Bhutanese Refugees: Middle of Nowhere
According to the 1951 UN Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees, a refugee is someone who has left his or her country because of a 'well-founded fear' of persecution for reasons of race, religion, nationality, social group, or political opinion. As countries started to gain independence, the problems of refugees and statelessness have become a multidimensional, worldwide phenomenon. By 1995, there were some fifteen million refugees and worldwide. Since 1989, even the tiny South Asian nation, Bhutan, has surprisingly been forcing its own citizens out of the country.By Rajesh Giri
The kingdom of Bhutan is currently ruled by King Jigme Singe Wangchuk. The 'official statistics' show that the current population of the country is 600,000. Drukpas (Tibetan descendants) form approximately 20% of the total population and occupy the northern part of Bhutan. They speak Dzongkha (an offshoot of Tibetan) and practise Himalayan Lamaist Buddhism. The king himself belongs to this group. Sharchhops of Indo-Burmese origin, in the eastern region, constitute around 30% of the population. They speak Sharchhopkha which is similar to the language spoken in the Arunachal Pradesh state of India. They practise Himalayan Lamaist Buddhism too. The Nepali-speaking people of Indo-Aryan origin, the Lhotshampas, make up about half of the population. Since the late 1800s they have been migrating from Nepal. They have tended to dominate the south and up to the present have retained their Nepalese culture and language, which differs greatly from those of the Drukpas.With the intervention of the British in 1907, Bhutan established a hereditary monarchy. Since then it has been ruled by an absolute monarch. There is no independent judicial system and no written constitution. Other than members of the ruling feudal class, no person may become a member of the National Assembly. The king appoints all ministers who remain in office at his pleasure. The right to form political parties and unions, a free press, and freedom of speech and of assembly are denied. There are no social or cultural rights nor is there a right to seek justice. Nevertheless, by the mid-1900s, the late king Jigme DorJi Wangchuk, the father of the present king, implemented various policies aimed at modernizing Bhutan and raising it from the status of an economic backwater.
In 1958 Bhutan's first Citizenship Act was introduced. Ethnic Nepalese who had been in the country for at least ten years and owned agricultural land were granted Bhutanese citizenship. Before that the Nepalese had all been aliens. Meanwhile, an increasing number of Bhutanese people were being exposed to the West. Both Drukpas and Lhotshampas travelled abroad and brought back the Western ideology of political democracy and leadership. Consequently, they began criticizing the monarchy as dictatorial and despotic. The attempt to modernize Bhutan economically created opposition rather than support for the monarchy.
Non-nationals
The present king then put an end to the economic development programmes in 1985. All opposition to the monarchy was suppressed and contact with foreign countries was cut off. The king also dismantled most media programmes. Most regrettably, the Lhotshampas were identified as a threat to the Drukpa monarchy. The king introduced a new Citizenship Act in 1985 and directed a national census be held in 1988, which was slanted against the majority Lhotshampas. The Act states: 'A person permanently domiciled in Bhutan on or before 31st December, 1958, and whose name is registered in the census registration maintained by the Ministry of Home Affairs shall be deemed a citizen of Bhutan by registration.'
However, in reality, only the southern Bhutanese (Lhotshampas) were declared 'non-nationals', a direct violation of Article 15 of the United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights with regard to arbitrary deprivation of nationality. Even those who showed all the mandatory certificates could not claim Bhutanese citizenship because the authorities immediately burned their certificates. The Lhotshampas were not alone in condemning this inhuman behaviour by the Bhutanese government, they were joined in their criticism by the US State Department.
For Nepalese immigrants to document their presence in Bhutan prior to 1958 is a nearly impossible requirement in a country with widespread illiteracy, which only recently adopted administrative procedures. 'Furthermore, the Drig Lam Namsha Code of Cultural Correctness was passed which compelled Lhotshampas to adopt Drukpa culture. They were forced to wear Drukpa customes and women had to cut their hair short. On many occasions, even the king himself spoke Nepali but he ordered a ban on the speaking and teaching of Nepalese language at school or even its use in public places. These demands were particularly difficult for the Hindu community of Lhotshampas, because they interfere in their cultural practices. The king of Bhutan also introduced a 'green belt policy' turning farms (of these Lhotshampas) in to forestland. Resentfully, the Lhotshampas opposed these laws and organized demonstrations calling for their repeal. Just for this reason, all of a sudden, the majority of the Lhotshampas were classified as illegal immigrants.
