BHUTAN: SILENCED AND CONTROLLED

Combating 'terrorism' in Bhutan

2009-01-16T23:24:00.000-08:00

Bhutan is not a new stranger to ongoing 'violence', as termed by the regime, particularly in the name of already-coined arm struggle by different underground outfits. Not much predicted earlier, but these days Bhutan is better experiencing series of bomb explosions mostly in the southern parts, the region where majority of Nepali-speaking people dwell.

The bomb explosions in Sarpang district on December 30, 2008 that claimed lives of four forest guards is the latest instance to confirm that arm struggle is already been initiated inside this peaceful Himalayan kingdom. Here arises a question of how prepared Bhutan is to combat arm launch supposedly floated with political motives.

The December 30 incident is not the first of its kind. Birat-led Communist Party of Bhutan (CPB-MLM), one of the underground armed revolutionary outfits, planted series of bombs on the night of February 3, 2008 in Samtse district which damaged the materials brought by the Druk government for National Assembly election. To carve out a sentence from Birat's release, it reads "this is the initiation of 'Armed Rural Class Struggle' in Bhutan.

Bhutan Tigers Force (BTF), United Revolutionary Front of Bhutan (URFB) and Vikalp-led Communist Party of Bhutan (CPB-MLM) often own up responsibilities to such explosions. URFB, which owned-up responsility to the recent bomb attack in Sarpang district has further warned the new settlers, who are occupying the lands of those evicted during early 1990s, to vacate occupied plots of lands shortly. The question of having inter-connection among these armed outfits, though is tough to predict, is still suspicious as their common minimal program seems to launch arm struggle against absolute regime.

Besides, possible links between militant organizations behind frequent bomb blasts in Bhutan and the United Liberation Front of Assam among other Indian underground outfits cannot be ruled out. A news story written by Tara Limbu of Bhutan Times entitled 'Sarpang and Guwahati blasts linked?' makes this clearer. Therefore, India too will be greatly affected if arm struggle in Bhutan continues.

Earlier on March 17, 2008, URFB took responsibility of the bomb explosion in Pasakha which injured one Indian national. The frequent claims of these outfits having genuine demands to see political change in Bhutan maintains necessity on the part of the Druk government to address them.

BTF among others is often seen actively involved in raising awareness towards arm struggle through pamphlets and posturing inside the country. The frequent hoisting of communist flag in southern districts is time and again publicized by Druk media houses. These are some of the strong proofs which speak of possibilities of the continuation of armed struggle in Bhutan if amicable solution is not sorted out at the soonest possible.

The Bhutanese authority, however, alleges that all of these armed groups operate from refugee camps in Nepal. Bhutan has to well understand that refugee camps in Nepal are monitored by the UN refugee agency, the UNHCR. Many a time Bhutanese stakeholders had put the tag of 'terrorists' to refugees languishing in Nepal, which in itself sounds most-fabricated-and-illogical assumption. The fact that a number of refugee youths have connection with these armed groups cannot be denied. However, it would be too early to say if really these armed groups are solely based at the UNHCR-managed refugee camps in Nepal.

More than 60 people from southern region of the country were apprehended by the Druk police authority last year for their alleged involvement in Maoists activities. The whereabouts of those arrested people that even includes some school-going children is never made public. Here the main concern is that minor civilians should not be victimized. Free and fair investigation on such cases definitely reflects Bhutan's respect to human rights--though is never been under practice inside this tiny kingdom.

Despite showing interest and flexibility towards resolving the ongoing political turmoil in the country, the Druk regime is mulling over expansion of military force. Media houses inside the country have quoted Police chief Col Kipchu Namgyal as saying that a security squad would be formed under the 'Special Reserve Police Force' mentioned in the Police Bill to counter the armed attacks.

To note, volunteer groups have been formed to patrol during nights. A person from each household has to send one volunteer to patrol every night. They will check on schools, hospitals among other public places. This is not a fair and reliable initiation of the government to counter with arm attacks. Innocent civilians should not be used as shield in the name of fighting against armed rebellion outfits, which they say they are fighting against the government. This sort of initiation would rather encourage armed groups towards continuing violent activities. Besides, it will bring a sense of enmity between public and the armed groups and finally ignorant civilians will be victimized.

What is the solution then? Well, the Bhutanese government should not escape from furnishing a peaceful solution through dialogues and this is the right time. Bhutan must notably see the instance around its neighboring countries-- the ongoing violence in Sri Lanka, India, Afghanistan and Pakistan. One of the news stories of Associated Press on January 16 entitled 'Thousands of civilians flee Sri Lanka fighting' speaks of this fact in a quite better way. Not to an exception, the decade-long Maoists insurgency in Nepal could be yet another lesson if Bhutan grasps it before it is too late.

To conclude, the armed outfits should also understand that their objective would never be met until they wash-out hands from violent activities. Arm struggle neither benefits the Druk government nor does it promote armed groups. If Druk rebellion outfits are truly dedicated towards the establishment of people's democracy in their country then they must opt for peaceful measures. Let's establish ourselves as peace loving freedom fighters in Bhutan!

मौन राज्यआतंक र भारतीय चाल

2009-01-15T02:06:00.000-08:00

December 17, 2008
टिपी मिश्र

नेपाल भ्रमणमा आएका भारतीय विदेशमन्त्री प्रणव मुखर्जी भुटानी शरणार्थीका आशाका केन्द्र बने । शरणार्थी समस्या समाधानमा जति नेपालको चासो छ, त्यसभन्दा धेरै जिम्मेवारी भारतको छ भन्ने बुझेका शरणार्थीको आशा तब तुहियो, जब उनी यसबारे एक शब्द नबोली फर्किए । भारतको सकारात्मक भूमिका खोजिरहेका शरणार्थीलाई यसपटक पनि भारतले लोप्पा खुवाइदियो ।

१७ वर्षसम्म घर र्फकने आशा बोकेर बसेका शरणार्थीहरूको स्वदेशफिर्तीको सवाल झन् जटिल बन्दै गइरहेको छ । यस समस्याका निम्ति जिम्मेवार भुटानले कानमा तेल हालेर बसेको कारणले समस्या जेलिँदै गएको छ । अमेरिका र अरू सात मुलुकमा सात हजारभन्दा बढी शरणार्थीको पुनर्वास भइसकेको छ । पुनर्वासपछिको शरणार्थीको भविष्य कस्तो होला ? यसबारे टीकाटिप्पणी गर्न अझै केही वर्ष पर्खनुपर्नेछ । यद्यपि उनीहरू आर्थिक रूपमा केही सबल हुनेमा दुई मत नहोला ।

राजनीतिक रूपमा अस्थिर भुटानका निम्ति पुनर्वास पनि एउटा समाधानका रूपमा देखिएको हुन सक्छ । तर, शरणार्थीमा निहित राष्ट्रप्रतिको माया उसका निम्ति कुनै दिन दुर्भाग्य बन्न सक्छ । शरणार्थीले विश्वको जुनसुकै कुनामा बसे पनि भुटानी शासकको दमनको विरोध गरिरहनेछन् । नेपालमा रहेका सबै शरणार्थीले पुनर्वासमा इच्छा देखाएका छैनन् । त्यसको ठूलो हिस्सा अहिले पनि घर र्फकने आशामा छ ।

तेस्रो देश पुनर्वासको प्रसंगले राम्रो उचाइ लिइरहेकै वेला धेरै निकायले स्वदेशफिर्तीको सवाललाई प्राथमिकता दिएका छैनन् । यसो हुनुको कारण स्वदेशफिर्तीको सम्भावना नदेखेर हो या जिम्मेवारीबोध नगरेर हो, यसै भन्न सकिन्न । द्विपक्षीय वार्ताद्वारा समस्या हल गर्न कसरत गर्दै आएको नेपालले पनि स्वदेशफिर्तीका निम्ति खासै पहल गरेको देखिँदैन । भारतमा सम्पन्न बिमस्टेक बैठकमा प्रधानमन्त्री प्रचण्डले भुटानी प्रधानमन्त्री जिग्मे वाई थिन्लेसँग यो समस्या समाधानका विषयमा गरेको छलफल नै नेपालको पछिल्लो पहल हो । दुर्भाग्य, यस्ता वार्ताका सहमतिको व्यावहारिक कार्यान्वयनतर्फ दुवै पक्षको पहिलेदेखि नै ध्यान गएको छैन ।

शरणार्थी स्वदेशफिर्तीका निम्ति प्रभावकारी भूमिका खेल्नसक्ने भारतले यसलाई ‘नेपाल-भुटानबीचको समस्या’ भन्दै टारिरहेको छ । यस्तो चालबाजीपूर्ण नीतिको आडमा रहेर भुुटानले यस समस्यालाई पूरै बेवास्ता गर्ने दुस्साहस गर्दै आएको छ । सन् २००१ मा वर्गीकरणपछि भुटानी नागरिक ठहर्‍याइएकालाई समेत उसले स्वदेश फर्काउन आनाकानी मात्रै गरेको छैन, यी शरणार्थीलाई आतंककारीको बिल्लासमेत भिराएको छ । अन्तर्राष्ट्रिय समुदायबाट भुटानले जति दबाब पाउनुपर्ने हो, त्यो नपाउनुले पनि समस्या समाधानमा उसको सकारात्मक नीति बन्न नसकेको हो ।

