|
The Jesuit Refugee Service (JRS)
which been assisting Bhutanese refugees in the education sector has also been
active in efforts aimed sensitizing
the International community to the Bhutanese refugee problem. Following
extensive lobbying at the 52nd session of UN Commission an Hunan Rights (18
March - 26 April 1996), JRS was invited to deliver a statement on the situation
of Bhutanese refugees to the Working Group on .Minorities, under specific
agenda item: Examination of issues relating to forcible displacement of
populations, threats of removal, and
return of persons who have been displaced'. The core of the May 1, 1966
statement, co-sponsored by the Lutheran World Federation and CARITAS
Internationalis, is reproduced below:
Mr. Chairman,
On behalf of the Jesuit Refugee
Service, I thank you for this opportunity to draw the attention of the Working
Group on Minorities to the plight of some 90,000 Bhutanese refugees of Nepali
origin currently residing in camps in eastern Nepal, and another estimated
30,000 unassisted Bhutanese refugees living outside these camps in both Nepal
and India. According to incomplete Royal Bhutanese Government census figures for
1995, these refugees represent more than one sixth of the total population of
Bhutan. Half of the refugee population living in the camps in Nepal constitute
women and about one third are children. Most of the refugees wish to return to
the place of their habitual residence while the Royal Government of Bhutan and
Nepal between 1994-96, the last of which took place only earlier this month,
have achieved but little progress.
Concerned parties have held much
hope for this last round of bilateral talks as for the first time the talks had
been conducted by the foreign ministers of the two countries. The stalemate
reached at the bilateral negotiations underlines the risk of the refugees to
become stateless persons, being denied their fundamental human right to
nationality of the Royal Government of Bhutan. The Royal Government of Bhutan
maintains that many of the persons registered in the camps as refugees have no
claim to Bhutanese citizenship and may never have resided in Bhutan. The office
of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR), on the contrary,
reports that the overwhelming majority of the refugees who have entered the
camps have been able to show documentary proof of Bhutanese nationality since
screening began in June 1993, and a sample survey conducted by the Jesuit
Refugee Service substantiates these findings. Concerned by the plight of the
Bhutanese refugees in Nepal and in India, the European Parliament recently
adopted a resolution on March 14 1996 calling upon the governments of Bhutan and
Nepal to reach an agreement which will allow the early and voluntary
repatriation of the refugees…….
Mr. Chairman,
The Kingdom of Bhutan is a
signatory tot he Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial
Discrimination (CERD) since 1973 though despite this declaration of intent it
has to date not yet ratified the convention. The country is, moreover, a state
party to the Convention on the Elimination of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW)
and to the Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC) since 1981 and 1990
respectively. As a member of the United Nations, Bhutan is moreover bound to
uphold the principles of the UN Charter as well as of the Universal Declaration
Human Rights. While the Royal Government of Bhutan has not acceded to the
International Bill of Human Rights consisting of the two international covenants
on civil and political rights and economic, social and cultural rights, it is
nevertheless bound to adhere by the provisions set forth in the Declaration on
the Rights persons belonging to National or Ethnic, Religious and Linguistic
Minorities as adopted by the General Assembly resolution 47/135 of December
1992.
According to the report of the
Working Group on Arbitrary Detention on their visit to Bhutan to the Fifty-First
session of the Commission on Human Rights (E/CN.4/1995/31/Add.3), King Jigme
Singye Wangchuk is vested with supreme power, including that of head of state
and supreme judge. For most important decisions he held to be, directly or
indirectly, the ultimate authority. The country has no written constitution.
By virtue of the Nationality Law
of Bhutan, enacted in 1958, the then King granted Bhutanese citizenship to
Nepali settlers living in Bhutan. The granting of citizenship 1958 was notified
by Royal Proclamation, but was not accompanied by an special certification
process. The Bhutan Citizenship Act of 1977 amended the nationality law and made
eligibility criteria more stringent. The Bhutanese Citizenship Act of 1985 was
interpreted during the 1988 Census as further tightening regulations for
eligibility by restricting citizenship to ethnic Nepali adults who owned land
and had lived in Bhutan since 1958.
