To see from this perspective, the scheme of federalism must be agreed by all population, and its characters need to be set forth by consensus. It is not my fight but I am in solidarity. They are isolated cases. Why Nepal needed to divide itself into states (provinces) and how the number of states were defined? Academia.edu is a platform for academics to share research papers. Nepali politicians are not honest. This is why Federalism is required on the basis of a common identity (ethnic, geographical and lingustic) and economic viablity. Three years after the introduction of a new federal constitution, 2019 is going to be a critical year for fiscal federalism in Nepal. Now that some sort of federalism is more likely than not, the arguement will turn to Hindu Rashtra and Nepali language. The Madhesi issue has been addressed to some extent in terms of identity, but not Economic Viability. Rai is a researcher at the Centre for Social Inclusion and Federalism (CESIF) Nepal. There are two important issues to consider for ‘giving the discussion of restructuring of the state’ a definite and meaningful shape. They should probably make it so that each region has ample access to trade routes. There are thousands of Pahadis living there, same with Janakpur, Nepalgunj, Birgunj, etc etc. Without consensus the ‘scheme of federalism’ might be a source of conflict among people. How do we provide states for 80+ ethnic groups? Too long has Nepal been the province of one religion, one language and one identity. Of course the people know what sanghiyata means and what that entails. The concept of federalism in Nepal is thus an idea of ‘breaking or eliminating the political domination of an elite group’, which, by centralizing the powers with a so-called central authority, has been monopolizing the governance powers to the exclusion of cultural and linguistic indigenous communities. Its not the six-state model anymore. The constitution does not ensure adequate representation for marginalised groups in any level of the state. But such a move is not that easy as Nepal is home to more than 125 ethnic groups and most of the regions have mixed populations. Canada has adopted ‘both symmetrical and asymmetrical models. Shouldn't we just accept our flaws and make peace/improve instead of marking territories? How will the other states handle this? Firstly, it should recognize that the ‘equality of all cultures and languages’ is the only basis of the national unity, and for this federalism is indispensable. What they don't realize is the complexity of federalism and the cost involved in running this system and not to mention countless battle and lawsuit for resources and what not. I welcome all replies. We also need to realize that we need full cooperation of India for this to work. system is needed for improved motivation and effectiveness, and hence, better services to private businesses, the public, and to the poor in particular. Another important issue relates to ‘demarcation of the geographical boundaries of provinces’. This paper explores structures and models for restructuring the civil service in Nepal, taking into account the existing context of public administration and civil service management. To see from this perspective, the scheme of federalism must be agreed by all population, and its characters need to be set forth by consensus. Except for some radical, fringe elements, the Madhesis and Tharus are not demanding priority rights (agra adhikar). There are some fundamental factors that explain why this is the case. My understanding comes from having read a little and living in Gorkha during the height of the civil war. Pahade migration to Madhes is increasing. It comes from the west which has had a different social-economic-theological and scientific evolution over millenia than us. The Constituent Assmebly failed to get a draft for approval even after sevderal extensions. This discusses how the major Nepali political forces agreed to the broader agenda of state restructuring to achieve specific objectives but how this agenda has been narrowed down to some aspects of federalism alone over the course of time. The Tharus and Madhesis were unhappy with the six-state model because it preserved the Bahun-Chhetri majority in almost all of these states. They saw the six-province model as a betrayal of their demands and another attempt to preserve the status quo. At this point the remarkable point to remember is that ‘the restructuring of the nation should be governed by two important needs, the first being the need ‘of consolidating democracy through vertical distribution of powers’, and the second being the need of ‘maintaining the secular character of the nation’.