LGBT case laws in Nepal
Script error: No such module "AfC submission catcheck".
Suman Pant V. Ministry of Home Affairs et al.[edit]
The case of Suman Pant V. Ministry of Home Affairs et al. reached its verdict on 2017 Oct 23. In this case, Suman Pant, a Nepali citizen married Leslie Luin Melnik, an American citizen in California, US. Suman Pant's partner was denied of spousal visa in Nepal as it does not recognize same-sex marriage. A petition was filed by Suman Pant at the Supreme Court of Nepal demanding for approval of spousal visa for her partner. The court ruled that it was unconstitutional to deny Suman Pant's partner from spousal visa.[1][2][3]
Precedence[edit]
- The terms person and citizen in the constitution are gender neutral, therefore fundamental rights are extended to everyone.
- In light to the broader human rights laws and fundamental rights guaranteed by our constitution, all forms of discrimination against gender and sexual minorities, be it an action or an omission, seems illegal.[1]
Aanik Rana et al. V. Government of Nepal et al.[edit]
The case of Aanik Rana et al. V. Government of Nepal et al. reached its verdict on 2017 Jan 23. Aanik Rana was denied of receiving a third gender citizenship certificate. The District Administration Office of Nawalparasi district demanded a medical certification determining her as third gender. They petitioned at the Supreme Court to ensure their right to gender identity. The court ruled that gender identity was a subject to self determination.[4]
Precedence[edit]
- Anyone to be able to live as per their gender identity is absolutely their personal right to self determination.[4]
Dilu Buduja V. Department of Passport et al.[edit]
The case of Dilu Buduja V. Department of Passport et al. reached its verdict on 2013 June 10. Dilu Buduja could not receive a passport since they had a citizenship certificate as third gender and the Department of Passport only offered male or female as options in passport. The court quashed the petition stating that the petitioner seems to have not submitted the passport form officially and had not challenged the law being inconsistent with the constitution, while Passport Regulations, 2010 did not have a provision for a third gender passports. However, the court also ruled through a directive order that the government should amend the passport laws to allow a third gender passport.[5]
Precedence[edit]
- There can be no question in providing a third gender passport.
- MRP passports are not only a concern of one country but an international document so any changes in this document should take notice on how it impacts in other places.[5]
Rajani Shahi V. National Women Commission et al.[edit]
The case of Rajani Shahi V. National Women Commission et al. saw its verdict on 2012 November 5. In this case, Rajani Shahi was married to a man, however realized her sexuality after her marriage and stayed in relationship with another woman Prem Kumari Nepali. Rajani Shahi was captured by her husband's family. Organizers like Maiti Nepal and National Women Commission treated her like disordered. Her partner Prem Kumari Nepali filed a petition of habeas corpus.[6]
Precedence[edit]
- Sexual orientation cannot be restricted.
- A husband cannot limit the personal rights and freedom of a wife on basis of marriage.[6]
Sunil Babu Pant et al. V. Government of Nepal et al.[edit]
The case of Sunil Babu Pant et al. V. Government of Nepal et al. was the first LGBTI case law in Nepal.[7][8][9]
Precedence[edit]
- Third genders cannot be discriminated.
- Sexual intercourse between consenting adults cannot be deemed unnatural.
- The state should formulate new laws for third genders and amend the existing ones that are discriminatory of third genders.[7]
Petitions currently under consideration[edit]
See also[edit]
References[edit]
- ↑ 1.0 1.1 "निर्णय नं. ९९२१ - उत्प्रेषण / परमादेश". Nepal Law Gazette. Supreme Court of Nepal. Retrieved 9 October 2022.
- ↑ "Suman Panta v. Ministry of Home Affairs et. al" (PDF). Pradhan, Ghimire & Associates Pvt. Ltd. Pradhan, Ghimire & Associates Pvt. Ltd. Retrieved 9 October 2022.
- ↑ "How one couple navigated the Nepali bureaucracy to pursue recognition". School for International Training. School for International Training. Retrieved 9 October 2022.
- ↑ 4.0 4.1 "निर्णय नं. ९८७५ - परमादेश". Nepal Law Gazette. Supreme Court of Nepal. Retrieved 9 October 2022.
- ↑ 5.0 5.1 "निर्णय नं. ९०४८ - परमादेश". Nepal Law Gazette. Supreme Court of Nepal. Retrieved 9 October 2022.
- ↑ 6.0 6.1 "निर्णय नं. ८९४५ - बन्दीप्रत्यक्षीकरण". Nepal Law Gazette. Supreme Court of Nepal. Retrieved 9 October 2022.
- ↑ 7.0 7.1 "निर्णय नं. ७९५८ - उत्प्रेषण, परमादेश, प्रतिषेध लगायत जो चाहिने आज्ञा आदेश वा पुर्जी जारी". Nepal Law Gazette. Supreme Court of Nepal. Retrieved 9 October 2022.
- ↑ "SUNIL BABU PANT VS. NEPAL GOVERNMENT". Centre for Law & Policy Research. Centre for Law & Policy Research. Retrieved 10 September 2022.
- ↑ "Sunil Babu Pant et al. V. Government of Nepal et al" (PDF). NJA Law Journal. National Judicial Academy, Nepal.
External Links[edit]
- Official verdict of Suman Pant V. Ministry of Home Affairs et al. (in Nepali)
- Official verdict of Aanik Rana et al. V. Government of Nepal et al. (in Nepali)
- Official verdict of Dilu Buduja V. Department of Passport et al. (in Nepali)
- Official verdict of Rajani Shahi V. National Women Commission et al. (in Nepali)
- Official verdict of Sunil Babu Pant et al. V. Government of Nepal et al. (in Nepali)
Category:LGBT rights case law of Nepal Category:Supreme Court of Nepal cases
This article "LGBT case laws in Nepal" is from Wikipedia. The list of its authors can be seen in its historical and/or the page Edithistory:LGBT case laws in Nepal. Articles copied from Draft Namespace on Wikipedia could be seen on the Draft Namespace of Wikipedia and not main one.
