Between Eclipse and Resistance: Experiences of Autonomy among the Indigenous Peoples of Nepal

Written on 31 August 2025. Posted in Nepal

BY KRISHNA B. BHATTACHAN FOR INDIGENOUS DEBATES

Indigenous Peoples in Nepal are experiencing a profound tragedy. Where they once enjoyed full autonomy and sovereignty, the past 250 years have brought a steady erosion of these rights. Today, they are fighting to reclaim their autonomy and assert their right to self-determination. Although they have made gains on some fronts, they have also faced bitter setbacks on others. The future of customary self-governance and the exercise of self-determination will depend on new generations of Indigenous Peoples—on what they choose to do or fail to do.

The 59 officially recognized Indigenous Peoples of Nepal, and a few not yet recognized enjoyed sovereignty, self-determination, autonomy, customary self-governance, and custodianship of ancestral lands, territories, and resources unfettered until the arrival of Hindu caste groups and the subsequent colonization of Indigenous Peoples resulted in the loss of autonomy, in waves.

The first wave was the mass migration of Hindu Bahun-Chetri groups into the hill regions following the Muslim invasion of northern India after the 14th century, along with the introduction of the caste system among the Indigenous Newar people by King Jayasthiti Malla. The second wave was the colonization led by King Prithvi Narayan Shah in the 18th century, which resulted in the loss of the sovereignty and autonomy of Indigenous Peoples along with state land grabbing. A third wave came with the introduction of Hindu jurisprudence through the enactment of Nepal’s first civil code in 1854, which classified Indigenous Peoples as liquor-drinking castes within the Hindu hierarchy, further dividing them into masinya (enslavable) and namasinya (non-enslavable) categories.

A fourth wave came with the nationalization of forests in 1956 and the abolition of the Kipat communal land tenure system in 1963. A fifth wave followed in the 1970s with the introduction of the fortress model of conservation since the 1970s with establishment of national parks, wildlife reserves, hunting ground, conservation areas, and community forests. Finally, the sixth wave was marked by the application of the doctrine of eminent domain and increasing aggression in the name of development from the 1970s onward.

From Dispossession to Resistance

Over the past 250 years, the state has expropriated the lands, territories, and resources of Indigenous Peoples through violence, warfare, treaties, and land seizures without recognition of ownership—applying doctrines similar to terra nullius (“land belonging to no one”) and the regalian doctrine (“royal jurisdiction”). In response, Indigenous Nepalis are fighting to reclaim their lands and resume their role as stewards. Yet this struggle is not only uphill—it has become a prolonged and invisible war, one that has consumed several generations and may continue to consume many more.

Before 1951, resistance against the state began with uprisings by the Yakthung (Limbu), Magar, Tamang, Tamu (Gurung), and Sherpa peoples against the autocratic Rana regime, as well as with the establishment of the Tharu Kalyankari Sabha by the Tharu Indigenous people in 1950. During the autocratic, partyless Panchayat regime (1960–1990), Indigenous resistance continued through the Setamagurali movement. Later, Indigenous Peoples participated in the Maoist People’s War (1996–2006), demanding autonomy and the right to self-determination, including the right to secede. However, the Maoist party failed to deliver on its promises during the drafting and promulgation of the 2015 Constitution.

In particular, the Yakthung (Limbu) and Tharu intensified their struggle for autonomy, but were brutally repressed by the government. As a result, the revival of their unfinished agenda has gained new momentum. Today, Indigenous Peoples are divided into three main groups: those who continue to fight tirelessly for autonomy with self-determination, customary self-governance, and stewardship of their lands, territories, and resources; those who are members and leaders of mainstream political parties—dominated by majority caste groups—who strongly oppose this movement; and an intermediate group that cannot abandon its Indigenous identity or collective rights, yet does not actively pursue autonomy and self-governance. Instead, they settle for cultural rights, including cultural autonomy.

