In the recently concluded House of Representatives elections, 101 representatives (61.21 percent) from the Khas-Arya community were directly elected, while only 1 representative (0.61 percent) from the Dalit community was elected. Similarly, out of the total 110 seats in the proportional representation, only 17 Dalits were elected from various parties.

According to the National Census 2078, the Dalit community constitutes 13.4 percent of the population in Nepal. However, through this election, the total presence of Dalits in the 275-member House of Representatives is limited to a mere 6.18 percent. This highlights the fact that the political representation of the Dalit community is still very low and unbalanced in proportion to the population.

Although the journey of Dalit representation in Nepali politics began with numerical reforms, it is now entangled in a structural 'syndicate'. During the parliamentary period from 2048 to 2056, only one person (Krishna Singh Pariyar) reached the House of Representatives, which showed the pitiful condition of Dalits. Although the first Constituent Assembly in 2064 had 49 members, since then this number has been continuously declining and has now shrunk to 17.

The current data presents a frightening picture of representation. Of the total 17 Dalit MPs, 88 percent (15) are from the Bishwakarma (Kami/Lohar/Sunar) community, while there are only 1/1 from the Pariyar and Badi communities. The most surprising aspect is that the number of Madhesi Dalits is zero out of the total 17. This confirms that only the Pahari Dalits and even then a specific sub-caste have political influence.

The proportional system, which should be a tool for inclusion, has become a means of obtaining 'double benefits' and establishing those with access. The presence of Dalits, who constitute 13.4 percent of the population, is limited to 6.18 percent in parliament and the absence of Madhesi Dalits in that too has undermined inclusion.

The proportional system, which should be a tool for inclusion, has become a means of obtaining 'double benefits' and establishing those with access. The presence of Dalits, who constitute 13.4 percent of the population, is limited to 6.18 percent in parliament, and the absence of Madhesi Dalits in that too has undermined inclusiveness. The Madhesi community is a community that has historically been discriminated against and oppressed by the hill-centric state. The glorious Madhesh movement established a meaningful presence and identity of Madhesh before the state, but the ‘Madhesh Dalit’ has always been overlooked in the priorities of the Madhesh-centric parties and leadership that have climbed the ladder of power.

Madhesh Dalits, like other Madhesh citizens, are not only facing regional oppression, but they are also victims of ethnic oppression from the so-called higher caste community within Madhesh itself. This situation is called ‘double marginalization’ in political science.

In the recently concluded elections to the House of Representatives, political parties raised the issue of Madhesh with great priority. The center of the electoral agitation was Madhesh. Some newly formed parties even achieved encouraging success based on the public opinion of Madhesh. Ironically, no major party dared to field Madheshi Dalits directly as candidates, nor did they ensure their fair representation through the proportional system.

Even in the inclusive structure of the state, the single caste dominance of the Pahari Dalits within the ‘Dalit cluster’ persists, while the presence of Madheshi Dalits within the ‘Madheshi cluster’ is almost zero. This confirms that Madheshi Dalits are still marginalized by the state and society on the basis of both geography and caste.

Indian writer and thinker Javed Akhtar says – ‘The structure of Hindu society is such that every person wants someone to be below him.’ This psychological truth is also reflected in the internal caste structure within the Dalit community.

From a political and social perspective, there is a tendency for the castes on the ‘upper’ rung of the Dalit ladder (especially Kami/Vishwakarma) to try to prove themselves superior to other Dalits. If we are to evaluate the achievements of the entire Dalit movement, even in the limited opportunities received, this relatively ‘accessible’ section has the highest grip.

There has been a change in the power structure within the Dalit community in recent times, but it is not fair. A few limited people who are economically powerful are monopolizing all the resources and opportunities. For example, characters like Prakash Saput or Rima Vishwakarma are socially prominent today due to their social and economic status. Their ‘celebrity’ image and social capital have worked more than their political contribution in the opportunities they have received. What this makes clear is that even among Dalits, those who are economically and socially ahead get a place in the forefront of opportunities, while the truly ‘disadvantaged’ Dalits are always silenced and marginalized.

The dignity of the proportional representation principle
The main idea of ​​the proportional representation system envisioned by the Constitution of Nepal was to bring Dalits, indigenous peoples, Madhesis, Tharus, Muslims and citizens of backward areas who were marginalized from the mainstream of the state to the center of governance. However, in practice, this system seems to be more distorted than ‘proportional’ and becoming a safe haven for the privileged. Since Dalit representation is constitutionally binding, there is a numerical certainty, but this is limited to the ‘ritualistic’ practice of carrying out the process. Instead of ensuring fair representation of geography and various sub-castes within Dalits within the proportional representation principle, the parties have made it a means of fulfilling only technical needs.

Out of the 17 MPs representing the Dalit community, 14 are women and only 3 are men (Khagendra Sunar, Prakash Chandra Darji and Ganesh Bahadur BK). Although this shows a numerical presence of Dalit women of 82 percent, they were elected through the proportional system. Out of the 17 MPs representing the Dalit community, 14 are women and only 3 are men (Khagendra Sunar, Prakash Chandra Darji and Ganesh Bahadur BK). Although this shows the numerical presence of Dalit women at 82 percent, they were elected through the proportional representation system. The constitution mandates at least 33 percent female participation in the federal parliament, but political parties have been extremely stingy in fielding both Dalit and female candidates in direct elections.