विश्वको सबैभन्दा ठूलो प्रजातान्त्रिक मुलुक भनिने भारत किन शरणार्थी समस्या समाधानमा अगाडि आउन चाहँदैन ? भुटानभित्र भइरहेको ‘मौन राज्यआतंक’लाई निरूत्साहित गर्न उसले किन चासो देखाउँदैन ? भारतीय भूमि भएर नेपाल आएका शरणार्थीले सोही भूमि भएर शान्तिपूर्ण रूपमा स्वदेश र्फकन प्रयास गर्दा उसले किन दमन गरिरहन्छ ? यस्तै प्रश्न आज भारतसामु तेर्सिएका छन् । यस समस्याको दीर्घकालीन समाधानका निम्ति भारत सरकार जति पन्छिँदै जान्छ, त्यति नै उसको प्रजातन्त्रमाथि नै प्रश्नचिह्न खडा हुँदै जान्छ । त्यसैले पनि यो समस्या समाधानमा भारतको अनिवार्य भूमिकाको निम्ति नेपालले तुरुन्तै पहल थाल्नु बुद्धिमत्ता हुनेछ । नेपाल-भुटान वार्ताबाट मात्र निकास आउने भए थिम्पु र काठमाडौंमा एकपछि अर्को गर्दै सम्पन्न १५ औँ चरणसम्मका वार्ता नै पर्याप्त बन्ने थिए । नेपाल आफैं पनि राजनीतिक अस्थिरतामा गुजि्ररहेको हुनाले शरणार्थी समस्या समाधानमा विशेष पहल गर्न उसले एउटा स्थायी आयोगको गठन गर्नु वैकल्पिक उपाय हुन सक्छ ।

शरणार्थीलाई तेस्रो मुलुकमा पुनर्वासका निम्ति औपचारिक रूपमा स्वीकृति दिएको नेपालले पुनर्वास हुन नचाहनेका माग र भावनालाई सही तरिकाले वेलैमा सम्बोधन नगर्ने हो भने त्यसले दुष्परिणाम निम्त्याउन सक्छ । स्वदेशफिर्तीका निम्ति सशस्त्र आन्दोलनको विकल्प नभएको ठहर गर्दै केही भूमिगत समूहले भुटानभित्र जनयुद्धको घोषणासमेत गरिसकेको अवस्था छ । दक्षिण भुटानका केही जिल्लामा गरिएका बम आक्रमणले यसको पुष्टि गरिसकेका छन् ।

यस्तो जनयुद्ध उठान गर्न ती भूमिगत समूहले शरणार्थी शिविरलाई समेत कुनै न कुनै रूपले प्रयोग गरिरहेका छन् । त्यस्ता समूहभित्रका अधिकांश कार्यकर्ता शरणार्थी युवा हुनुले भुटानमा गरिने सशस्त्र युद्धबाट नेपाल अछुतो रहन नसक्ने लगभग निश्चित छ । जनयुद्धले राम्रो उचाइ लियोे भने त्यसले भारतलाई समेत ठूलो असर पार्न सक्छ । यसमा नेपाली माओवादीको दसवर्षे जनयुद्धले भारतमा पारेको असरलाई उदाहरणका रूपमा लिन सकिन्छ ।

Prisoners of the dragon kingdom

2008-12-16T06:29:00.000-08:00

Source: the kathmandu post, daily
http://ekantipur.com/kolnews.php?&nid=170564
By T. P. MISHRA
How does it sound when we hear that political prisoners inside jails are mentally tortured with the help of mind control devices? But this is a fact-based saga in the tiny Himalayan kingdom of Bhutan. Senior human rights leader Tek Nath Rizal is one among the many unknown political prisoners who have suffered brutal torture inflicted by this banned device. From a medical point of view, mind control devices have a direct and bad impact on the brain. Rizal says that one who has been subjected to this gadget will at once become nervous. Other kinds of physical torture will not be felt until consciousness is regained.
The book entitled Bhutan: Hijo Ra Aaja by Balaram Poudel, president of the Bhutan People's Party (BPP), also provides a good illustration of how cruel Bhutanese jails are. It is stated in Poudel's book that before 1992, the Bhutanese authorities stressed inflicting physical punishment on prisoners. According to this book, Dharma Raj Gurung and Padam Dhakal from Dagana district died in jail due to excessive physical torture in 1991. It adds that the whereabouts of Dhakal’s dead body is still unknown.

Not only this, the accurate figure of those who died in jail due to extreme physical torture before and after 1991 has never been made public. In comparison to the early 1990s, the Bhutanese authorities now opt for giving mental instead of physical punishment to political prisoners. This is an attention-grabbing concern as mental punishment has a long-term impact on the sufferer.

We can take yet another example of the saga of a political prisoner in a Bhutanese jail. On Nov. 1, the Druk authorities released Dhan Kumar Rai, 45, founding general secretary of the BPP and an outstanding Bhutanese personality, after 17 years of rigorous imprisonment. Rai says he was kept in solitary confinement for one year.

Rai, generally referred to as the Bhutanese Mandela, is now in Kathmandu for medical treatment for the excessive mental torture he suffered. Rai claims he was mentally tortured in jail for more than a decade. Arrested at Todey in Darjeeling, India on Nov. 17, 1991, he was later handed over to Bhutanese police on the fake charge of being involved in anti-national campaigns. He now suffers from a psychiatric problem due to extreme mental torture.

Many Druk prisoners who have been released say that the most painful physical punishment they faced was having the tips of the fingers pricked with needles.

They also had stones suspended by strings to their private parts. This kind of physical torture is very common in Bhutanese jails.

Hundreds of political prisoners are still believed to be languishing in Bhutanese jails, and their latest status has never been made public. Here arise some significant questions. Where are the international human rights bodies? What is the international community doing to protect the rights of prisoners in Bhutanese jails? Where are the so-called international advocacy groups? How long will India, the world's biggest democracy, remain a mute spectator to the ongoing atrocities in Bhutan? What are those countries that hailed the so-called democratic practice in Bhutan doing? Have the jails in Bhutan ever been visited by any international rights group? These questions still remain unanswered.

However, the role of the International Red Cross Society (ICRC) is worth mentioning here. The ICRC has been actively campaigning for the release of political prisoners in Bhutanese jails. Rai admits that he was released thanks to the heavy and constant pressure the ICRC put on the Druk authorities. But the endeavours of the ICRC alone is not enough to discourage the atrocities being committed in Bhutanese jails.

Bhutan's repeated claims that it has already embarked on a democratic path are nothing but a ploy to hoodwink the international community. There is no independent judiciary in the country, and a fair trial is always doubtful. The fact that Rai was imprisoned for almost 17 years without any justifiable reason serves as a good example.

“Silent state terrorism” still prevails in this tiny kingdom. Freedom of speech is completely restricted. People cannot speak against the government or the monarchy, the so-called supreme institution. The international community should not be duped by Bhutan's illogical concept of having Gross National Happiness in the country. It should always read between the lines of Bhutan's tricky statements.

(The author is editor of the Bhutan News Service and head of the Bhutan Chapter of Dhaka-based Third World Media Network.)

mishratp@gmail.com

Resettlement In Australia

2008-09-15T23:04:00.000-07:00

The offer of Third Country Resettlement (TCR) for now has become an immediate solution to the protracted Bhutanese refugee issue. Even looking at it statistically, an escalating number of refugees are showing interest in the TCR. As many as 3,000 plus Bhutanese refugees have already been resettled in different countries, including the US, the biggest of the resettling core group comprising Australia, Canada, Denmark, the Netherlands, New Zealand and Norway.

Why the delay?
Majority of the refugees being resettled have reached the US. The other six countries in the core group have been a bit slow in expediting the resettlement process. The latest statistical data show that as many as 62 individuals among the 1,000 already interviewed have been resettled in Australia. The process for resettlement, particularly in Australia, is confusing to the people living in the different camps. A number of refugees, whose process for resettlement in Australia has been completed, have been frustrated by the delaying tactics opted by the Australian government.

Refugees who began the necessary process for resettlement in Australia following the visit by Ellen Saurbrey on November 1, 2007 are yet to get their confirmation date to leave Nepal for Australia. Ganga Woti Bhujel (name changed) of Sanischare camp began the process for resettlement in Australia in 2007. Ganga Woti says she was given assurances of resettlement within four months of undergoing her medical check-up in February 2008. What is interesting is that Ganga Woti will have to undergo more medical check-ups once the date crosses six months. Ganga Woti further says that she has been wearing the clothes and using other basic necessities which she intended to use after resettling in Australia. Like many others, Ganga Woti has also sold all her belongings after the medical check-up.

A number of refugees have already undergone numerous medical check-ups. A source very close to the International Organisation for Migration (IOM), on condition of anonymity, says that the IOM usually carries out the medical check-ups for refugees to be resettled in Australia without wasting a single day once the file is received at the office. Thus it is only natural that those who have undergone medical check-ups should be greatly frustrated.

In comparison to the resettlement programme in the US, those applying or whose process is already underway, particularly for Australia, are in a sea-saw position, meaning they do not know whether to withdraw and apply for another country or wait and see for new developments, if any. There is no concerned authority stationed near the refugee camps where the refugees can put forth their inquiries regarding resettlement in Australia.

Many refugees complain that the staff at the Damak-based UNHCR office do not cooperate when the refugees reach the office for any inquiry. This unfair and unjustifiable trend should be immediately stopped. It is necessary on the part of the resettling countries to establish an inquiry office near the refugee camps. This will help the refugees to stay free of any mental harassment. The UNHCR must state clearly if it is capable of handling all these issues single-handedly.

It is worth drawing the attention to a case of one Raghu Bhandari (name changed) of Morang-based Sanischare camp. His brother has gone mentally ill following the delay in the resettlement process in Australia. He had undergone the medical check-up as early as January 2008.

