Nepal's new Cabinet under Prime Minister KP Sharma Oli highlights a severe underrepresentation of women in public position, with just two women making it to the 22-member Council of Ministers. This marks a regression from the previous term, when women held four out of 20 positions, which is already a low number. Such invisibilisation of women is concerning in a country where women comprise 51.1 percent of the population.

The current composition of the Cabinet raises serious questions about Nepal and the newly appointed government's commitment to gender equality and social inclusion (GESI). It is not only the women who have been sidelined; there are no Dalits in Oli’s Cabinet.

The recent appointments suggest that our political leaders no longer attempt to maintain the "illusion of inclusion" or "tokenistic representation", given that women’s representation in the Cabinet dropped from a low 20 percent to a concerning 9 percent. It reflects a serious lack of power position for women in political decision-making. If women still lack visible power in such leadership positions, is there any hope of an invisible or hidden power working in their favour?

A mirage of inclusion

Historically, Nepali women’s exclusion from open spaces of power has been a common practice, with numerous women leaders having to fight battles against patriarchal norms. Women have struggled for the right to vote, inherit property, or even join the so-called male-dominated professions like politics. The exclusion of women representatives from political spaces further undermines their ability to claim any space. If women are continually shut out from high-level positions such as the Cabinet of Ministers, it is unlikely that hopeful youth can see meaningful representation.

This situation sends an extremely disheartening message to young women who aspire to join political leadership in a federal and democratic Nepal. The fact that the political ambitions of many women may be unattainable in a system that perpetuates patriarchy and misogyny is severely demoralising.

A power cube framework explains that women can access power in certain spaces, forms and levels while others remain inaccessible. In terms of power levels, since time immemorial, women have predominantly exerted influence at the household level. However, through activism and women’s rights movements at the local, national and international levels (creating a pyramid of power), dents have been made to rightly put a few women in decision-making positions.

In the last elections, female representatives at the local level (elected and nominated) comprised approximately 14,465 out of 35,097. In contrast, at the national level (National Assembly and House of Representatives), there were just 115 women out of 334 elected representatives. This difference underscores how structures of hidden inequality perpetuate gendered power dynamics, which are distinctly unequal. In terms of forms of power and spaces claimed by women, they tend to emphasise the structural, discursive and symbolic barriers women face.

Structurally, women have historically held fewer formal positions of power, and the current Cabinet composition only reinforces this disparity. Discursively, women's issues are often sidelined or superficially addressed in political discourse, lacking the depth and seriousness they deserve. Symbolically, fewer women in power send a detrimental message about the perceived capabilities and roles of women in leadership, further entrenching gender biases as well as imposter syndrome.

The barriers within

At a personal level, the individual experiences and challenges female political leaders face in positions of power are critical. They must navigate a predominantly male environment, facing biases and obstacles in their work alongside manoeuvering petty politics often thrown at them by subordinates with conscious/sub-conscious patriarchal mindsets. Institutionally, political parties and other actors promote or hinder women's decision-making.

The lack of proactive measures to ensure women's active representation and participation indicates a failure at the institutional level to support gender equality and inclusion. Societally, public perceptions and cultural attitudes toward women in leadership remain a significant barrier, with deep-seated patriarchal norms and values that continue to undermine women's political ambitions and achievements.

Nepal's regression is part of a global and regional trend of declining women's political representation and rising right-wing sentiments. Only 13 percent of countries have effectively implemented gender quotas, resulting in disparities in women's political representation. Globally, women make up just 23.3 percent of Cabinet ministers. In South Asia, India's local-level progress hasn't translated nationally, with only 74 women making up the 2024 Lok Sabha.

Our situation mirrors these global trends, where political, social and cultural factors undermine equality. Right-wing populist governments often exacerbate this issue by prioritising traditional gender roles and enacting policies that undermine gender equality. But this narrative sets the world back to times before the First Wave of Feminism and hence, second-class citizenship.

Compared to the previous term, the 45 percent reduction in women's representation in the Cabinet is a significant step backwards and must not be ignored. In Nepal, the electoral representation system mandates that women hold 33 percent of seats in federal and provincial parliaments and 40 percent in local governments. Despite these measures, women remain significantly underrepresented in executive roles. This raises pertinent questions regarding our leaders’ sense of accountability, as it seems they no longer care about the optics of representation, at the very least. Concerns about whether party-heavy agendas and personal gain have led to the dismissal of issues concerning women and social minorities must be addressed.

Reclaiming political spaces

Nepal seems to be struggling to move beyond the second wave of feminism, which focuses on legal inequalities, to the third wave and beyond, which addresses broader issues of inclusivity and intersectionality. Unsurprisingly, both women in the new Cabinet come from upper-caste Brahmin-Chettri communities, which yet again pose questions about the representation of women from marginalised communities that are severely lacking in top-ministerial positions. Who will remind the patriarchally inclined leaders of the history of hard work and contributions of women leaders to public life, which the former seem so conveniently to erase or forget?

The current state of the Cabinet is not just a disappointment; it is an outrage. It signals a potential reversal of the efforts toward creating a more inclusive and equitable Nepali society. We must question whether our leaders are actively perpetuating the false narrative that 'women are not interested in politics' or 'not capable enough to navigate the complexity of the domain' by erasing their opportunities to claim leadership roles in the first place. And whether this tactic is aimed at further silencing women leaders.

This underrepresentation profoundly impacts the potential for generational progress and the overall ecosystem of progressive development. It also restricts the diversity of perspectives in decision-making processes, which is crucial for formulating comprehensive and inclusive policies. Research by the UN Women indicates that gender-diverse leadership teams tend to foster more innovative and effective governance strategies, contributing to more equitable and sustainable societal outcomes. The systemic exclusion of women from high-level political roles not only undermines the democratic principle of equal representation but also stifles the social and economic advancements that arise from inclusive leadership.

It is time political actors recognised the importance of representational leadership and took concrete steps to ensure that women, particularly those from marginalised communities, have a seat at the table and real decision-making powers. Alongside 'shattering the glass ceiling,' the phenomenon of climbing the ‘broken ladder’ must be mended. Only then can Nepal hope to move forward and embody the principles of gender equality and social inclusion that are fundamental to a democratic and just society. The need for a more inclusive and representative political landscape is not just about optics but rather about fairness and equity for a better future of our country.