but they often benefit those already with access. Without addressing education, quotas remain symbolic.”
The way ahead
Pariyar noted that while awareness of caste is growing among youth, opportunities to act remain limited. Legal reforms like the 2011 Caste-Based Discrimination Act, constitutional guarantees in 2015 and provincial Dalit empowerment acts have had an uneven impact.
Kaundinya submitted that “quality education is essential to transforming deep-rooted discrimination”.
Enforcing legal safeguards is also critical. Legal and policy frameworks have progressed: the Constitution criminalises caste-based discrimination, and commissions for Dalits, Madhesis, and Tharus exist alongside reservation systems in education, civil service, and politics. Yet, implementation is uneven.
“Inclusive policies are vital, but enforcement is fundamental. The mindset of upper-caste elites must change to achieve meaningful inclusion,” Kaundinya said. “Despite progressive provisions, political instability may persist if caste and marginalised groups remain unaddressed.”
Given that political representation remains skewed, Pariyar advocated population-based quotas: “Ensuring 14 percent Dalit representation and proportional shares for janajatis and Madhesis could create a truly rainbow parliament.”
Lal suggested that electoral reforms must mandate population-based quotas, ensuring genuine representation. Policies must go beyond symbolic gestures to ensure commissions and quotas function effectively.
“Fielding candidates from marginalised communities in the FPTP (first past the post) system is essential. In the 2019 federal election, Dalits held only 2.69 percent of FPTP seats, while women held 13 percent. Prioritising candidates from Dalit, women, and other marginalised groups in high-probability constituencies is not just symbolic placements, but crucial,” he added.
According to Kaundinya, movements create pressure on elites to change mindset, but real change requires structural reforms, quality education and meaningful representation. “Only then can Nepal’s political and social systems reflect its true diversity.”
For Lal, history offers a cautionary lesson: “Nepal has undergone revolutions and constitutional change, yet elite circles remain entrenched. The monarchy is gone, but its shadow defines the republic. Without addressing the roots of caste inequality, true transformation remains elusive.”
This is an updated version of the report
(Edited by Sugita Katyal)
Also Read: Gen Zs have taken down the Nepal regime. Here’s why this will never happen in India