wfn.org | Nepal/Bhutan: Bilateral Talks Fail to Solve Refugee Crisis

["Frank Imhoff" <FRANKI@elca.org>]

Nepal/Bhutan: Bilateral Talks Fail to Solve Refugee Crisis
International Community Should Take Concerted Action 

GENEVA, 29 October (LWI) - The latest round of talks between the
governments of Bhutan and Nepal to resolve the Bhutanese refugee
crisis has failed to provide a solution, a coalition of five
leading non-governmental organizations (NGOs) have said. Donor
countries should convene an international conference to devise a
solution to the longstanding crisis.

The two governments heralded the bilateral talks, held last week
in the Bhutanese capital, Thimpu, as a "historic breakthrough."

"These talks between Nepal and Bhutan were neither historic nor
a breakthrough," said Rachael Reilly, refugee policy advisor at
Human Rights Watch (HRW). "The bilateral talks have ignored the
concerns of the international community and failed to provide a
solution for the Bhutanese refugees in Nepal. Donor countries
must insist on the full involvement of the international
community in solving the refugee crisis."

The coalition of NGOs - Amnesty International, Human Rights
Watch, the Lutheran World Federation (LWF), Habitat International
Coalition and the Bhutanese Refugee Support Group - called on
donors to urgently convene an international conference involving
the two governments, refugee representatives, the office of the
United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR), and other
relevant UN agencies to devise a comprehensive and just solution
to the 12-year-long refugee crisis.

More than 100,000 Bhutanese refugees - an estimated one-sixth of
the population of Bhutan - have been living in camps in
southeastern Nepal since the early 1990s when they were
arbitrarily stripped of their nationality and forcibly expelled
from Bhutan in one of the largest ethnic expulsions in modern
history. In cooperation with UNHCR and other partner agencies,
the Lutheran World Federation has provided assistance to the
refugees in the camps since the early days of the crisis.

After years of stalemate, the governments of Bhutan and Nepal in
March 2001 agreed to conduct a pilot screening of the refugees in
Khudunabari camp, which houses 12,000 refugees, to determine
their identities and eligibility to return to Bhutan. The
refugees were divided into four categories: 
- Category I - bona fide Bhutanese citizens (2.5% of the
refugees);
- Category II - refugees who supposedly "voluntarily" migrated
from Bhutan (70% of the refugees); 
- Category III - non-Bhutanese (24% of the refugees); 
- Category IV - refugees who have committed "criminal" acts,
including those who participated in so-called "anti-national"
pro-democracy activities in Bhutan (3% of the refugees). 

In August, a group of NGO representatives visited Khudunabari
camp as part of a joint international mission to Nepal and India.
The mission expressed grave concern about flaws in the screening
process as it excludes UNHCR, fails to comply with international
human rights and refugee standards, and risks leaving tens of
thousands of refugees stateless.  

The mission also identified the refugees' key concerns
regarding repatriation to Bhutan. These include guarantees of
safety and security, full citizenship rights, and return to
original homes and properties for refugees returning to Bhutan.
None of these conditions was addressed by the latest round of
talks, said the NGOs. 

The NGOs had hoped that the 15th round of bilateral talks would
answer some of the serious concerns about the ongoing screening
of the Bhutanese refugees and plans for their repatriation.  

