Nepal's Controversial Polygamy Amendment: A Step Forward or Backward?

Nepal has found itself at the center of a heated legal and social debate following the recent proposal of a controversial amendment to its Criminal Code. The proposed changes to Section 175, which deals with polygamy laws, have sparked nationwide discussions, protests, and ultimately led to government backtracking. This blog examines the details of the proposed amendment, the reactions it generated, and what it means for Nepal's legal landscape.

Background: Nepal's Current Marriage Laws

Currently, Nepal operates under strict monogamy laws. Marrying more than one is considered as illegal in Nepal, with the National Civil Code defining marriage as a permanent and inviolable bond between two individuals. The country abolished polygamy in 2018, making it a criminal offense under Section 175 of the Criminal Code.

The Controversial Amendment

In July 2025, the Nepal government prepared a draft law that would allow polygamy in limited circumstances, revising the current total ban in place since 2018. The proposed amendment specifically targeted situations where polygamous unions would be exempt from being automatically void if the second partner becomes pregnant or gives birth.

The draft amendment was ostensibly designed to address complex situations where men in existing marriages form relationships outside their marriage that result in pregnancy or childbirth. Under current law, such relationships are automatically considered void and carry criminal penalties.

The Rationale Behind the Proposal

Proponents of the amendment argued it was intended to protect women and children involved in extramarital relationships. The reasoning was that if a relationship had already resulted in pregnancy or childbirth, recognizing it legally would provide protection and rights to both the woman and child involved.

However, critics viewed this differently. At face value, it claims to protect women and children involved in extra-marital relationships. In substance, however, it legitimizes what many see as a form of polygamy.

Public and Parliamentary Backlash

The proposed amendment faced immediate and widespread opposition across multiple sectors of society:

Parliamentary Opposition

During Monday's meeting of the House of Representatives, several female lawmakers raised objections. Most of the women who spoke criticized the MoLJPA, claiming that the ministry had prepared such a draft. The criticism was particularly sharp from women parliamentarians who saw the proposal as a step backward for women's rights.

Public Protests

The controversy extended beyond Parliament, with widespread opposition emerged after news broke that the legal draft appeared to permit men to practice polygamy. Civil society organizations and women's rights groups organized protests against what they perceived as a regressive move.

Media and Editorial Response

Major media outlets were critical of the proposal. The proposed laws seem to align with the patriarchal narrative of 'men will be men', reflecting broader concerns about gender equality and women's rights in Nepal.

Government Backtrack

Faced with mounting pressure, the government quickly moved to distance itself from the controversial amendment. Nepal's Minister for Law, Justice, and Parliamentary Affairs, Ajay Kumar Chaurasiya, on Wednesday assured lawmakers that no bill, including those relating to polygamy, will be presented in Parliament.

This assurance came as Nepal's Law Minister assured Parliament no law promoting polygamy will be introduced, addressing concerns over a proposed amendment. The government's quick reversal indicated the significant political pressure and public opposition the proposal had generated.

Legal and Constitutional Concerns

The proposed amendment raised several significant legal issues:

Constitutional Compatibility

Critics questioned whether the amendment would be compatible with Nepal's Constitution, which emphasizes gender equality and non-discrimination. The proposal was seen as potentially undermining constitutional principles of equal treatment under the law.

Human Rights Implications

The National Human Rights Commission stresses the need for careful consultation on human rights-related law changes, highlighting concerns about the human rights implications of such amendments.

Legal Precedent

The amendment would have created a concerning legal precedent, potentially opening doors for further erosion of women's rights and gender equality protections.

Analysis: The Broader Implications

The controversy surrounding this proposed amendment reveals several important aspects of Nepal's current legal and social landscape:

Gender Equality Progress

Nepal has made significant strides in gender equality legislation since the restoration of democracy. The strong opposition to this amendment demonstrates that civil society and political representatives are vigilant about protecting these gains.

Political Sensitivity

The government's quick reversal shows the political sensitivity around women's rights issues in Nepal. Any perceived regression in women's rights faces immediate and strong opposition.

Legal Reform Challenges

The episode highlights the challenges of legal reform in a diverse society where traditional practices may conflict with modern legal principles and constitutional rights.

International Context

Nepal's experience with this proposed amendment reflects broader global debates about balancing traditional practices with modern legal frameworks. Many countries grapple with similar tensions between customary practices and contemporary human rights standards.

Looking Forward: Lessons Learned

Several key lessons emerge from this controversy:

1. Consultation is Crucial: Any proposed changes to sensitive areas of law require extensive consultation with stakeholders, including women's rights organizations, legal experts, and civil society.
2. Transparency Matters: The backlash was amplified by the perceived secretive nature of the draft preparation. Greater transparency in legal drafting processes could prevent similar controversies.
3. Constitutional Alignment: All proposed amendments must be carefully evaluated for their compatibility with constitutional principles, particularly those related to equality and human rights.
4. Impact Assessment: Proposed legal changes should include comprehensive impact assessments, particularly regarding their effects on vulnerable populations.

Conclusion

The controversy over Nepal's proposed polygamy amendment serves as a significant case study in legal reform, gender equality, and democratic governance. While the government has assured that no such bill will be presented to Parliament, the debate has highlighted important questions about the direction of Nepal's legal development.

The strong opposition to the amendment demonstrates Nepal's commitment to gender equality and women's rights. However, it also reveals the ongoing challenges in addressing complex social situations within a legal framework that prioritizes equal rights and constitutional principles.

Moving forward, Nepal's legal system must continue to evolve in ways that protect all citizens while upholding the fundamental principles of equality, justice, and human rights enshrined in its Constitution. The swift reversal of this controversial proposal shows that Nepal's democratic institutions and civil society remain vigilant guardians of these principles.

As Nepal continues to develop its legal framework, this episode serves as a reminder that any changes to marriage and family law must be approached with careful consideration of their broader implications for society, particularly for women and children who are often the most vulnerable in such arrangements.