equality for all members of society, fostering a more just and inclusive Nepal, and aids overall nation development. A win-win for all parties. 3. a) If you live in a country where there is some space to engage in human rights work, how do you believe your society would have developed differently if this work were not permitted? Without the space to engage in human rights work, civil society’s role in advancing social justice would be severely limited. People and communities who hold higher in the social and political power dynamics would have all the leeway to set negative narratives and unwarranted restrictions. In Nepal, even though the human rights work is not explicitly scrutinized, an indirect force fueled by politicized narratives, social beliefs, and corruption has created friction, thus hindering progress. NGOs and human rights advocates are sometimes viewed with a level of skepticism by some government officials. These political, social, cultural narratives and belief system and their materialization into a restrictive environment hinder civil society actors and human rights advocates from working to their full potential. For instance, CAPN’s work on issues related to citizenship denial is often viewed with skepticism and mistrust because gender equal citizenship is often associated with national security against foreign nationals illegally taking citizenship at Nepal’s border. While these two issues are completely unrelated, one about equality and another about strengthening its administrative system, the xenophobic narrative created a barrier in CAPN's work. Without these obstacles, Nepali society likely would have recognized the need to reform discriminatory citizenship laws sooner, with stronger political will enabling timely legal reforms and fostering inclusive policy-making and social accountability. b) If you live in a country where there is very limited space for human rights work, how do you try to create more space to do your work? Please give examples. While Nepal does not have an outright closed environment for human rights work, the issue relating to citizenship is highly sensitive due to nationalism and security concerns. CAPN’s work undergoes constant skepticism and scrutiny especially during individual case support, where the opposition is felt both from societal level and government level. However, there also has been positive experiences where the community members and government officials have cooperated very well in discussion to interpret laws for seemingly complex citizenship issues. CAPN builds trust with the government by demonstrating that its efforts benefit national interests and advocating collaboratively rather than defensively. Engagement and partnerships with government bodies help create space despite scrutiny and accusations against civil society, especially that working on citizenship related issue. 4. Please describe what piece of human rights work you have carried out or contributed to that you are most proud of over the past five years. CAPN functions under three pillars: Social Awareness, Policy Advocacy and Safe Haven. Each of CAPN’s work and sustained advocacy falls within these pillars and is led by those affected themselves, transforming personal struggles into collective advocacy for equal citizenship rights, individual case support, alliance building (nationally and internationally), and amplifying affected voices are the highlight. There are two ongoing initiatives that CAPN has been successfully operating. First, is our Sahayatri Initiative, that is established on the bases of CAPN’s years of firsthand experience of providing individual case support to affected individuals. It is more than just a paralegal support. It involves a true companionship to the affected person in every step, ensuring a dignified experience in their citizenship acquisition process. The second is our flagship school outreach programs, through which 8