Instead, the NGOs pointed out the following shortcomings in the
outcome of the talks: 
- Both governments have rejected the strong appeals of the
international community to involve an independent third party,
preferably UNHCR, in the screening and repatriation process.
- The Bhutanese government repeated its position (announced at
the 14th round of talks in May) that it would allow refugees in
Categories I, II and IV to return. However, the talks failed to
clarify the conditions under which the refugees would be
readmitted.  
- The Bhutanese government affirmed that refugees in Category II
would have to reapply for citizenship in Bhutan after a
probationary period of at least two years, even though the
majority of them were forced to sign so-called "voluntary
migration forms" when leaving Bhutan. The stringent and
discriminatory nature of Bhutan's citizenship laws, including
the requirement that all applicants are fluent in the language of
northern Bhutan, Dzonkha, could exclude many southern Bhutanese
from reacquiring citizenship.
- The Nepalese government repeated their offer of citizenship
for refugees in Category II, the supposedly "voluntary" migrants,
who choose not to return to Bhutan. But the growing insecurity
and instability in Nepal raise questions about the viability of
this offer. 
-  Refugees in Category IV, including those who participated in
peaceful pro-democracy activities, would have to stand trial in
Bhutan if they returned, despite the absence of any guarantees of
fair trials or due process in Bhutan.
-The talks gave no guarantees that refugees would be able to
return to their original homes and properties or enjoy basic
human rights protections and full access to social services,
including education, all of which are critical conditions for
sustainable return.
-The governments agreed that the screening would proceed in a
second camp - Sanischare - without any assurances that the
serious anomalies and inadequacies in the process would be
addressed. The decision to continue the screening process
camp-by-camp in the other six camps will further delay the
process. It took over two years just to complete the screening in
Khudunabari camp.
- The governments set a deadline of January 2004 for reviewing
the appeals of refugees in Category III but failed to address the
serious concerns of the international community regarding the
flaws in the appeal process. These include: the absence of an
independent third party to hear the appeals, the lack of
transparency regarding the criteria for screening, and the
extremely short time frame for appeals.

The two governments look set to repeat all the mistakes of the
initial screening in Khudunabari camp," said Peter Prove,
Assistant to the LWF General Secretary for International Affairs
and Human Rights. "None of the fears of the refugees have been
properly addressed, and the process could drag on for years,
prolonging the suffering of the refugees." In cooperation with
UNHCR and other partner agencies, the LWF has provided assistance
to the refugees in the camps since the early days of the crisis.

In a move criticized by the NGOs, UNHCR announced earlier this
month that it would begin phasing out assistance to the refugee
camps in the absence of a just and lasting solution by Nepal and
Bhutan.  

The NGOs called on donors to apply new pressure to Nepal and
Bhutan and insist the two governments uphold the refugees'
rights and allow UNHCR to monitor the repatriation process.

"For too long donor governments have offered tacit support to
the bilateral process between Nepal and Bhutan," said Eve Lester,
refugee coordinator at Amnesty International. "Now they must
recognize that this strategy has failed and international efforts
are needed to find a comprehensive solution for the refugees."

For further information, please contact:
In London, Magda Wendorff-Kowalczuk, Amnesty International: +44
20 7413 5729/ + 44 7778 472 173 (mobile)

In Geneva, Peter Prove, The Lutheran World Federation: 
+ 41 22 791 6364/ 41 78 757 6749 (mobile)

In New York, Rory Mungoven, Human Rights Watch: + 1 917 497
9704

In New Delhi, Malavika Vartak, Habitat International Coalition:
+ 91 11 2435 8492 (office)/ + 91 11 3590 0378 (mobile)

(The LWF is a global communion of Christian churches in the
Lutheran tradition. Founded in 1947 in Lund (Sweden), the LWF now
has 136 member churches in 76 countries representing over 61.7
million of the 65.4 million Lutherans worldwide. The LWF acts on
behalf of its member churches in areas of common interest such as
ecumenical and inter-faith relations, theology, humanitarian
assistance, human rights, communication, and the various aspects
of mission and development work. Its secretariat is located in
Geneva, Switzerland.)

[Lutheran World Information (LWI) is LWF's information service.
Unless specifically noted, material presented does not represent
positions or opinions of the LWF or of its various units. Where
the dateline of an article contains the notation (LWI), the
material may be freely reproduced with acknowledgment.]

*	*	*

LWI online at: http://www.lutheranworld.org/News/Welcome.EN.html 

LUTHERAN WORLD INFORMATION
PO Box 2100, CH-1211 Geneva 2, Switzerland
Tel: (41.22) 791.63.54
Fax: (41.22) 791.66.30 
Editor's e-mail: pmu@lutheranworld.org