Another Bhandari family (surname changed) in Beldangi-II camp regrets choosing Australia as their resettling country. "If it is possible, we want to withdraw our case from resettling in Australia," says the father who leads the family. The other problem is that the UNHCR gradually cuts off facilities for refugees whose resettlement process has begun. This family has had the bitter experience of seeing rude behaviour from the UNHCR staff while making inquiries about their resettlement process in Australia.

Solutions
Dissemination of reliable information is a problem, with which the refugees are getting impatient. The IOM is not the agency to deal with resettlement in Australia, and the UNHCR is unresponsive to the queries put forth by the refugees. To be honest, people in the camps say Australia is not the best country to be resettled. This might not be true, but the concerned authorities have the moral obligation to disseminate reliable information to the refugee community. They have the right to know why the delay in the resettlement in Australia.

Those refugees visiting the Kathmandu-based Australian Embassy quoted officials as saying that the Australian government would resettle only as many Bhutanese refugees as the Canadian Government does as agreed in the core group negotiation. The Canadian government has resettled a little more than a dozen refugees till date and has yet to resettle a considerable number within this year. The Australian government might be waiting to see what number of refugees the Canadian government would resettle this year and make its plan accordingly.

Many refugee students have already quit their studies after getting assurances from the Kathmandu-based Australian Embassy. But the same embassy has now been saying that further inquires need to be made directly with the New Delhi-based immigration head office. So the delaying schemes of the Australian government need to be read between the lines.

Struggle For Justice Continues

2008-09-15T22:58:00.000-07:00

THE dawn of people's democracy in the context of Bhutan is a far cry. Despite international pressures, this tiny Himalayan kingdom has not yet given off a trend of practicing 'silent state terrorism' in the country. The regime is in no position to guarantee rights of the citizens and suppression upon the Nepali-ethnic community continues. On the other side, the regime is turning its ears deaf towards expediting the repatriation process of its genuine citizens languishing under the UNHCR-monitored camps in eastern division of Nepal for the last 18 years.

Resettlement
According to the weekly bulletin published by the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR), as of 30 August 2008 as many as 3, 843 individual refugees have departed for third countries under resettlement programme. Similarly, an estimated 49, 640 individuals among one hundred eight thousands have declared an interest in Third Country Resettlement (TCR). Not much assumed earlier, the number of refugees declaring an interest in TCR is at escalating rate. Though a prediction, it can be stated that a majority of Bhutanese refugees will finally opt for resettlement in third countries.

The hopes for repatriation and subsequently becoming a respected citizen in their country of birth continue to surface in their daily activities but remained overshadowed as authorities concerned, which howled for repatriation, have now gone into hibernation. Each year, refugees' wish not to stay inside the unimproved camps in Nepal, ends without opening the door, largely due to Bhutan absconding from repatriation process. Finally, refugees are bound to opt for TCR citing the unfeasibility of immediate return-home programme.

More importantly, now-a-days voices for repatriation have been getting suppressed – mouth stitched, hearts held on, feelings knotted and wishes turned down. As if to mean there are no Bhutanese refugees willing to get back to their country. The tracks ahead for any sustainable solution to refugee deadlock have really turned unclear.

The option of TCR is lying on the table. But on the other side, the grand-designer of the deadlock, absolute Bhutanese regime, is howling at the international arena floating its fabricated logic of pushing the Himalayan kingdom to democratic state despite rise in atrocities. Refugees' wish to get back to the country of origin, when conducive atmosphere is created, should not be ignored. It should be guaranteed by the resettling countries.

Struggle
It should not be misread here that refugees are permanently getting assimilated in third countries under TCR programme. The atrocities imposed upon them by the Druk regime during early 1990s and thereafter shall always remain in fresh memories. Undoubtedly, refugees getting resettled in third countries will raise their living standard from economic point of view. Besides, lobbying the issue at international communities is yet another opportunity on the part of resettled refugees.

It may take quite a long time but people's democracy, in accordance to the model of 21st century, is sure to foster in Bhutan mainly following the continued struggle--be it from resettled refugees or other suppressed groups inside Bhutan. For this to happen, a networking and firm unity among the refugees and a strong support and solidarity from international communities are unavoidable.

Their genuine voice for the dawn of people's democracy in Bhutan will continue unless the absolute-turned-so-claimed-democratic regime guarantees rights of public therein by expediting the dignified repatriation process. It would not be mistaken if stated that a majority of resettled refugees will return to hometown, Bhutan when favourable situation is noticed. This is simply because they have a good volume of contribution to bring Bhutan to the present state.

The peaceful struggle for justice should continue until the absolute rulers in Bhutan surrenders before the public for the so-far crime it committed in the name of stepping to a democratic country. Bhutan should not be led freed from practicing further atrocities upon the innocent Nepali-ethnic people inside the country. Donor countries of Bhutan, in particular India should immediately stop being just a mute spectator of atrocities ongoing inside Bhutan. Besides exerting pressure, International community's continued vigil over the worst situation prevailing within Bhutan is a need of the moment. TCR, though not a complete and amicable solution to the protracted Bhutanese refugee crisis, but can still serve as one of the best means to explore further possibilities of voicing for people's democracy in Bhutan.

Experimenting With Refugee Life

2008-09-09T23:10:00.000-07:00

Becoming a refugee is something like struggling for the existence of day-today life with hard times. Not to an exception, the each dawn almost remains as distressed moments for me, like other youths and children inside camps, since my future prospect is uncertain inside Bhutanese refugee camps in eastern division of Nepal.

Nevertheless, though of low quality, the education given inside Bhutanese refugee camps has been established itself as one of the means of eye-openers to some extend. The dreams for building up good career and stepping in better future prospect have always been held high despite uncertainties of hitting such dreams on the stand of reality. I often question myself if I have already loosed youths’ potentialities with 17-year of unfruitful stay in ramshackle huts, made up of bamboo sticks and plastics, that standstill screening the hot sun during the day time and let rain to enter in during rainy seasons. What a misery!

The more one stays in the refugee camps, the further it generates frustration and a sense of depression with no ‘hope’ of tomorrow. The question of safe and dignified return to hometown, Bhutan has become a farce cry. Besides, the possibility of getting better opportunities in the host country, Nepal is out of the periphery of imagination. So, can you just imagine for a couple of seconds how youths and children, in particular, would feel when none of their dreams are met?

For instance, I have had never experienced how it would be while putting a pair of shoes-- be it of lower or higher quality until the completion of my School Leaving Certificate (SLC), grade X, which also mean I was of 19 years old. Still today, most of the children and youths in the camps walk bare footed during their schooling days. This is simply because they lack sources of income. A pair of slipper (chappal) worth just 21 Nepalese currencies which I worn until a decade better demonstrate suppression of youths’ feeling and interests due to exiled life. It may be a strange thing if I disclose the bitter truth that I used to wear the slipper only while going to school and while on my return to tent-turn-castle hut.

A majority of aged parents can’t manage amount to proper diets. They are bound to sell the facilities such as the ration and pulses to at least manage delicious foodstuffs like the meat or fruits only during some of the festivals that they observed even inside the camps. I do not hesitate to reveal my story too regarding the same. Despite wish, I hardly tasted the meat twice or thrice in a year.

Nevertheless, my tongue almost remained dried without having learnt the taste of fruits such as the apples, mangoes or grapes almost for more than a decade.
You might be anxious to know how my life was after a decade. This is because I explored some of my notable and bitterest realities that I had experienced until a decade since the establishment of Bhutanese refugee camps in early 1990s.
The real challenging days began after the successful completion of my SLC examination, grade-X as I was wondering how I could continue my further education with my own expenses. Being the youngest from an eight-member family was another hurdle on my way to collect the amount to pursue my higher studies. Still I haven’t asked to him, but my senior brother, who was at that time doing his bachelor’s degree in Nepal’s capital city, Kathmandu managed all necessary expenses. And, finally I could join a government-owned college stationed nearby the camps. My wish to pursue college education with a tip-top dress, along with most of the facilities on hands, turned as day dream since I was helpless to manage them due to lack of finance.

But this time I was quite lucky to wear a pair of leather shoes, as it was compulsory in college, which costs 430 Nepalese rupees.

Currently, I am doing my bachelor’s degree in Journalism and Mass Communication from one of the private colleges, affiliated to Purbanchal University, in Kathmandu. I reside in a small rented room that also works as office for Bhutan News Service, a news agency run by and for Bhutanese refugees.

But I am clear of the fact that my ambition to become an established journalist in the future shall go in vain if I lack better opportunities. And, finally this will collapse all my dreams; a sense of frustration and depression will follow me. What a miserable life!

India’s Support Is A Must

2008-07-30T06:40:00.000-07:00

ONCE again the Bhutanese refugee issue is overshadowed by political lords in New Delhi. This is because the 42-member delegation from Bhutan led by Prime Minister Jigmi Y. Thinley returned home recently, after official visit to India, even without discussing a single word regarding the protracted crisis.

Tactics
The tactical plan of New Delhi and Thimphu to see these refugees getting assimilated in third countries is gradually working. Or else, these concerned governments would have discussed the issue during the recent meet. Bhutanese refugees do not expect that the latter would show interest in discussing the issue with the former but it was the responsibility of India to draw Bhutan’s attention towards expediting the repatriation process since she is regarded as one of the biggest democracies of the world.

Refugees and their well-wishers had expected that this time India would open its mouth but it went exactly opposite thereby leaving enough space to question on her ‘democratic’ values in the South Asia region. To be fair, India cannot continue keeping absolute Druk regime under its armpits citing that the Bhutanese refugee issue is a bilateral deal between Nepal and Bhutan.