The Peaceful Struggles of Indigenous Nepalis

In recent years, Nepal’s Indigenous Peoples have engaged in a range of struggles to strengthen their processes of autonomy. Although the outcomes have been varied, these efforts show that the aspiration for self-determination remains very much alive.

• During the first term of the elected Constituent Assembly between 2008 and 2012, Indigenous Peoples formed an Indigenous Caucus that effectively raised the issue of autonomous, protected, and special areas for Indigenous communities. After the deliberate demise of the first CA, the IP caucus was prohibited in the second CA, and subsequently, the movement for autonomy ceased to exist.
• The Tharu of Baridya began to legally recognize Barghar customary self-governance system by enacting a law by the Baridya Municipality. Later, other municipalities also formally recognized Barghar by their respective local governments.
• The Newa people declared the Newa Autonomous State in 2009, although they have faced problems in implementing it. The Kiritipur Municipality enacted a law declaring the Cultural Autonomy of Kirtipur.
• The Newa of Kathmandu valley (their ancestral land), protested against the government bill to kill their customary self-governing institution Guthi by merging it with religious endowments of various Hindu religious institutions.
• The Tharu succeeded in enacting a law in Morang declaring Gramthan as their sacred site.
• After declaring Dhorpatan Wildlife Hunting Ground on Magar Kham’s ancestral land without obtaining Free, Prior and Informed Consent (FPIC), the community strongly protested declaring communities as “buffer zones” around the Hunting Ground. They come face to face with armed police and the Nepal Army who seek to establish a military base on the region.  
• The Majhi Indigenous Peoples are protesting against the Marin Diversion, and Sunkoshi-3 Hydropower projects in Ramechap and the diversion of water resources towards the Marin river.
• The Khambu (Rai) Indigenous Peoples protested the government’s plan to break a stone rock called Khuwalung lying in the Koshi River, which they consider a sacred site. Due to mounting pressure from the community, the government finally pulled back.

Five Cases of Violent Struggles

At the beginning, many Indigenous Peoples, especially Magar, Tharu, Tamang, Tamu (Gurung), Majhi, Khambu (Rai) and Yakthung (Limbu) were the pillars of the People’s Liberation Army of the CPN Maoist, which waged People’s War from 1996 to 2006 against. This was a class-based movement led by non-Indigenous Peoples. It resulted in the death of 17,000 but the Maoists have abandoned the promised autonomy for Indigenous Peoples with the right to self-determination and the right to secede.

Secondly, on 24 August 2015, thousands of Tharu community members publicly demonstrated in their ancestral lands demanding a separate Tharuhat/Tharuwan autonomous province that was denied by the Constitution of Nepal promulgated in 2015 without obtaining free, prior and informed consent from Indigenous Peoples. Police fired tear gas into crowds and the crowd responded by attacking the police and killing eight of them. In retaliation, the police carried out arbitrary arrests, detentions, torture, and ill-treatment against members of the Indigenous Tharu community, accusing them of murder, attempted murder, and robbery. According to the Amnesty International report “Nepal: Torture and Coerced Confessions – Human Rights Violations of Indigenous Tharus after the August 2015 Police Killings in Kailali”, released on 19 July 2016, the detainees were forced to sign confessions under coercion.

One Yakthung (Limbu) demonstrator was killed and two sustained bullet injuries by the security personnel during the No Koshi movement in Biratnagar. Earlier, two Indigenous Peoples were killed by the security personnel during the Limbuwan autonomy movement. Armed police forces used prohibited bullets, rubber bullets, tear gas, water cannons and batons against the demonstrators.

In the same vein, during the “No Cable Car” movement or Save Mukkumlung movement, two persons received bullet wounds to the chest close to a lung, a broken thigh, broken shoulder bone from hitting with the butt of the gun, broken hands and deep neck wounds from Khukuri (big “Gurkha” knives). Injuries were also caused by baton charges and hurling stones, and police and vigilantes inflicting torture on children, women, family members and guests throughout the night. All of this occurred as the government armed police force backed the construction of a cable car on the sacred site Mukkumlung in the Yakthung community of Limbu.

