The history of the LGBTQIA+ community in Nepal does not date back much. However, there have been many strides in these two and a half decades. Our nation, rather small, carries a tumultuous history. The ever-changing socio-political landscapes have impacted the visibility, legal rights, and social acceptance of the community.
The journey through political changes, landmark socio-political movements, and legal decisions has been shaped by decades of grassroots activism and advocacy. This article explores these pivotal moments while reflecting on the contributions of Bhumika Shrestha, a key figure in Nepal’s LGBTQIA+ movement.
Bhumika, who identifies as a transgender woman, has been associated with the Blue Diamond Society (BDS) since 2004. She was around 16 or 17 years old and had joined as a volunteer then. It became a turning point in her life. Since then, she has dedicated herself to advocating for the rights and issues pertaining to gender and sexual minorities in Nepal.
Bhumika Shrestha, a transgender activist with the Blue Diamond Society. (Image: Facebook)
An influential voice in the LGBTQIA+ movement in Nepal, Bhumika currently oversees two major projects aimed at empowering LGBTQIA+ individuals across the nation.
“One of the projects I manage focuses on human rights in all seven provinces. We collaborate with federal, provincial, and local governments to create inclusive policies and ensure health-related rights for the LGBTQIA+ community,” she adds.
And there has been progress over the years. Well, some. The nation does get coveted as being “queer-friendly” but that’s mostly from non-Nepalis. For natives, like Bhumika, challenges still remain, ever since she remembers.
“I faced many personal challenges related to my identity and family expectations, but I slowly opened up and embraced my identity. There were initial struggles with societal norms and family reactions, but with time, I found my path,” Bhumika recalls her past.
After joining BDS, Bhumika became deeply involved in advocacy work. Eventually, she found friends and connected with others from the community. Her passion for creating spaces for LGBTQIA+ individuals in Nepal grew stronger.
“There was little awareness about rights among the community. When we raised our voices, we didn’t know how to speak or address the issues properly,” Bhumika thinks of the early days, and adds, “Society used derogatory terms and slurs. The environment was not accepting, even in schools.”
Her lived experiences echo a reality for many folks from the community. It does get challenging to even understand and accept yourself when you do not have an accepting space around you.
The Monarchy Era and The Maoist Insurgency
Speaking of spaces where marginalised communities are invisibilised, the nation’s time during the monarchy does take a front seat. Although Bhumika started her advocacy work after the monarchy was abolished, she does think voicing for LGBTQIA+ rights did exist during the kingship.
“It’s not like people like me did not exist then. It is just that no one could make initiatives to bring our cause to the forefront,” Bhumika goes on to add, “With very few openly queer people then, the issues did not reach the general public, so there was no traction at all. Even if there were movements, they never became mainstream.”
The rigid social structures that strengthened the monarchy pushed LGBTQIA+ issues to the brink of invisibility. Activism was probably done in hushed or secret manners. This more than likely resulted in the Blue Diamond Society emerging as an organisation in 2001 to advocate for change in the existing laws and the rights of gender and sexual minorities.
The Maoist insurgency, ongoing at that time, also introduced additional hassles to the community. The Nepal army set up check posts at different places for surveillance, which brought traumatic confrontations.
“With no provisions for changing gender markers in citizenship, a lot of friends from the community got cross-examined because their appearance didn’t match the gender marker on their ID cards. They were accused of being spies and what not,” Bhumika scratches her jarring memory.
The Restoration of Democracy
Then came the revolution in 2006, the People’s Movement II to restore democracy in the nation. LGBTQIA+ people from different backgrounds too joined the movement of political agitation against the direct rule of King Gyanendra at that time.
Another reason for partaking in the revolt was due to the mass appeal of being hurt or injured while fighting the system. “If some of us got our hands or legs broken in a nationwide uprising, then there is also a high chance of our issues being noticed. The public would not notice our direct or indirect participation otherwise,” Bhumika lays out the harsh reality.
Soon, the 19-day-long revolutionary people’s movement led to the abolishment of the 240-year-old monarchy. This meant a lot for everyone, but even more for the marginalised communities. A return to democracy where people would be able to exercise their rights and engage with political institutions.
Sadly, the reality was rather anticlimactic. While democracy did open doors for advocacy, it came along with its own set of challenges. No movements existed then where the LGBTQIA+ community was positively politicised. Community representation alone was almost nonexistent in political platforms or manifestos.
“Political parties and their leaders were oblivious about LGBTQIA+ rights and movements. Even those who had come to Nepal after spending years studying abroad,” Bhumika looks back at the startling unawareness.