Now refugees want to question the stakeholders in New Delhi why it had inhumanly dumped Bhutanese people at the Indo-Nepal border loading them in trucks during early 1990s. And, why she restricts them from returning to hometown, Bhutan via the same route. Was that her strategy to remain sidelined from the issue? Does she simply want to see these people getting assimilated in third countries? This isn’t a fair and impartial initiative if India really claims to be one of the biggest democracies of the world.

Bhutan’s foreign policy was vested on the hands of India for years until the revision of Indo-Bhutan Friendship Treaty last year. Even now New Delhi holds good influence in Bhutan. It was India that assisted Bhutan both with moral, financial and logical support to hold the recently-concluded general election in the country for the first time. To say in a single sentence, Bhutan can’t run ahead without the support from its immediate neighbor, India. With these many facts lying on the table of reality, India is never going to put its hands in resolving the refugee crisis.
It may be impossible on India’s part to interfere in Bhutan’s politics but at least it can press Bhutan to resolve the decade-long refugee deadlock, in particular asks to expedite the repatriation process.

The government of Nepal had long-time tried to garner New Delhi’s support-- be it through SAARC summit or bilateral meets, but the latter always delivers whimsical stance on this issue. India has always failed to generalize its official stance on Bhutanese refugee issue. The other big irony is that it has been directly or indirectly supporting the atrocities ongoing inside Bhutan. This can be proved when taken the illustration of recently-concluded general election in Bhutan. How easily India dared to hail the democratization process in Bhutan despite knowing the fact that the latter had excluded refugees during the election process? Was Thimphu right to term refugees languishing under the UNHCR-sponsored camps in Nepal as ‘terrorists’ frequently? These are some of the questions whose answers are also obvious to India.

Solutions
Last year Indian Prime Minister Dr. Man Mohan Singh himself, while in a written response to a lawmaker, had vowed that he would take immediate and necessary initiative to help resolve the issue. But PM Singh and his team had failed to discuss the issue during his recent visit to Bhutan, after the completion of general election. With the passage in time and despite several attempts refugees have almost lost their hopes to receive India’s good will support in their return-home process but they are always of the opinion that their wish to back home would be possible only if India takes an initiative.

It should not be forgotten here that the more India tries to remain out of the scene in this issue, the further complication it generates. Third country resettlement program in itself cannot give an entire end-up to the crisis. On the other side, Thimphu is never going to accept refugees languishing in Nepal as its citizens unless New Delhi speaks. To conclude, India is left with no option than to press the Druk regime for expediting the repatriation process after resolving all sorts of political flux inside Bhutan.

Druk regime in democratic mask

2008-07-30T06:38:00.000-07:00

The hopes for repatriation and subsequently becoming a respected citizen in their country, Bhutan continue to surface in refugees’ daily activities but remained overshadowed as authorities concerned, which howled for repatriation, have now gone into hibernation.

The absolute Druk regime has absconded from expediting the repatriation process since a small incident at Khudunabari camp in December 2001. And, obviously, many smelt this absconding tactics of the regime as a reward from New Delhi encouraging continued atrocities towards Bhutanese citizens.

Addressing the inaugural session of Parliament on May 10 this year, the Oxford-educated King Jigme Khesar Namgyal Wangchuk said that the very meeting was gathered to celebrate nation’s historic achievement of a unique democratic transition. Ironically, the King indirectly admitted the fact that the democratization process in the country was ‘unique’ simply because it is just a showcase.

During the inaugural session, King Khesar didn’t prefer speaking a single word regarding ‘refugee issue’ created by his father on the inaugural session though he issued a number of directives to the new government. But, one day this sort of ‘silence’ from the Bhutanese monarch will undoubtedly become a suicidal attempt in itself.

Besides, the so-called democratically elected government under the premiership of Jigme Y. Thinley hasn’t yet spoken a single word regarding the repatriation of Bhutanese refugees languishing under the UNHCR-cantonments in eastern part of Nepal for the last 18 years. The assumption to see positive initiative from the newly formed government continues to have occurred as illogical concept since it ignored the refugee stalemate.

Of late, the government-owned Kuensel on its June 28 edition expressed regime’s clear-cut expression of astonishment over escalating misinterpretations by big media houses in refugee-resettling countries. It mentioned that as they (Bhutanese refugees) are being resettled in the U.S, the American media describe the resettled people as Bhutanese refugees who have been expelled from the kingdom. Despite government’s verification in Khudunabari camp, where more than 70 percent were categorized under genuine Bhutanese citizens, the absolute Druk regime does not like to accept us as ‘refugees from Bhutan’. This serves as a good illustration of Druk regime’s endeavor to hoodwink the international communities on its face covered with democratic mask.

The tracks ahead for any sustainable solution to refugee deadlock have really turned unclear. The option of third country resettlement is lying on the table. On the other side, the grand-designer of the deadlock, absolute Bhutanese regime, is howling at the international arena floating its fabricated logic of pushing the Himalayan kingdom to democratic state despite rise in atrocities. The regime is in no position to guarantee rights of the citizens and suppression upon the Nepali-ethnic community continues.

Dozens of innocent Nepali-speaking Bhutanese from southern region of the country are bound to spend long-term jail sentence ranging from 5-9 years despite their innocence. The regime, in democratic mask, has clamped baseless allegations terming them of being cadres of underground revolutionary outfit Communist Party of Bhutan (CPB-MLM).

Those citizens trying to raise their voices for the establishment of rights are still suppressed by the Druk government. Public’s right to speech and expression is completely encroached by the government since media is under strict vigil of ‘autocratic’ rulers. The international community’s access over the deteriorating condition in the country is a farce cry.

Now the efforts of refugees to get back to their original homeland, Bhutan seem ‘fire-test’ as they hardly find those supporting their stance on dignified repatriation. Refugees’ voices for repatriation have been getting suppressed – mouth stitched, hearts held on, feelings knotted and wishes turned down. As if to mean there are no Bhutanese refugees willing to get back to their country.

Thus, Bhutan’s autocrats should not be led freed to hoodwink the international communities with democratic mask as it would further encourage the regime towards continued atrocities in the country. International rights bodies and other concerned agencies should urgently probe into ongoing atrocities inside Bhutan. It should not be forgotten that refugees’ willingness to get repatriated would never be replaced by any other options in the name of sustainable solutions. Refugees languishing in eastern districts of Nepal have contributed a lot for the development of the country and this invaluable contribution should not be over looked.

On the other side, Bhutanese autocrats are left with no any options then to expedite the dignified repatriation process as resettlement in itself does not deliver sustainable solution. Making refugees to opt for the option of third country resettlement will further intensify their feelings towards nationality as they would be equipped both logically and financially. The more Druk autocrats delay the repatriation process, the further problem it generates.

Refugee Issue and Maoist Stance

2008-05-20T00:51:00.000-07:00

Source: The Rising Nepal
April 29, 2008 (Baisak 17, 2065)
Many are now-a-days fearing whether the policy of Nepalese government towards Bhutanese refugee issue would be again changed following the formation of the next government under the leadership of Communist Party of Nepal (Maoist).

Those refugees wishing to opt for the option of Third Country Resettlement (TCR) have a sense of fear whether the Maoist-led government would decelerate their process. On the other side, many refugees began showing optimism that their long-waited repatriation process would be accelerated as Maoists are more committed towards safeguarding their right to return.

Whimsical policy
Nepalese government has quite frequently changed its policy towards Bhutanese refugee issue. Here, with the change in the government the policy has been changed. Now-a-days, the offer of TCR is taking a good height attracting many refugees towards it. Nepal government has already agreed to issue exit permit to those refugees who are willing to get resettled.

Here the main concern is the Maoist-led government should not change its policy and obstruct the resettlement process rather it should exert adequate pressures to the Druk government for expediting the repatriation process.

Today, Nepalese people have kept high hope that the Maoist-led government will push the country to a ‘New Nepal’. In a similar way, refugees are optimistic that their long-neglected repatriation process would be accelerated by the government supposed to be formed under the Maoist leadership within another couple of weeks.

Undoubtedly, currently only a single option for refugees viz TCR is unlocked and other two options viz repatriation and local assimilation are overshadowed by authorities concerned. Still a significant portion of refugees are willing to get repatriated should there arise favourable condition for the same but this process seem unfeasible following Druk regime’s delaying tactics. Thus, there is, of course need on the part of the Nepalese government to change their policy but provided that it do not obstruct the TCR process, rather accelerate its seriousness and flash parallel concern towards refugee repatriation process.

Bhutan’s negligence
Bhutanese government has been absconding from taking back its genuine citizens languishing under the UNHCR-administered camps in Nepal following a small incident in Khudunabari camp in December 2001. The government even held general election in the country without making these refugees exercise their right to franchise. Nevertheless, refugees’ sentiment is always ignored by the absolute Druk monarch.
Government of Nepal that has taken initiatives to help sort out a possible outlet to this more-than-decade-long protracted crisis has always failed. To note in figure, no single Bhutanese refugee is being repatriated to the original homeland till date despite several efforts. On the other side, Nepalese government could not be up to snuff to drag India, the most influential factor, in the negotiation process.

This could also be an opportunity and a challenge on the Maoist-led government side to tie-up their diplomatic dealings highly-influenced at international arena after giving an successful end-up to this impasse.

