Right to Housing in Nepal
Housing has been one of the highlights of constitutional schemes on fundamental rights in Nepal, setting an ambitious target of providing homes for homeless and needy citizens.
The parliament enacted the Right to Housing Act (2018) to implement Article 37 of the constitution, which guarantees every person the right to appropriate housing.
From non-deprivation of the right to housing to its preservation, from negative to positive content, the right to life has been fundamentally transformed by the magical wand of progressive fundamental rights embodied under the constitution.
This extension in the dimensions of the right to live with dignity has been made possible by ensuring an extended meaning to the world’s life and liberty in Article 16.
These are organic terms, that have to be liberally constructed so as to mean that right to life is something more than mere survival and more existence.
In this respect, the constitution of Nepal guarantees all those aspects of life that make life meaningful, complete, and worth living.
Although the magnitude of the right to housing would depend upon the available resources, the legislation stands as a lamppost that shows a vivid path to realize the right to shelter and housing.
Which do not necessarily mean a mere right to a roof over one’s head but the right to own a home where a person has opportunity mean a mere right to a roof over one’s head.
But the right to own a home where a person has opportunities to grow physically, mentally and spiritually.
The preamble of the Right to Housing Act mentions that the legislation has been brought into force to guarantee every homeless citizen an appropriate house.
Section 3 provides a bundle of rights to citizens that include the right to safe housing and the right to protect and promote religious, social, and cultural identity.
The law of right to housing recognizes that the quality and safety of homes is closely associated with health.
The Act has a plethora of provisions that supplement cooperative federalism.
The fair corpus of legal mandates is intended to give a message that the objectives the legislation has intended to achieve cannot be fulfilled unless there is close coordination and cooperation among the three spheres of government.
The Act has a good deal of provisions that empower the local bodies to take steps in achieving the cherished goals.
Section 9 directs the local bodies to prepare a list of homeless citizens in their respective jurisdiction, and the succeeding clause (Section 10) envisages that local bodies would provide identity cards to the persons so enlisted.
In this way, the legislation authorizes the local government to conduct the groundwork and pave the way for the provincial government duty-bound to coordinate with the local bodies while expediting any plans and policies regarding the right to housing.
The federal and provincial governments are required to allocate budgets and arrange manpower so required to enforce the provisions, while the responsibility to implement the law lies on local bodies.
This arrangement, thus, supplements the concept of cooperative federalism plus bargaining space in the sense that the law provides ample opportunity for the provincial governments to negotiate with the federal government for the allocation of budget as well as human resources.
It can also be said that local bodies have the right to implementation, while the provincial and federal governments have concurrent (shared) jurisdiction over the resource or budget allocation.
As of late, the federal countries, like India, are found spearheading the notion of bargaining federalism by giving sufficient opportunity to the second and third tiers of the government to negotiate with the center for the ‘proper’ allocation of budget and resources.