The Lhotshampas saw these laws as violations of their human rights and reacted by openly defying the code. Consequently, after a century, mutual peace and harmony between the Drukpas and the Lhotshampas came to an end. People's resentment and anger finally exploded and the demonstrations began with the popular demand for political reform, human rights, and democracy to replace the current absolute monarchy. The government cracked down on the demonstrations by using the army and the police forces. The crack-down involved arbitrary arrest and detention, torture, extra-judicial killings, rape, plunder, confiscation of lands, properties and citizenship documents, demolition of houses, and forced evictions. Accordingly, the first refugees (individuals and whole families) fled to Assam in India. The local Indian authorities refused to provide any assistance, forcing them to move on instead.
Demands
Frightened and desperate, Lhotsampas were driven towards Nepal, which became a reluctant host to a rapidly growing refugee population. Currently one-sixth of the total population (i.e. more than 100,000 people) of Bhutan has been stripped of their citizenship, exiled, and rendered stateless simply for demanding their political and human rights. Over 90% of these are housed in the eight camps in eastern Nepal and the rest are fending for themselves without assistance outside of the camps both in Nepal and in India. Most political leaders representing Lhotsampas are being jailed in Bhutan. More than 100 political prisoners including scores of monks have been imprisoned without any trial. This violation of human rights has made it almost impossible for Lhotsampas to lead a life of dignity.
After waiting for eight years, the refugee community in Nepal has come to the conclusion that the bilateral negotiations are just waste of time. Certainly, since 1990 several talks have been held between the governments of Bhutan and Nepal, but these talks have resulted in absolutely nothing. Citing the false allegations, the king of Bhutan continues to refuse to accept the refugees' return. He has not allowed any concerned groups, journalists, or any international organizations (especially the Amnesty International) to visit southern Bhutan. The main reason is that the whole region has been pillaged and currently the king has deployed the military force there. To a great extent, the Lhotsampas are frustrated by the inconsistent policy of the Nepalese government towards the refugee issue. Refugees are no longer willing to rely on endless rounds of diplomatic negotiations and have started a peace march back to Bhutan. India, one of the largest democracies in the world, could play a vital role in resolving the problem of Bhutanese refugees. Instead of that marchers have been held back by the Indian security forces. On the recommendation of the Bhutanese king strong law enforcement has been laid on in anticipation of the activists. As a result, many activists have been arrested and over a thousand of them sent to jail. In April 1996, Rongthong Kuenley Dorji, the leading figure for pro-democracy or the leader of the United Front for Democracy (UFD), was arrested. Along with many others, he is still confined in the infamous Tihar Jail of India. The main reasons are that since 1949, India has controlled Bhutan's foreign and defence policy and over 90% of Bhutan's foreign trade so that it wants to wash its hands of the problem.
After years of stagnation the Lhotsampas have lost their patience. No matter what, refugees are no longer prepared to suffer in silence. They themselves have continued to hold various demonstrations in Nepal and India and to campaign in Bhutan through media or any other means they can find. They have repeatedly insisted that the Nepalese government internationalize the problem. For over a year, two Bhutanese pro-democracy organizations Druk National Congress (DNC) and United Front for Democracy (UFD), have organized a peaceful, a non-co-operational movement in Bhutan demanding the institution of a constitutional monarchy with multiparty democracy. They have demanded fundamental human rights in keeping with the universally accepted provisions of the United Nations and the unconditional and immediate release of Rongthong Kuenley Dorji.
However, so far, the crisis of the Bhutanese refugees has not attracted any positive attention. Even though the problem of Lhotsampas has been seen as a bilateral issue between Nepal and Bhutan, it has extended well beyond such concerns and interests on the grounds of legality, rationality, and humanity. Some experts even have argued that the failure of the talks was mainly due to India's refusal to mediate. But it is not surprising that one of the world's largest democracies has turned a deaf ear to such a matter. As things stand, questions like how long the refugee crisis will continue to be a problem and how long Nepal will be able to provide asylum remain unanswered.
Rajesh Giri can be reached at e-mail: hiha@wowmail.com.