Alternatives with New government
The first and the foremost thing that the new government should consider is that it should be able to involve New Delhi in the negotiation process with Thimphu; only then a solution would be sorted out at the soonest possible.
Secondly, the formation of a permanent task force could be another significant initiative to help furnish durable solution to the issue including TCR, which has now been under the process. This is also to ensure that the task force would be completely involved in the solution-finding process as it may not be always possible on the part of the government side. Bhutanese refugee issue has already occupied the space of one of the big burdens for the whole south Asia region. Therefore, this problem should not be left to fester; it should be dealt in such a way that the durable solution is sorted out before it is too late.

Question of security for refugees

2007-08-16T06:32:00.000-07:00

Due to lack of proper management to beef up the security situation inside refugee camps, series of violence has been at escalating rates one after another. In the few recent months the disputes have already claimed at least three innocent lives of youths including irreparable loss.

Despite repeated calls to tighten security in these camps, the UNHCR including government of Nepal haven’t yet resumed security posts inside refugee camps. And, as a result the normal lives of people in camps have been crippled.

A small dispute between Forestry officials and refugees at Sanischare camp on February 22 finally resulted into an uncontrolled scuffle claiming lives of two youths including one refugee youth from Sanischare camp. Despite several attempts to bring the situation to normalcy, the lives both in the local areas and in Sanischare camp gained complication with a sense of fear continuously for at least a week.

When locals from Jirkhimti village of Pathri Baazar set ablaze refugee’s huts at Sector ‘J’ and ‘K’ on February 23, no authority could immediately control the then situation until at least five huts were turned to ashes. Locals in the middle of Mahendra highway chanting anti-slogans against Bhutanese refugees blocked even fire brigadier and ambulances.

The incident in Beldangi camp on May 27-28 regarding so-called ‘controversial’ interview of Hari Adhikari Bangale, camp secretary of Beldangi – II is yet another better illustration to quote about unmanaged and weak security situation inside refugee camps. Two youths from Beldangi camp were killed at police firing during the latter’s attempt to bring the situation under its control. Unjustified yet, it is also said that Bhutanese Maoists were involved in manhandling Bangale. If this statement deserves 'truthfulness' then it should be remembered that refugee camps are not the only places from where we raise our voice for democracy in Bhutan. We have to always target our activities inside Bhutan, not inside refugee camps.

The mostly targeted people in camps are those favouring the US offer of third country resettlement. Actually, even when the office of International Office of Migration, selected as Overseas Processing Entity (OPE) is established, the authorities concerned are not giving reliable information on resettlement. People in camps do not believe in the information that they receive from pro-resettlement activists or their leaders from within the same community. This is one of prime reasons behind frequent disputes in refugee camps.

Meanwhile, it has to be well considered that individual’s right to expression, and in particular, their right to opt for any options should be promoted. As we are in democratic era the trend of violating others’ right while raising our concern should be eradicated.

At a time when the Home Ministry of Nepal has assured to provide between 25-30 armed policemen for each of the seven refugee camps within mid of July, but to no avail, another incident occurred in Beldangi camp on August 12.

A group of youths and women severely beat up Manorath Khanal, camp secretary of Beldangi – II extension accusing him of supporting Pingala Dhital for approving her to overseas to attend an international conference. Both of them are activists for resettlement to third countries. Not only this, the youths also vandalized huts of those advocating for ‘resettlement’ including that of Dhital’s and Khanal’s. This is one of the sad parts. Be it an advocator for resettlement or repatriation, huts of their innocent family members should not be vandalized in the name of opposing the advocacy level of those leaders.

The local authorities and the UNHCR usually claim that they have been on constant discussion to normalize such situation; however no outcomes are seen yet. It would be no more a mistake to say that the UNHCR is standing as mute spectator towards such incidents. Otherwise, why can’t the UNHCR takes necessary measures to create peaceful and safe environment for these refugees when it is already revealed that home ministry in Nepal would deploy security forces? It should not be forgotten that the more refugees involve in violence the further it creates complication. As a result the Druk oligarchy will take advantage of the scenario.

If authorities concerned still turn deaf ears to the immediate attention to beef up the security situation inside exiled Bhutanese camps then there exist possibilities of resuming further tensions. Therefore, the UNCHR including government of Nepal should immediately take measures to bring the tensed situation to normalcy.

It is equally necessary to probe into the facts behind such-natured violence and drag the criminals, whosoever it is, to the court of justice. Refugee’s right to stay under safe and secured environment must be promoted by all individuals including the authorities concerned. Even innocent people in camps are vitimised from such violence. Refugee, who so ever and of any opinion, should demonstrate their civil responsibility and establish an atmosphere of mutual respect for each other's views and opinions.

On the other side, it has to be well considered that until the UNCHR itself takes initiatives to inform people in camps regarding the offer of third country resettlement then it would lead to further violence as refugees are in no account to listen to any information from the pro-resettlement activists in camps. Those activists should pressurise and lobby authorities concerned to inform people in camps rather then attempting to advocate on their own. Should the tensed situation continue as in recent days then process for both resettlement and repatriation will get derailed leading the lives of refugees’ to further ailment.

Attack on Freedom of Expression

2007-08-09T00:57:00.000-07:00

Freedom of speech and expression is one of the fundamental rights of an individual. This is an era of communication. Since I started blogging I have been trying to make you reach my personal opinion on Bhutan and its refugee stalemate.

On August 7, 2007 I received an e-mail in the name of non-existent Refugee Defense Force (RDF) at: bhutan.voice@gmail.com threatening me not to write in favour of repatriation. The mail has stated that I am always opposing the offer of third country resettlement, which is baseless, and if it continues I would be physically attacked or anything may happen. Isn’t this an attack to individual’s right to freedom of speech and expression?

The following is the extraction from the mail that i received

I do not want any mail reply Just understand it and if it persist I will report to our own task force workers which have been recently formed.Make sure to maintain good relation with us other wise you will bear the consequences.

I do not think that the articles that are posted in this blog are in opposition to the recently coined offer of third country settlement. It was a socking mail as was filled with almost all filthy words that cannot be read by a normal being. It is clearly mentioned in the ‘description of the blog, at the top of the page’ that the opinions expressed in this blog are personal and that from a diary of an individual writer.

Freedom of expression is a mostly considered fundamental right in this democratic globe. I am confident that I have been trying to bring opinions on various issues remaining exactly in the middle point; I mean I am neither discouraging the US offer of resettlement nor encouraging Maoists activities, as mentioned in the mail by the RDF.

It is, I suppose, a moral responsibility of a conscious Bhutanese national to attempt for bursting out atrocities carried-out by absolute Bhutanese regime. And, this is what I have been trying. Suggestions are mostly welcomed from you individual, be it negative or positive, but without filthy and baseless words. Let’s be positive and put a joint effort so that the outlet to ‘Bhutanese political problem’ including the 17 year long ‘refugee stalemate’ can be grasped before it is too late.

Politics in Exile: Change in Bhutan?

2007-08-09T00:43:00.000-07:00

After rise in suppression, violence and entire breakdown of law and order, Bhutan government evicted about one sixth of its total population from the homeland during early 1990s. This population is scattered at different places of Nepal and India including the UNHCR-administered camps in eastern division of Nepal for the last 16 years.

Except for the few instances, the Bhutanese refugees are now confronting a dark future inside refugee camps. In the name of establishing democracy in Bhutan, few political parties including dozens of other apolitical organizations have come into existence. Majority of these organizations, aimed at working for the welfare of Bhutanese people, are at zero point progress especially in the context of fight for Bhutan democracy.

politics
The ground level people in camps are politically conscious. Still majority of them are wishing to get repatriated provided in a condition that it should take place in a dignified way safeguarding their safe living inside Bhutan.

The political and apolitical organizations formed in exile are mostly depending upon paper works. Some of the leaders show their active participation at different regional, national and international conferences for lobbying the issue; however such attempts have been proven as worthless as Bhutan is still active in formulating conspiracies. Not to ignore the reality, some so-called Bhutanese leaders have even settled in the western countries. They are now trying to remain at low profile citing the unfeasibility of dignified repatriation.

The question of unified ideology towards finding the solution of refugee stalemate has always been a farce. Bhutanese in exile, their country in ruins, are bound to remain within the unimproved periphery. But no matter how complex the situation is, the refugee issue should not be left to fester. It should be carefully considered and regulated in a manner that refugees’ sentiment is given high priority.

Bhutanese people now residing inside the country are totally out of tie with the organizations in exile. Nevertheless, the approach for the same will always fail as the Indo-Bhutan border is tight for free passages. The campaign for political consciousness inside Bhutan is at risk because right to association and freedom of speech and expression is under the government threat.

Refugees are fed-up with the ‘self-beneficiary’ activities of some of their leaders. They are in no account to consider anyone, now existing, as their leader. The sense of far-sightedness, commitment and firm political ideology is a convenient aspect for all Bhutanese leaders to learn.

We shouldn’t forget the constructive achievements of leaders in exile. The Druk regime’s ongoing atrocities and the ‘silent state terrorism’ practiced in Bhutan would have remained unheard by the world communities had the organizations in exile remained hushed. Meanwhile, the significant part is that the trial of about 16 years for establishment of inclusive democracy in Bhutan, has verified that Bhutan democracy is impossible if we depend only upon the exiled politics.

Common consensus
At present times, the clear-cut ideological differences within individual refugees can be felt. This difference sometimes even creates havoc resulting to time consuming debates. Now it is necessary for all political and apolitical organizations in exile to create an environment of common consensus for Bhutan democracy and dignified return of refugees to their original homeland. And it’s a matter of essence to respect the sentiments of those who are in no position to opt for the option of repatriation.

