6 January 2026
It is common for a federation to have a bi-cameral parliament. In its constitution of 2015, Nepal got a National Assembly (NA) in addition to the main chamber, the House of Representatives (HoR). In federations, the secondary chamber is often defined as the house of the provinces or states. In some instances, constituent member states of the federation are given equal powers and in others each voter is given equal weight. The powers of the secondary chamber vary a lot internationally, from the House of Lords in the UK with mainly delaying and reviewing powers to the US Senate which has (at least) the powers of the HoR. In other federations, such as Germany, the secondary chamber has powers within defined areas, such as in the relationship between the states and the centre.
To what degree the systems of representation are specified in the constitutions varies. In Nepal, however, the 2015 constitution has defined elections to the HoR, the provincial assemblies, and local governments in detail but is quiet on the NA. This means that the NA electoral system has been guided by regular laws, first by introducing the proportional system, the Single Transferrable Vote (STV), as per the National Assembly Member Election Ordinance 2017 and then with the STV disappearing as a result of the staggering of the terms in office when the National Assembly Members Election Act was passed after the 2018 elections (and last amended in 2019).
For a proportional system to work, more than one seat needs to be filled at the time. The Constitution specifies that eight members are elected from each of the seven provinces. It also specifies that out of the eight at least three have to be women, one Dalit, and one person with disability or representing a minority community. The remaining three are open for all. The 2017 Ordinance chose to elect each of the four groups separately, which meant that the two groups of three (women and open) were elected by STV and Dalits and disabled/minority by first-past-the-post (FPTP) since they were elected as single members. When the staggered periods were implemented, the two groups of three were divided into three separate elections and therefore all members were elected separately and STV could not be used. The National Assembly Members Election Act 2019 therefore only specifies FPTP.
Powers of the National Assembly
When considering the system of representation, one should evaluate the purpose and the powers of the NA, the needs of the federation, and the quality of the representation as a whole. In Nepal, it seems that the system came about more as the result of a technicality than after careful consideration.
A parliament has mainly three roles: passing legislation, passing budgets, and installing and reviewing the government. It is the HoR that is responsible for the last task. Together with the provincial assemblies, both houses are part of the electoral college electing the President, who has mainly ceremonial tasks. For bills though the rules are more complex.
A bill (apart from money bills) may be introduced in the HoR or the NA and if passed in both is sent to the President for assent. Either house may make amendments to the draft and in case of disagreements the HoR may force its version through. If the NA insists on its version of bills originating there, it is passed on to a joint session, where the NA has 59 members and the HoR has 275 members. Money bills are proposed by the government and presented to the HoR first. Such bills are then sent to the NA but it is up to the HoR to approve or reject their suggestions. In conclusion, the HoR has the last say regarding laws and budgets.
Constitutional changes may be introduced in any house. If it concerns the boundaries between provinces or the list of exclusive powers of the province, the concerned provincial assembly or assemblies have to pass the bill by a majority of its members. If it is approved, or if a constitution amendment bill does not need to be sent to the provinces, it is passed by a two-third majority in both houses combined. This means that 223 members voting in favour of a change can pass the bill. The NA, therefore, has little say on constitutional changes.
The Composition
The NA has eight members from each of the seven provinces and three are appointed by the President on the recommendation of the government, making 59 in total. Out of the three appointed by the President at least one needs to be a woman.
The equal number from each province has been controversial. Especially from Madhesh Province with a high population protests are heard with suggestions of representation in proportion to the population. Article 25 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ratified by Nepal in 1991) requires that elections be by equal suffrage. In some areas, the Article has been qualified to mean at least one of the chambers in case of a bicameral parliament and in general it seems to refer to the principal chamber, the one with power. The Covenant does not make exceptions for federations. In Nepal, there can be no doubt that with the division of powers, the equality of the vote is covered, even if there is no equality of the voters to the NA. One has decided instead that for the NA there is an equality of the provinces.
The System of Representation
The electoral college electing the members of the NA from a province consists of the members of the provincial assembly and mayors/chairpersons and deputy mayors/vice-chairpersons of local governments, with different weights given to the two groups of voters. The sum of the weights from the province assemblies is the same as the sum of the weights from the municipalities. The term in office of the NA is six years, and they are elected every two years with staggered periods. In the first election in 2018 all the NA members were elected and lots were drawn to decide which seats should be vacated after two years and after four years and who should sit the full period. The Constitution says that the tenure of a third of the members expires every two years and the seats are to be filled in the same manner as how those vacating were elected. The system of representation is not regulated by the Constitution, which is quite unusual since all other systems—even for local bodies which had not been mentioned in the Interim Constitution—are regulated in much detail.
The government issued an ordinance for the first NA election specifying that the STV will be used. This system had been introduced for the NA elections by the 1990 Constitution. It was at the time inspired by the election of India’s upper house of parliament, the Rajya Sabha, which is elected by STV. The STV is a proportional election system without party lists. Voters rank all the candidates in order of preference, and each voter may choose what dimension is more important to them, e.g. gender, ethnic group, geography, etc. If all voters vote according to political party preference, the result would be close to List PR.
STV was applied to the two groups of three: three women and the three open to all from each province. The Dalit and the disabled/minority representative were elected by FPTP. When drawing lots on which seats should be vacated it was decided to divide the groups of three so that for each province one woman was to be elected every two years, and it was the same with the open seats. As per the 2019 Act, that meant that all seats had to now be filled by FPTP only.
When interviewing political leaders in 2025 no one seemed to be aware that the strategy chosen for staggering the terms in office also meant that the electoral system had changed from STV to FPTP only. Apparently, there was no discussion about this at the time the rules were changed. When, in fact, while drawing lots on which third should vacate at each election one could have chosen not to split the groups of three. In that way one would also have honoured the rule that the vacancies be filled by the same system as those leaving the house.
Figure 1 shows the way it was done, and Figure 2 how it could have been done.
The question is whether one would like to have proportional election (in terms of parties) or a winner-takes-all system. If the NA is to have a role in protecting minorities it seems that one should at least discuss re-introducing a PR system. This could be done by electing the all of the two to four seats from a province in one go, with quotas for women, Dalits, and the disabled or minority, and this could easily be worked in either through the List PR, which is the familiar system in Nepal, or the STV.
Balancing the Powers and the Representation
In federations, the secondary chamber is often defined as the house of the provinces. That would mean that the house has particular roles regarding the authorities of the provinces, and perhaps also in protecting the rights of minorities. In Nepal, the equal numbers from each province indicates that the NA is meant to protect the powers of the provinces but the authority given to the NA does not necessarily indicate the same.
The question is then what electoral system would be most suitable for the NA. Should it be FPTP, which gives a big advantage to the biggest party, or should it be a proportional system, which would produce a more representative result? The NA is the chamber of the provinces. In some countries like Germany, all the representatives from a state vote with a mandate from the state government. In other places, such as India, the state is represented by a political diversity. Generally, in a divided society it is important that no group are left out at any level of government. Each province of Nepal has a diverse population in terms of politics and ethnicity. Therefore, a representative delegation to the NA from a province may be desirable.
