In the first 100 days of the Balendra Shah-led government in Nepal, concerns have surfaced regarding its approach toward Dalit communities, traditionally marginalized under the country's caste system. Critics argue that the administration, led by Shah’s Rastriya Swatantra Party (RSP), has so far failed to address key issues facing Dalits and has taken steps perceived as undermining institutions designed to support their rights and development.

The alleged custodial death of Shree Krishna BK, a Dalit youth in Sindhuli in April, became a focal point of public concern and criticism. Dalit parliamentarians from the RSP and the National Dalit Commission demanded an independent investigation into the circumstances surrounding BK’s death, which they suspected involved police misconduct. However, no autonomous inquiry was commissioned. Instead, the Nepal Police conducted an internal investigation and reportedly submitted a confidential report to the Home Ministry, which Shah directly oversees. The findings have not been publicly disclosed.

The government also held private negotiations with BK’s family to facilitate the cremation of the body, reportedly providing undisclosed compensation. These actions drew criticism for lacking transparency and accountability, with human rights advocates emphasizing longstanding distrust of police-led probes into allegations of misconduct by law enforcement officers.

Critics highlight a perceived retreat of Dalit parliamentarians within the RSP, noting that those who initially sought justice for BK have since remained silent following rebuke from party leadership. This apparent consolidation of a more subdued voice within Dalit political representatives has raised concerns about the administration’s commitment to addressing caste-based grievances.

In addition to the controversy over BK’s death, the government has moved to dissolve two government bodies focused on Dalit rights—the Neglected, Oppressed and Dalit Upliftment and Development Committee and the Badi Development Board. The latter targeted the Badi community, a subgroup within the Dalit population facing extreme social exclusion. While both agencies reportedly suffered from funding shortages and administrative inefficiencies, critics argue that their closure reflects a shrinking commitment to Dalit empowerment rather than efforts at reform.

The government also intends to restructure the National Dalit Commission, a constitutional body tasked with protecting Dalit rights, potentially subsuming it under the Human Rights Commission. This plan remains contentious, as the National Dalit Commission has a distinct constitutional status.

Observers stress that financial constraints do not fully explain the government’s decisions, given the limited resources these bodies previously received. Moreover, Dalit communities remain absent from meaningful representation in senior government positions or in policy priorities.

The government had initially pledged a formal state apology to Dalits, acknowledging past discrimination and committing to combat caste-based injustice. However, no official apology has been issued, and no related policy implementation has been observed since the Cabinet’s initial announcement.

This emerging pattern of neglect and institutional dismantling raises broader questions about the Shah administration’s stance on social inclusion and justice. Dalits—and other marginalized groups such as Madheshis, ethnic and religious minorities, and residents of the Karnali region—appear to have been excluded from meaningful engagement in government programs and resource allocations during the current administration’s early months. The trajectory of these developments may pose significant challenges to Nepal’s ongoing efforts toward equality and social cohesion.