No political history, now existing in the world, has denied the fact that democracy is possible only when people and their leaders turn out to be politically conscious to step towards collapsing absolute rulers or dictators. Bhutan is not an exception of being an absolute state amidst very handful of such countries.

But, there is no political consciousness in people, currently living in Bhutan. Nepali speaking people including one of the ethnic groups, Sharshops, who are permanent resident at southern belt, are the commonly suppressed groups in the country. The ruling elite always restrain on them. Until such groups are not conscious, peoples’ democracy in Bhutan would become a farce.

Much of the developmental approaches are at leaders hand in exile as they are more open to launch any sorts of unified programs for Bhutan democracy. Now refugee leaders should wholeheartedly bring various programs to draw the attention of international communities towards extending their support in resolving this protracted crisis.

It doesn’t mean a leader should be a known figure in international arena. Indeed, leaders should be gifted to take right decisions and amass potential support and solidarity from the public. Especially, Bhutanese youths-students, the prime force in a movement, are on no account in drawing their closeness towards a common political mainstream under the already failed leadership.

It should be well remembered that only paper works and press releases would pave no way for early solution of Bhutanese refugee issue. Bhutan will further derail the process of dignified repatriation if leaders still put oil in their ears.

India’s Role in Repatriation

2007-07-29T06:42:00.000-07:00

India has for the first time said that the outstanding Bhutanese refugees issue is an international problem. Indian Foreign Minister Pranab Mukherjee has recently said that it is an international problem and the government of India is trying to work out a solution. Despite several attempts of Bhutanese refugees and the world communities, India, the big democracy, tried proving herself as one of the passive factors towards solving the refugee stalemate for the last 17 years.

It is visibly acknowledged that India, Druk regime’s big brotherly neighbor, bars Bhutanese refugees from returning home though it still in a dominant position to pressure Bhutan for the early and lasting solution of refugees languishing currently in Nepal. This is a matter felt even by the entire international community. Nevertheless, had India acted upon this mess in an optimistic phase, the problem would have been solved by now.

India is one of the biggest democratic republican countries in the world, which when it “wishes” may bring a drastic change in the specified areas that it opts. It would be a truism to say that Bhutan exists only because of the double-standard diplomacy of India. India may not be an exception to the fact that it is the largest donor country of Bhutan. The past history has a clear reflection that it was Indian security forces, which escorted the evicted Lhotshampas to drive them in Kakarvitta, Nepal.

Now when the same refugees try to back home, it stands as a gigantic blockade. Indian police in West Bengal in the third week of December 2004 intercepted Bhutanese refugees from Jhapa trying to return home. Not only this, some were arrested and an announcement notification against refugees not to attempt entering Bhutan was issued. This was done at the time Bhutan forced another 26 families of Nepalese ethnicity from southern Bhutan for exile into India and Nepal.

When about 500 refugees, in January 2005, including the elderly and women, marched through Kakarvitta, Nepal’s eastern border town, and onto the bridge that connects the two countries, a posse of security personnel, comprising of the Seema Suraksha Bal (SSB) and the West Bengal police, stopped them halfway by the bridge.

Like wise, Bhutanese refugees who frequently attempt to demonstrate on Mechi Bridge demanding for the free passage to Bhutan will be dumped into their camps by Indian security forces. Deployment of hundreds of refugees on December 17, 2005 on the eve of their national day from the Indo-Bhutan border is sufficient to state that India doesn’t like to extend its direct support to help return. Even some dozens of Bhutanese refugees who were said to have been demonstrating peacefully are time and again hurt in scuffles with Indian security forces.

Prior to this, on July 3, more then 350 refugees were stopped at the Indo-Bhutan border. On the 10 of the same month, Bhutanese security forces arrested 12 Bhutanese refugees who entered Phuentsholing border and handed them over to India. Later on they were left on Mechi Bridge.

From the ban of cycle rally in 1994 till the interference in recent peaceful ‘Long March’ on May 28-30, 2007, under the banner of the NFD – Bhutan, India has time and again made a point to prove itself as uninterested towards this concern. The death of an innocent youth, Shaw Bahadur Dewan, at the bullet firing, from the SSB forces, leaves a clear-cut message as to whether India can claim that it is a democratic country.

Not only this, India turns its ears other side when refugees have appealed countless times through the medium of peaceful memorandum and the like. Refugees’ internal voice that urges support and solidarity of India in solving the issue seems meaningless. This is none other then proving herself to be a blind “diplomacy-follower” of an oppressive indication from Bhutanese autocratic regime.

Bhutan never bypasses anything when India takes the hold, but the latter doesn’t likes to bring it into realistic sense. A concealed subject can be undeniably felt as the result of it. Had India taken a bit burden to the cause then Bhutan would have returned its genuine citizens, and will make them return as and when she puts a hand into it. Now, refugees are left with no hope of returning to their homeland. Most refugees have faith in Indian media to pressure its governing heads to take instantaneous steps towards finding a lasting solution.

This is because, even when the international society wished for Indian involvement, it denied and pierces out the possibilities of grasping solution through bilateral consultation between Nepal and Bhutan. Nevertheless, media campaign in India would certainly sound worthy at this critical junction to overcome all possible hindrances. India itself is never in a position to take its responsibility for finding the solution but will actively participate to bar refugees who organize frequent peaceful demonstrations to return home.

India is more interested to view these refugees getting assimilated in Nepal or either resettled somewhere in a third country. Being a huge democratic country, it minds more to hear incidents related to deteriorating democratic and freedom exercises but how fair it is, to keep Bhutan, its border neighbor, behind the dark curtain?

India will have greater demand in the international arena if it can extend its sincere support for resolving Bhutanese refugee problem before it is too late. The rise of frustration and mental depression within the Bhutanese refugees will certainly greet various problems in Bhutan some days and India too wouldn’t fall under exception in the affected area as the latter shares close border with Bhutan.

Bhutan Blocks ‘Controversial’ News Site

2007-07-21T23:00:00.000-07:00

The royal government of Bhutan has blocked the Bhutan Times, from being viewed from within the country because, officials say, the site has been covering ‘controversial issues’.

The Bhutan Times has been seen as a popular site for forum discussions where people can register and express their opinion on important national issues.

The editorial policy of news organization has been to offer balanced and in depth news, covering both sides of the story.

However, some forum discussions were seen to be critical of the minister Sangey Nidup, who is maternal uncle of the present Crown King.

The regime’s decision to block the site is direct violation of individual’s right to information.

Article 7 of the Bhutanese constitution has provision of fundamental rights that includes the right to information and expression as well. Sub Article (2) of Article 7 states, ‘A Bhutanese citizen shall have the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion. No person shall be compelled to belong to another faith by means of coercion or inducement’.

Similarly, Sub Article (4) states, ‘There shall be freedom of press, radio and television and other forms dissemination of information, including electronic,’ and the (5) says, ‘A Bhutanese citizen shall have the right to information’.

Despite the constitution guaranteeing the Bhutanese people the right to information, the government continues to block that right.

As soon the issue was covered by the APFAnews.com, a website run by journalists in exile, the International Federation of Journalists (IFJ) expressed deep concern over Bhutanese regime’s initiative to block the site and called on the Bhutanese government to reverse the decision.

In a statement on the IFJ site, the organization’s director for the Asia-Pacific region, Jacqueline Park, said the action was both alarming and hypocritical.

“We strongly urge the Bhutanese government to overturn this decision, which can only be described as blatant censorship, and allow the Bhutanese people full access to the bhutantimes.com.

“It is a hypocritical move by the government to block local access to this website, particularly after taking so many positive steps towards a freer media, such as allowing the introduction of media privatisation last year,” Park said.

It seems that the regime is turning deaf ears to the demand raised by such international press bodies working for the promotion of peoples’ right to information at global level.

People’s democracy cannot be predicted where media freedom doesn’t exist. If the government of Bhutan is really serious towards stepping onto ‘democratization’ then it shouldn’t compromise with guaranteeing people’s right to information.

The Internet service has connected people globally. It is the only ‘round-table’ where opinions are highlighted and exchanged.

The blockage of the site, which was acting as one of the mediums to promote people’s right to information’ has left a question mark as to the seriousness of Bhutan’s plans for democracy.
Source: www.mediahelpingmedia.org

The Horrific Lives of Forgotten Refugees

2007-07-15T23:35:00.000-07:00

An estimated 80 thousands Nepali speaking people from southern belt of Bhutan, who fled to Nepal for safe living during early 1990s when the then Bhutanese despotic regime forcefully evicted them, even hadn’t anticipated that they would waste 17 years of horrific lives in eastern division of Nepal as refugees.

But, finally it twisted into a factual trance since the efforts to sort out potential solution of the catastrophe failed one after another at the preliminary phases. The tremendous increase in this population has now reached approximately one hundred and ten thousands, which itself is a big threat to increasing nuisances due to jam-packed living.

Cut-Short in facilities
The UNHCR including other aid agencies provide essential food items, shelter, medical care and education to these refugees. However, facilities being provided to them are not adequate.

The gradual cut-short in the facilities such as ration, medical facilities, kerosene, education aid and allowance for maintenance of the camps’ roofs has almost begun. The replace of kerosene oil with briquette which, it’s claimed, has been reported to be very harmful to normal health, is a better example of how these refugees are leading their vacillating future.

Upendra Acharya, sub-sector head of sector D at Beldangi-II camp is hurrying for distributing ration; however, the coal he has burnt hasn’t yet lighted. “It takes not less than an hour even to cook rice”, Acharya laments.

Bhimawoti Gurung, 65, a resident of Beldangi-I camp, a severe patient of Tuberclouses (TB), is fed-up with blowing the fire to light briquette for making her meal ready. She says that the daily routine of facing such difficulties has pushed back her chronic disease of returning to normalcy.

