 |
Kathmandu Saturday January 19, 2002 Magh 06, 2058.
|
NRNs and citizenship
The Voluntary Disclosure of Income Scheme
(VDIS) has hardly wound down and Finance Minister Dr Ram Sharan Mahat seems already to be
working with renewed energy to reverse the gloomy economic trends. There’s also the
supplementary budget and spiralling defence expenditures to be dealt with. Perhaps, buoyed
by the collection of about 445 million rupees in revenues from VDIS, Dr Mahat has now
turned his attention to the Non-Residents Nepalis (NRNs), and pledged provisions for
tapping them as an economic resource. But NRNs will have to wait for next fiscal
year’s budget to receive the good news and weigh the pros and cons. The NRN issue has
finally been taken up by the Minister himself, and this is reassuring. Along with this
hopeful development however, confusion and queries have cropped up. Since there is plenty
of time before the next budget, the Finance Ministry has leeway to thoroughly discuss,
debate and grapple with the issues involved so that they will strike the right chord and
respond to national interests.
A developing country like Nepal cannot afford
to ignore its people who are living abroad and have potential economic clout in their home
country. First, they are Nepalis also in blood. Second, they have economic value. But in
the absence of proper laws and incentives, the economy has not been able to tap their
potential. Some of them are demanding dual citizenship in line with the arrangements that
India makes for its NRIs. But provisions for dual citizenship may create complications.
With the Citizenship Bill controversy and the open border with the southern neighbour,
provisions for dual citizenship for NRNs are likely to raise hackles both inside and
outside Parliament. Given such a scenario it will be disastrous to jump the gun. Before
opting for any dual citizenship arrangement, the authorities can grant other facilities to
the Nepali diaspora. Provision of extended visas may be a wise start. This would save them
from the hassles of renewing their visas frequently. There is also a need for identifying
the NRNs and keeping records on them and their annual contributions to the remittance
economy.
Remittances are just the start. The inflow of
remittances needs to be supplemented by healthy doses of investment, and NRNs are the best
source of direct foreign investment. But these are unlikely to come flowing in unless
significant incentives are given to Nepalis living abroad who have a genuine interest in
investing in Nepal. Where to invest is another question that should be dealt with keeping
in view the possible impact on society and the economy. There’s also the issue of
property rights. Under the existing law, NRNs are not allowed to acquire immovable
property here. On this count, they are being treated like foreigners. Those who live
abroad cannot expect to be given the same terms or provisions as Nepalis living in Nepal.
Yet, given their economic significance, a more liberal policy and privileges need to be
devised. Learning from India and China, which have had an enriching experience in dealing
with their diaspora, will certainly help. Around 15-20 million NRIs contribute about 10
billion US dollars in remittances to India, while China has acquired investment capital
worth 30 billion US dollars from the 55 million overseas Chinese. But what has worked well
for those countries might not work equally well here. |