Delegations to political leaders barely yielded results, as the focus was more on traditional gender roles and the majority population.
“When the Maoists came to power after the 10-year-long Civil War, we sent delegations to all the places seeking opportunities. The Ne Ka Pa Samyukta party offered one seat for a constituent assembly member. At that time, no other political parties included us,” Bhumika expands on what transpired. “Folks from the community did join Congress, UML, and Maoist, all major parties, despite the unwelcoming environment. We had realised that our lives are political and our issues hadto be raised.”
Besides, leaders used community folks as political pawns to gain votes and totally abandoned what they had assured once they won the election. The political landscape remained largely indifferent to community issues during the democratic transition. The reform promised equality, but the broader political debates did not focus on them.
Albeit acknowledging the need to address LGBTQIA+ issues because of awareness programmes by BDS, political leaders were visibly reluctant to address the concerns of the community struggling with invisibility and recognition.
Recounting one of several discouraging encounters, Bhumika remembers a derisive remark by a senior political leader: “It took over 30 years to raise and address women’s issues in Nepal. The LGBTQIA+ movement has just begun, so you’ll have to wait.”
Prior to 2007, there was little room for advocacy or visibility. With looming societal stigma and nonexistent institutional support, LGBTQIA+ Nepalis lived in a society where their identities were neither recognised nor understood.
The 2007 Supreme Court Decision
A key moment in Nepal’s LGBTQIA+ history came on December 21, 2007, when the Supreme Court issued a landmark decision recognising the rights of sexual and gender minorities. It mandated the government to recognise gender diversity and include LGBTQIA+ rights in legislation.
“This decision by the Supreme Court did a lot to create awareness to some extent. Before that, we endured a lot of hassles from police and authorities. They were not ready to hear our concerns,” Bhumika narrates the change.
In 2007, the first Supreme Court judgment on sexual orientation and gender identity ordered the government to take three steps: review all laws and remove those that discriminate based on sexual orientation and gender identity; set up a committee to explore same-sex marriage options; and officially recognise a third gender category based on an individual’s self-identification.
However, the legal provisions still fall short in practice. Despite the framework prompted by the ruling, its implementation has been slow and uneven. Many individuals still face difficulties in securing gender recognition on official documents, and the social stigma surrounding identities of gender and sexual minorities remains deeply ingrained in society.
Subsequently, with the drafting of the 2015 Constitution, some changes began to take shape.
The 2015 Constitution
The drafting of Nepal’s 2015 Constitution marked another historic milestone. For the first time, a national constitution explicitly prohibited discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity. This was a significant achievement in the fight for equality, placing Nepal at the forefront of LGBTQIA+ rights in South Asia.
The Constitution specifically contains three articles that enshrine the protection and rights of LGBTQIA+ individuals.
Article 12 states that citizens will be allowed to choose their preferred gender identity on their citizenship document. The choices available are male, female, or other.
Article 18 states that gender and sexual minorities will not be discriminated against by the state and the judiciary in the application of laws. It further adds that the government may make special provisions through laws to protect, empower, and advance the rights of gender and sexual minorities and other marginalized and minority groups.
Article 42 lists gender and sexual minorities among the groups that have a right to participate in state mechanisms and public services to promote inclusion.
Despite the milestone, the Constitution’s promises remain largely unfulfilled in terms of implementation. Moreover, the laws on paper have taken a rather slower pace to reflect a broader societal context.
Socio-Political Attitudes Towards LGBTQIA+ Community
Pride 2024 (Image: Birat Bijay Ojha)
“Major political parties do not think of carrying our issues forward. And small parties that do align with our concerns do not gain enough votes to get the seats in parliament,” Bhumika continues to voice her grievances. “Social attitudes have not shifted enough to ensure that the rights guaranteed on paper are fully realised.”
What unfolded at the Kathmandu Youth Conclave in August 2024 encapsulates Bhumika’s sentiment. When asked about how the then Prime Minister KP Sharma Oli will ensure necessary implementation and amendments to safeguard LGBTQIA+ rights, the PM responded, saying he is unaware of gender and sexual minorities, but he does believe in gender equality.
Surprisingly, the PM, one for equal rights, does not understand marriage between the same gender, at the same time. Along with the PM’s uninformed, rather simply insensitive remarks given his position, the shameless cheer from the young audience was disappointing as well—a stark reminder of the general Nepali dismissive or ignorant attitudes on the subject of same-sex marriage.
As it seems, the court order, while it’s a victory, is yet to become a socio-political transformation.
This article is based on a conversation with Bhumika Shrestha, a transgender activist with the Blue Diamond Society.
Birat Bijay Ojha
