Following a recent sexual exploitation and murder of a three-year-old girl in Bara, the government on Saturday signed a three-point agreement with the victim’s family, promising to form a committee for legislative reform. The committee is mandated to review current statutory provisions regarding offences and penalties for heinous crimes in accordance with ‘citizens’ expectations’ and submit recommendations for legislative reform.

Amid widespread public outrage, demands for capital punishment for perpetrators in rape cases often resurface in Nepal. Just five months earlier, a similar case of a 16-year-old Dalit girl in Surkhet had also led to similar public outcry. In March, the Ministry of Law, Justice and Parliamentary Affairs formed a committee to conduct a similar study; the committee submitted its report in May, and the law minister announced that an amendment bill would be presented in Parliament. Three months later, no such bill has been tabled. Instead, the government has promised yet another committee in response to another child’s death.

Legal reform regarding punishment in rape cases, albeit necessary, addresses only part of the problem. Offences of rape and murder of a child attract the highest degree of punishment in Nepal allowed within constitutional limits—imprisonment for the remainder of the offender’s natural life. Punishment decreases with the survivors’ age; it is much more relaxed for the rape of adult women. There is an implicit assumption within the legal provision that an adult woman has some kind of agency in her rape. However, stricter punishment alone cannot solve all the problems within both the criminal justice system and the larger society with regard to cases of rape and sexual violence. Evidence shows that the failure of the system does not lie in a single point—the law—but within the entire chain a survivor navigates from reporting to conviction and survival.

The statute of limitations for reporting rape cases prevents many survivors from ever being able to pursue justice. On July 14, 2022, Nepal’s National Assembly ratified amendments to the law concerning sexual violence, increasing the statute of limitations for the reporting of rape from one year to up to three years. Adult survivors can file a report within two years of the incident occurring, while survivors who are minors can file a case within three years of them turning 18. The amendment came after a 24-year-old model made revelations about repeated rape and sexual assault, and how Nepal’s statute of limitations meant she had no way to access justice; however, the amendment still did not give her access to justice.

The amendment ignored widespread calls for the complete removal of the limitation, including the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW) Committee’s recommendation to “repeal the statute of limitations provision on the registration of cases of sexual violence in all contexts to ensure effective access for women to justice for the crime of rape and other sexual offences.” The statute of limitations fails to take into account the social stigma and the psychological trauma that survivors have to navigate and instead seeks the ‘perfect’ victim who can immediately report.

The police administration is itself a big hurdle for those seeking justice in cases of sexual violence; the lack of trust within the institution is one of the factors that drives the public demand for harsher punishment even in cases where the highest form of punishment constitutionally available is legally codified. As in this case, delays and outright refusal to file complaints by the police are frequently reported. Survivors are often subjected to intrusive questioning and victim-blaming as part of the investigation process. Police are also alleged to participate in negotiating out-of-court settlements. Caste, class, ethnicity, gender and sexual identity often mediate access to justice and how the administration responds to victims and survivors, compounding barriers for victims from historically marginalised communities.

While disaggregated data for cases of rape is not readily available, according to a study conducted by Feminist Dalit Organisation (FEDO) in 2019, of the total incidents of rape, 21 percent of the victims belonged to the Dalit community. Only 15 percent of the Dalit victims got justice. Alarmingly, the victims were killed in 80 percent of the cases. No such separate data is available for the Tharu community or other marginalised groups. On one hand, women from marginalised communities are more likely to be raped. On the other, they face heightened barriers in accessing justice or are less likely to receive justice. Barriers compound for gender and sexual minorities, with the gendered and binary nature of the law itself posing as a source of the problem, which does not even acknowledge adult males and trans, non-binary persons as victims of rape.

Unlike Indian law, Nepal’s law is silent on the introduction of character evidence relating to the past sexual history of the victim, which in practice means that the victim’s character is brought up in court. While courts have held that convictions in rape cases can be based on the sole testimony of the victim, in practice, courts often look for corroboration through medical evidence or other testimonies. Victims continue to report being subjected to the horrifying non-scientific two-finger test.

Nepal’s rape laws merit review and amendment. However, stricter punishment does not solve the problem. Often, Nepali society finds a ‘perfect victim’, who was wearing the ‘right’ clothes, was of the ‘appropriate’ age and was not just ‘raped’ but also ‘murdered’. This leads to widespread popular demand for capital punishment. However, it does little to demand structural change. From broadening the definition of rape and consent to removing the statute of limitations, and reviewing the provisions for punishment, Nepal’s rape laws need reform. But legislative reform does nothing to address the failure of institutions to effectively deliver justice for survivors.

The justice system fails survivors at multiple points. Society often holds the victim responsible. Implementation of the existing provisions and laws is one area the government should focus on to effectively deliver justice. Prevention of rape altogether is another area that requires much more rigorous investment, along with the complex work of social transformation that might not yield straightforward returns. None of these much-needed reforms might be as popular as amending laws to introduce the death penalty. It is worrisome that the public discourse around capital punishment completely overshadows the conversation about reforms in the implementation of existing laws to ensure effective administration of justice.