Despite reach of using electricity, refugees are bound to use such harmful briquette. Citing rise in the price hike, UNHCR cut down its supply in the beginning of 2005.

The most remarkable thing is that the guest, who arrives late, would have to wait empty stomach for hours to take another series of prepared meal. From this reality, it’s easy to detect how sick people in camps are facing troublesome even to boil water for taking drugs.

On the other side, refugee students are bound to opt for early bed despite giving time to their studies especially during the night time. Actually, the camp people are strictly prohibited from using electricity.

Supply of just half liter of kerosene oil to a family, whether small or joint, for at least seven days is not enough even to light candle. As a result, the academic performance of students under 10th grade has dramatically fallen down.

Tulashi Ram Kafley, 12, who scored second position in 5th grade last year, has now failed in most of the subjects in this year’s final examination. The reason is--- such brainy refugee students really lack other alternatives to study during the night time.

Jamuna Karki, Principal of Tri-Ratna Secondary School, a secondary level school run in Bhutanese refugee camp, Beldangi-II, also accepts that there is drastic fall in the academic result of students due to lack of kerosene oil.
The Asian Medical Doctors’ Association (AMDA), which has been rendering its medical care assistance to these refugees, has now cut-off most of the facilities. Refugees with chronic diseases are dieing inside huts even without being referred to better hospitals.

The shortage of adequate space for normal living, especially for joint family is yet another problem. No drop of rain drops out of roofs of the tent-like huts during the rainy seasons.

Escalating frustration
With the run of time, there is rise in mental dejection and frustration within individual refugees. The elongated stay under the plastic canopy with hesitant future has even led to the augment in suicide cases. The frequent attempts to suicide considering the unimproved lives in refugee camps have now become normal subjects.

These refugees, on the other side, lack income sources as they aren’t allowed to work legally in the host country. Actually, they are not allowed to leave camps without permission of Refugee Coordination Unit (RCU). However, most of the educated youths are working as a teacher in different private boarding schools in Nepal.

Dick Bir Mahat is amongst hundreds of such youths, currently working as English teacher in Sunrise Boarding School Lahan, a local area nearby the refugee camp. “I haven’t disclosed my identity to the school authority. I have fear of being expelled from my temporary job when the authority knows that I am a refugee”, Mahat says.

From his earning of about 4,000 Nepalese Rupees (Rs), he also manages basic expenses for his Graduation degree, which most of the refugee youths do.

Ran Bahadur Bhattarai served as a general teacher at secondary level school in refugee camps from the beginning of 1999 until 2005. Now, he is working as a resource teacher in one of the renowned schools in Kathmandu, denies revealing the name of the school, since he couldn’t see any alternatives to pursue his higher education while serving with just 1,375 Rs, first grade incentive, in camp schools.

Bhattarai, who has disclosed his identity to school authority, says that the school where he works is run by international mission. “I think quality is one of the influential factors that don’t bar refugees from getting any sorts of jobs”, Bhattarai adds. The bitter reality is---besides his whole day engagement in the school, he has to regularly attend his classes of Master’s degree in Education faculty at Tri-vhuwan University, evening session. Harka, his junior brother is also depending upon his earning for his Graduation degree in science and technology.

Polarisation in refugees
Citing the unfeasibility of early repatriation, the US and other several countries including the refugees’ chief aiding agency, UNHCR has almost begun hinting the package of third country exodus.

Since from the time when the third country resettlement package is brought-up it provoked faction within refugees; individual’s opinion can be distinctly seen divided into different forms. The literate youths’ circles are running behind third country resettlement. The other elderly, illiterate groups are still willing to get repatriated as they say they have sweated a lot to bring Bhutan into present state.

Leading political and apolitical organizations and majority of refugees have repeatedly criticized such moves claiming that the option of third country resettlement would not furnish entire justice to the stalemate.

A query, why America despite exerting pressure over Druk dictator to take back its citizens is encouraging these refugees in allowing the US land to relocation? always exists.

Atrocities
The history clearly reveals that during early 1990s when these people were forcefully evicted from the Himalayan Kingdom, Bhutan imposed ‘Security Acts’ which resulted into gross violation of even fundamental rights. Not only was this, hundreds of innocent youths lost their lives despite innocence. The similar numbers of people from southern belt were imprisoned and inhumanly tortured.

Still significant figures of southern residents are missing inside Bhutanese jails. The whereabouts of dozens is yet unknown. Many women and young ladies were attempted to death after gang rape in front of all family members by Bhutanese security forces.

Even today, neither any foreign human rights activists nor other international bodies are allowed to probe the ongoing ‘silent state terrorism’ inside the country. Press freedom, a milestone to democratization, is strictly under government threat, which shows that people inside the country, especially in southern division, are bound to remain within the periphery of sternly imposed laws.

These refugees are leading their uncertain lives without knowing for how long they would be fed by aid agencies such as the UNCHR. It would be too early to show optimism towards returning homeland as Bhutan is still hatching conspiracies to derail the repatriation process.

Exiled Media in Retrospection

2007-07-15T23:27:00.001-07:00

Bhutan has been best-known as the only country in the South Asia region that has continuous remarks of controlling media sectors. The frequent report released by different international human rights bodies and media organizations shows all these things.

About one sixth of the total population that fall under forcible eviction during early 1990s is currently languishing as refugees under the UNHCR-run camps in Nepal and different states of India for the last 17 years. It is no doubt that conceptualizing for private media sectors has been immensely felt by these evictees. Not only in refugee camps, Nepali speaking people (majority of evictees includes this ethnic group) have a greater role in initiating for the concept of print media in the existing history of Bhutan.

Various organizations formed in Bhutanese refugee camps started publishing different newspapers but with the flow of time each of them had a sensible background of early stoppage due to financial constraints and other alike reasons.

Newspapers such as the Mukti, published by Bhutan People’s Party under the editorship of Hari Adhikari during early 1990s, Manav Adhikarko Chirharan by Human Rights Organization of Bhutan in 1991, the Bhutan Focus by Students Union of Bhutan from 1 Dec. 1990, initiated new concepts of privatization in media sectors. These bulletins, however, has just served as the mouthpiece of concerned organizations. Later, backing up the same concepts different individual media professionals and organizations initiated independent newspapers such as Bhutan Observer, Bhutan Review, Bhutani Kopila etc.

The Sandesh, weekly professional paper run in Bhutanese refugee camps, under the editorship of B P Kasyap, which began its publication from 20 December 2000, has been closed with the stoppage of fund by LWF by mid 2004. The Bhutan Times, weekly, edited by Sagar Rai that started its hardcopy publication from July 2000 is yet another paper that existed only for six months due to lack of financial aid. Now, the paper with the same name i.e. Bhutan Times is launched inside Bhutan on April 30, 2006.

The currently under existed papers in Bhutanese refugee camps namely Bhutan Jagaran, Vidhyarthi Pratirodh and The Bhutan Reporter are also frequently meeting various hurdles including the financial assistance to still bring the paper into existence. All of the papers published from the refugee camps are strictly barred from bringing them to market. Whether it be weekly, fortnightly or monthly--- they aren’t given open market. These papers are just meant for private circulations.

It is no doubt that the lack of financial assistance has been long-standing as the key reason for early stoppage of newspapers in Bhutanese refugee camps. Many of the sponsoring organizations, aimed at promoting media situation, cite refugee status as the main crux for not rendering their continued support. Those which take initiatives at the preliminary phase quit their support in the middle without furnishing reliable reasons.

The other significant part is that when papers aren’t allowed to bring to the open market for sale due to host country’s law, the working team at all cannot generate money by selling them. The other message between the lines is that newspapers in Bhutanese refugee camps will have to be circulated free of costs--- readers in camps cannot afford even Nepalese rupees two to buy a sheet of paper. Meanwhile, the lack of adequate trained and volunteer journalists can be considered as yet another reason. Young, committed and volunteer journalists in refugee camps are always bound to struggle against constraint financial aid to continuous publication of any newspapers.

Actually, Bhutan doesn’t allow any press bodies to operate inside the country and there are none in the present context. The Organizations such as the Association of Press Freedom Activists (APFA) – Bhutan, Bhutan Press Union (BPU) and Third World Media Network (TWMN) – Bhutan Chapter are all established in Bhutanese refugee camps, meant for advocacy of media freedom in Bhutan.

Each of these organizations is working for the promotion of exiled media thereby advocating for complete press freedom, freedom of speech and expression in the country. However, all of them seem incapable of meeting needs of journalists in exile (giving training, continuously publishing newspapers, organizing workshops, seminars etc) mainly due to lack of adequate funds.

The http://www.apfanews.com , a news portal launched by APFA – Bhutan since last year, which has been trying to cover all issues related to Bhutan and refugees, is a good model to say that journalists in exile are also committed towards promoting peoples’ right to information.

Despite various challenges ahead, young journalists in Bhutan’s exiled camps are committed towards working for people’s right to information and for raising their voice for establishment of complete media freedom in Bhutan. The possibility of publishing daily or weekly newspapers seems impossible until adequate financial aid is provided. However, some monthly papers are still running inside Bhutanese refugee camps.

There is an essence of international bodies, working for the promotion of media sectors, to extend their fullest support and solidarity to Bhutan’s exiled media. Official recognition is yet another method towards supportive approach for the establishment of media freedom in Bhutan. The affiliation of Bhutan Committee at Third World Media Network (TWMN) serves as a better illustration. Not only this, other international press bodies should also open its door for affiliation to Bhutan’s media bodies.