The current situation of the
Bhutanese refugees, Mr. Chairman, is marked by increasing frustrations the lead
to recent demonstrations by groups of refugee (Appeal Marchers). Since January
1996, some 950 Bhutanese refugee from camps in eastern Nepal, frustrated at the
lack of progress in finding a solution to their situation, have taken the
initiative into their own hands and begun walking towards Thimphu, the capital
of Bhutan, via India in order to deliver a petition to the King of Bhutan. All
were immediately detained under provisions of the India Penal Code upon entry
into India. Although the marchers have in meantime been unconditionally released
by the Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate Court of Siliguri, India, they were
intercepted again as soon as the 'Appeal March ' to Bhutan resumed on 15th
March 1996. At the submitting this statement some 792 marchers remain in custody
in jails in West Bengal, India, out of whom 128 are women. Many of the marchers
have been imprisoned for more than three months now. Serious concerned have been
raised regarding the deteriorating health of the some of the marchers. The
'Appeal Marcher' have temporarily suspended their efforts appealing to the
Government of India to stop intercepting the marchers and to provide them with
safe and free passage to Bhutan.
While these refugees as well as
their compatriots in camps in Nepal and those living outside the camps in Nepal
and India face an uncertain future , Nepal's Foreign Minister, Dr.. Prakash
Chandra Lohani was quoted in the Kathmandu Post on 9 April 1996 as
stating that " If they (the refugees) are not Bhutanese nationals, they
certainly are not Nepalese. Bhutan must take the responsibility to solve this
problem since Bhutan is responsible" [ electronic version]. In the light of
events as described, and in search of a peaceful and constructive solution to
the Bhutanese refugee problem, allow me, Mr. Chairman, to make the following
recommendations to the Working Group on Minorities for its urgent consideration;
- prepare a comprehensive report on the
situation of the Bhutanese refugees in Nepal and India for the next session
of the Sub-Commission on Prevention of Discrimination and Protection of
Minorities and adopt a resolution on the issue in the light of its findings
to be submitted to the next session of the UN Commission on Human Rights;
due accounts should be taken in this endeavor of the resolution adopted
recently by the European Parliament on the issue;
- request the High Commissioner for Human
Rights, in close cooperation with the Office of the United Nations High
Commissioner for Refugees, to examine the reasons for the exodus of the
refugees and to mediate among concerned governments with a view to arrive at
an early resolution of the situation and to take all necessary steps in line
with the Convention on the Reduction of Statelessness of 1961, to ensure
that the refugees do not become stateless;
- request the Working Group on Arbitrary
Detention currently visiting Nepal and Bhutan to extend their visit and also
investigate the situation of detained Bhutanese refugees in Nepal and India
and reports on its findings without delay. The Jesuit Refugee Service
welcomes in this connection the invitation extended by the Royal Government
of Bhutan to the Working Group for the return visit to the country underway
(vide E/CN.4/1996/40, para 36 + 37), and the positive response of the
Government of Nepal to a visit of the Working Group within (para 39);
- call upon CEDAW and CRC to consider any
violation of the Conventions with respect to women and children prior to,
during and after their flight from Bhutan;
- urge the Royal Governments of both Bhutan and
Nepal to resume their bilateral talks in the near future and to allow the
assistance of a neutral mediator in their negotiations to solve the refugee
crisis;
- encourage the implementation of an
International Arbitration Committee of experts examine the nationality of
the refugees through individual status determination procedures.
- Call upon the Royal Government of Bhutan to
recognise the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) as the
expert body mandated by the United Nations to determine refugee status, work
towards a reduction of the phenomenon of statelessness, and to facilitate
and monitor the voluntary return of refugees to their homes in conditions of
safety and dignity and, towards this end, to invite the Office of the High
Commissioners for Refugees for a visit to Bhutan to discuss the issues
forthwith;
- Urge the Government of India to promptly
release the Bhutanese Appeal Marchers currently incarcerated in Indian jails
and instead provide them with safe and unhindered passage to Bhutan;
- Encourage the Royal Government of Bhutan to
repeal its 1985 Citizenship Act and its 'One Nation, One People ' policy of
1989 and to replace it with laws consistent with international human rights
laws, the letter and spirit the Charter of the United Nations and the
Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the two covenants on Civil and
Political rights and on Economic, Social and Cultural rights and the
Declaration on the Rights of Belonging to National or Ethnic, Religious and
Linguistic Minorities, as well as to ratify the Convention of the
Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination without further delay.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
|
