Bhutan: An Introduction

In April, 1988, two southern Bhutanese members of the Royal Advisory Council submitted a cautiously worded petition to the King outlining southern Bhutanese concerns about the census. The petition reported "Census Teams are questioning the people with undue threats," "Citizenship Identity Cards already issued have been confiscated," village elders "are not permitted to testify the credentials of their village people," "illiterate and simple village people are being coerced into signing documents, the contents of which are not known to them," and "the people believe that this is not a routine exercise as it is made out to be."[71]

The cabinet declared the petition seditious, focusing the blame on one of the authors, Tek Nath Rizal. Rizal was removed from office, arrested and held for three days. His release was secured after signing a confession and an agreement not to meet with more than three people at one time. Faced with constant surveillance and insecurity, Rizal left Bhutan for Nepal in July, 1988.[72] Refugees report that seven people from Chirang who had been involved in the drafting of a separate petition to the King were arrested, held for up to three days, and later harassed through tactics such as being denied trade permits and refused participation in district meetings.

In July, 1989, a small group of dissidents in Nepal formed the Peoples Forum for Human Rights (PFHR) to address the human rights situation in Bhutan, and elected Rizal as chairperson.[73] The group published several booklets which were distributed in Bhutan and subsequently declared seditious. In October, 1989, Ratan Gazmere, a lecturer at the National Institute of Education, was arrested as "one of the main persons responsible for printing and distributing seditious pamphlets" and accused of various anti-national activities such as having "some students refuse to wear 'ghos' and 'kiras' during the winter vacation and instigate the people in villages to follow their example."[74]

Gazmere was not alone, and from October to December 1989, "a total of 45 people were arrested for their involvement in the writing of 'seditious pamphlets', among them Tek Nath Rizal who along with Jogen Gazmere and Sushil Pokhrel was arrested in Nepal on 15 November 1989 and handed over to Bhutanese authorities."[75] Most of these prisoners were released on January 19, 1990, and the remaining six, adopted as prisoners of conscience by Amnesty International, were held incommunicado without trial. Five of these six were finally released after periods of detention ranging from 26 to 28 months, and Rizal is still imprisoned.[76]

"Anti-national Activity" and Mass Arrests

Amnesty International reports that "[u]nrest at government policies regarding national integration and the application of the Citizenship Act became widespread in southern Bhutan from early 1990 onwards."[77] The Bhutan Peoples Party (BPP) was formed in June, 1990, and, together with the Student Union of Bhutan (SUB) and PFHR, organized demonstrations and protests in September and October, 1990. Some of these rallies resulted in violent conflict between the dissidents and the authorities. Reports of government violence sometimes were highly exaggerated by refugees, such as the reported massacre of 300 people at a September, 1990 demonstration at Charmachi Bridge in Samchi.[78] But in spite of the hyperbole in some cases, reports of government shootings cannot be dismissed. Many refugees received medical treatment for severe injuries and bullet wounds, and refugees report the names of 19 people killed by government gunfire during the months of September and October, 1990.[79]

The government alleges increasingly violent activity by "anti-nationals", or ngolops. Reports include murders of census officials, attacks on government facilities, and looting of local homes. Most of the schools in the south were converted into army barracks and health services were severely limited. In addition to those claiming abuse by security forces, Amnesty International interviewed victims who report abuse by opposition groups, including forced donations to the BPP.[80] The issue of terrorism is considered separately and in more detail in a later section below.

Following the September, 1990 demonstrations, raids by the army on southern Bhutanese homes became common. People frequently were beaten and questioned on participation in anti-national activities. Rape was widely reported. Many were detained, for periods ranging from a few days to a year, in prisons or the local schools which were converted to army barracks and jails. Amnesty International reports that the "total number of people arrested since early 1990 for suspected involvement in opposition activities runs into thousands."[81]

Assessing Claims of Violence and Torture

Several refugee groups have documented arrests and mistreatment witnessed in Bhutan or reported by those arriving in the camps. The varying parameters defining their documentation result in varying figures. The Human Rights Organization of Bhutan (HUROB) documents 509 cases of male torture victims and 64 cases of female torture victims including 37 victims of rape; the Association of Human Rights Activists (AHURA) reports the names of 845 males and females who were imprisoned in Bhutan and now reside in the Jhapa camps; the Kathmandu-based Centre for Victims of Torture (CVICT) works with rape victims and reports 138 victims presently in the camps; and Save the Children Fund (SCF-UK) indicates 387 refugees seeking specialized treatment for the effects of violence.[82] Amnesty International's report includes numerous accounts of witnesses and survivors describing

torture, rape, and deaths in custody.[83] A 1993 report of the U.N. Special Rapporteur on Torture cites numerous allegations of torture which are not confirmed or denied.[84] Similarly, the U.N. Special Rapporteur on Extrajudicial, Summary or Arbitrary Executions did not have enough information to reach a conclusion concerning 185 alleged executions.[85] The government of Bhutan denies torture and claims refugees are "carefully tutored by the BNDP and HUROB cadres" and taught to "narrate horrendous tales of torture, rape and other fabricated excesses by Bhutanese security forces."[86]How reliable is the reporting of torture in Bhutan?

The office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) commissioned a study conducted by sociologist and social worker Cindy Dubble to evaluate the extent of the problem and assess the needs of victims of violence in the camps. After correlating the various lists of victims, Dubble interviewed a random sample of 100 men from a composite list of 850 reported male victims in the camps, and 38 women out of 150 reported rape victims.[87] Through in depth interviews, consideration of corroborating evidence such as medical reports, and cross-checking for consistency between interviews, Dubble verified torture in 95 of the 100 reported torture cases.[88] The more personally and culturally sensitive issue of rape was less easily verifiable, with Dubble confirming rape in 63% of the cases and violence (though not strictly rape under a formal definition) in 21 % of the cases. The remaining cases were confirmed as victims of violence, yet determinations concerning rape were inclusive.[89]

Victims universally suffered severe beatings and most were kept tied or in handcuffs. All report horrendous conditions of confinement in small or crowded spaces with inadequate sanitation facilities and minimal, or purposely polluted, food. Common forms of torture include the wearing of shackles welded onto the victims' legs, solitary confinement, and exposure to severe cold weather. A frequent interrogation technique involves placing thick boards above and below the victims thigh, tied at one end. During questioning a guard stands on the top board, putting unbearable pressure on the leg. Many methods of torture involve degrading behaviors, such as being paraded naked or being made to imitate animals and combat each other in mock "bull-fights" for the guards' entertainment. This list is far from exhaustive and detailed statements of victims of torture are found in most publications on the refugee situations.[90] Dubble's report includes a thorough listing of commonly used methods of torture, sorted by the various places of detention where they are practiced. Her list includes the names of perpetrators who were recognized or known by their victims.[91]

Women face special problems as survivors of rape and torture. For many men, surviving torture was traumatic, yet for Hindu women who are raped, trauma can be compounded with great shame and stigmatization. Some women report rejection by husbands and families, while others are afraid to talk about their experiences for fear of rejection. Other victims have had to deal with pregnancies and children resulting from rapes.

Some special services are provided in the camps for victims of violence. SCF-UK provides medical services and CVICT, in conjunction with AHURA, initiated a program providing counseling for rape victims and medical treatment in Kathmandu for some torture victims. A group of refugees have started Bhutanese Refugees Assisting Victims of Violence (BRAVVE), an income generating project teaching tailoring skills to victims. Programs like BRAVVE are a good model and other such projects should be developed. But a broader population of the camp also needs such programs, and when these programs are mainstream all can participate without continuing identification as a victim.