Finally, in Bojeni, located close to the Kathmandu Valley, armed police threatened to shoot at Tamang women who are fighting against the construction of a high voltage electricity station. The community has been terrorized by the security personnel and threatened with eviction. What has transpired from these past and ongoing conflicts between Indigenous Peoples and the State is that if the government is determined to use excessive force including gun shots, crimes against humanity, human rights violations, and cultural genocide just to protect a cable car project of a private business company, how far they could go if Indigenous Peoples declare their autonomy or rebel by raising arms?

Hurdles in Realizing Autonomy

There are both external and internal hurdles in the realization of autonomy in Nepal. External hurdles include continued and intensifying racism, colonization, Brahmanism (domination of people belonging to the Hill Hindu Bahun caste group who comprise not more than 12 % of the total 30 million population of Nepal), Hinduization, Sanskritization, militarization, globalization, criminalization, and Hindu patriarchy.

The main internal hurdles include Bansha Gaddar (Clan traitors), “blue eyed boys” (and girls) cadres, followers and leaders of the main political parties controlled and led by the leaders belonging to the dominant caste groups, captive-minded Indigenous Peoples, and the disconnection between the younger generation from elders. In this sense, it is said that Indigenous Peoples know how to “give”: give lands, give territories, give resources, give blood but do not know how to take from others. In contrast, the people belonging to the dominant caste know how to take from others without giving back anything. Even “modern” education, foreign employment, prominent religions, mass media, and many other factors are adding fuel to the fire in degrading the autonomy of Indigenous Peoples.

People from the dominant group never tire of discussing democracy, federalism, rule of law, justice, and human rights. Still, their mindset, policies, actions, and practices are the opposite. For Indigenous Peoples, they are nothing but colonizers, predators, development aggressors, dictators, anti-federalists, and anti-Indigenous Peoples. They make the rules of the game and adopt them if they win, but reject them if they lose, creating a new game rule and repeating the same vicious cycle.

A Ray of Hope

There is a ray of hope, which is the meaningful implementation of national and international commitments to autonomy and self-determination. Though the Indigenous Peoples’ movement has disowned the Constitution of Nepal of 2015 for being racist and predatory to Indigenous Peoples, its Article 56(5) states that law would be enacted for autonomous, special, and protected areas. The Supreme Court of Nepal issued a directive order for its meaningful implementation in line with the international commitments. However, the government has not demonstrated any clear advancement in these areas.

Similarly, the Nepalese government ratified the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW) and ILO Convention No. 169 and adopted United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP) and CEDAW General Recommendation N. 39. CEDAW committee made recommendations to the state party Nepal in 2018, and in 2025 to amend the Constitution of Nepal in line with the UNDRIP to explicitly recognize the right to self-determination of Indigenous Peoples and all the rights of indigenous Women. If CEDAW recommendations are sincerely and meaningfully implemented in Nepal, Indigenous Peoples could live in their collective ways in Shangri-La.

Following these advances, Indigenous Peoples’ fight for recognition of the right to self-determination with autonomy and customary self-government at the international level is no longer required. Its application in Nepal is needed, which has not been easy since the 15th century. The present generation of Indigenous Peoples in Nepal is at a crossroads, one leading to the realization of autonomy and the other, the definitive disappearance of Nepalese Indigenous Peoples.

Krishna B. Bhattachan is Nepal’s leading sociologist and a passionate Indigenous activist scholar. He is one of the founding faculty members and the former Head of the Department of Sociology & Anthropology at Tribhuvan University in Nepal. After retirement, he has been an advisor and expert at the Lawyers’ Association for Human Rights of Nepalese Indigenous Peoples (LAHURNIP). Dr. Bhattachan can be reached at This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.

Cover photo: Gathering of women from the Chepang people. Photo: Signe Leth / Iwgia

Tags: Indigenous Debates