Nepal Should Form Permanent Task Force

2007-07-15T23:25:00.000-07:00

Since the inception of the Bhutanese refugee stalemate the frequent change in government in Nepal is stirring one after the other. With this amend in government, Nepal’s official and firm stance upon this catastrophe has never been felt.

With the run-up to April up rise between the SPA and Maoists, refugees were quite positive towards treading stepping towards their solution as well. Now, national and international political analysts have admitted that the lately formed interim government, including the revolutionary force, Maoists would triumphantly hold election to the Constituent Assembly (CA). Finally, hopes and positive aspirations have once again revived within refugees following the peaceful measures in Nepal.

Aside from preparing for the CA polls, Nepal government’s firm stance has been not yet known.

Again there will be formation of another government after this election. The more Nepal government ignores the plight, the further it would get prolonged and--- the supplementary complications it generates. Considering the past developments it would not be mistaken to mention here that Nepal government alone cannot deliver entire justice to Bhutanese refugees.

From the accord of the then home minister Sher Bdr Deuba to verify refugees into four categories to the annulment of the same move by former DPM K.P. Sharma Oli, Nepal is seen supple in its position. A number of new faces came each time in high level government officials but couldn’t sort possible ways out for resolving the impasse. It was made public through different media that during the King’s direct rule in Nepal, the then foreign minister Ramesh Nath Pandey had seized some of the important files related to Bhutanese refugee crisis.

From the time when these refugees came to Nepal until today, about one dozen of government has been changed in Nepal. Each government that remained in power didn’t progress satisfactorily in the name of furnishing durable solution to the problem. Not only this, some of the government even could not manage leisure time to deal the issue. However, the refugees showed their kind patience as the bloodshed situation in Nepal due to civil war was one of the considerable aspect for pushing-back Nepal’s top priority to the refugee issue.

Now Frustration and mental depression within individual refugees is heightened due to long stay inside the unimproved camps. Besides this, the aid agencies including the UNHCR are trying to get sidelined from helping these refugees further more. These organizations are curtailing the budgets citing financial constraints. Not to ignore the reality, it can be a challenging intellectual task on Nepal’s part if it cannot take this issue very seriously.

Bhutanese prime minister’s recent remarks terming innocent refugees as ‘ready-made-terrorists’ and it’s allegation to Nepal for being responsible was another test on Nepal’s behalf on how it would react. The then DPM and Foreign Minister KP Sharma Oli reacted to the statement simply stating that it was just a misfortune. It is Nepal that has been allowing these refugees to stay in its soil on the basis of humanitarian ground for the last sixteen years. So, Nepal’s weak reaction upon Bhutan’s superfluous blaming is yet another point to question on Nepal’s fragile stance.

At this juncture, formation of a permanent task force (national commission) to cope-up with the problem will have very significant consequences. Amongst other alternatives, it implies that the way the commission would pave a way towards lasting solution can affect the deteriorating scenario. And this commission will play a historic role should it be able to accommodate all intellectual groups including senior civil society members.

Without any further delay Nepal should prioritise the Bhutanese refugee issue acknowledging the necessity of involving India in the talks. It would be worthless if still Nepal deal the issue bilaterally. On the other side, Nepal can internationalize the issue to bar criticism from international communities for its ‘diplomatic failure’ to grasp the solution until sixteen years. Refugees are more enthusiastic that the newly formed government in Nepal would pave a way for the solution at the earliest.

Monarch’s Democratic Responsibilities

2007-07-15T23:17:00.000-07:00

Soon after the fourth Druk king, His Majesty Jigme Singye Wangchuk handed over his responsibilities of the monarch and head of state of Bhutan to Crown Prince Jigme Kheshar Namgyal Wangchuk, the latter had signed the 57-year-old ‘Friendly Treaty’ between India and Bhutan, inked during colonial era of the 1950s in New Delhi.

The Oxford educated, new King Jigme Kheshar Namgyal Wangchuk signed it representing Bhutan. This is one of the initial initiatives of the new king since his father ascended the throne.

King’s political role
It is a matter of great revelation that the trend of Druk king, who shows direct and active role in Bhutan’s politics, is exactly carried on by the new king as well. Thus, this particular step from the new king prior to the 2008 general election itself is a strong proves to question on whether he would play democratic and liberal roles thereby establishing himself as a constitutional monarch.

It is believed that this historic step has given Bhutan more freedom in foreign policy and military purchases and redefines its special ties with India. As Article 2 of the treaty that has asks Bhutan to be 'guided by the advice of government of India in regard to its external affairs', is being reviewed. Now Bhutan itself has taken the responsibility of deciding in its external affairs. This is a well-coming step if Bhutan can transform it into a practical perspective.

Rewording this particular Article has certainly reminded Bhutanese nationals of boosting for their national sovereignty and independency. However, it would be too early to boost as stakeholders at Thimphu frequently hatch conspiracies. Undoubtedly, it has also visualized broader concept that will mean New Delhi giving more freedom to Thimphu to pursue its foreign policy as long as it does not clash with its strategic interests. But what changes would it be made in practicality is yet to be seen.

Meanwhile, the widespread query at this point is that whether India, which has kept its military cantonments at different areas of Bhutan, in the name of carrying military operation to increasing ULFA activities, will now withdraw those barracks. Similarly, Bhutan is stating that it would hold general election in 2008 and would elect peoples’ representatives. But without stepping onto this entire process, the new king including the hand-picked Prime Minister have rushed ahead for revising one of the most controversial and widely criticized 1949-treaty.

There is not a single point to believe that the colonial treaty, which has suppressed Bhutanese people from exercising independency and national sovereignty from India’s direct role in Bhutan’s politics, is partly reviewed. But it shouldn’t be forgotten here that the treaty was signed by new king, who is a follower of senior Jigme. It is easy to sign on treaty rather than bringing its agreement into practical perspectives. Thus, both Bhutan and India should consider their peoples’ wish and sentiments.

Negligence of refugee issue
Meanwhile, it was much expected that the new king would discuss the refugee stalemate with India government officials during his visit there but he couldn’t manage leisure time to put hand in this problem. This negligence leaves a clear message whether the new Oxford educated Druk king is serious towards resolving the long standing refugee issue.

Eventually, the signing of Indo-Bhutan treaty is the second step towards development from the new king. Just few days after Jigme Kheshar acquired the throne, the 86th National Assembly (NA) of Bhutan, where the crown prince himself was present during the inaugural session, termed all refugees living in Nepal as ‘Ready-made-terrorists.’ The parliamentarians have claimed that to repatriate refugees would mean to importing terrorists from Nepal. Had the new king been positive towards refugee crisis NA meeting wouldn’t have accused refugees of being terrorists.

The present king is definite to absorb a secure position if he successfully safe lands the exiled Bhutanese crisis. He would never be reckoned as a democratic king unless refugees, currently languishing in Nepal and different states of India, are returned to their original homeland with honour and dignity, and providing compensation thereby promoting guarantee of human rights. The new king of Bhutan has a greater role to play in the present history. He is enrolled within a periphery of a number of challenges and hurdles for proving himself as a democratic monarch.

HRW Report and Durable Solution

2007-07-15T21:56:00.000-07:00

The United State-based one of the potential international human rights organizations i.e. Human Rights Watch (HRW) has released a 86-page report titled ‘Last Hope : The need for durable solution for Bhutanese refugees in Nepal and India’ on May 17 in Kathmadu. The report has well spoken of the facts related to unheard voices of suppressed Bhutanese people since centuries.

Thimphu’s atrocities
The HRW in its ‘Executive Summary’ has clearly mentioned that the right to return is not by itself a sufficient condition for the promotion of voluntary repatriation as a durable solution.

“Repatriation in safety and dignity is feasible only if the country of origin is willing and able to guarantee respect for returnee’s human rights. In the case of Bhutanese refugees in Nepal such guarantees are lacking. Not only does Bhutan remain unwilling to return the vast majority of Bhutanese refugees but it also continues to discriminate against the remaining ethnic Nepali population in Bhutan.”

This particular fact-based finding inside the HRW report implies that the long-standing claim of the Druk edicts for ‘Gross National Happiness’ seems a matter of laughter.

The summary of the report has further stated that ethnic Nepali have great difficulties obtaining so-called No Objection Certificates (NOCs), which are a prerequisite for government employment, assess to higher education, obtaining trade and business licenses, travel document and buying and selling land. Being denied a NOC deprives a person of all most all means of earning a living.

It is true that almost except for few instances, ethnic Nepalis have been long-suppressed both physically and mentally. Ironically, the report has left questions on whether Bhutan would meet its claim for stepping onto so-called a democratic country latest by 2008.

The summary has also said that a nationwide census completed in 2005 inside Bhutan classified 13% of current Bhutanese permanent residents as “non-nationals”. Here the query, however is my personal, is if this could be considered as the beginning of symptoms towards opting for ‘ethnic cleansing policy’ as in early 1990s. The world community was well-informed of this fact even prior to the HRW’s initiative to release the report. However, it is sad that no measures were taken to question on Bhutan’s under-practiced atrocities as mentioned above.

The HRW’s recommendation, especially to India, is worth mentioning to be quoted here. The report has urged government of India to allow all Bhutanese refugees currently living in India to regularize their status and give them the possibility to acquire Indian citizenship. But, it is a matter of essence to understand here that their sentiments and choices should be given equal priority.

Though is a matter of farce for seeing it into practicality the HRW has also asked government of India to encourage Bhutan to immediately stop its policy of discrimination against its ethnic Nepali citizens. India, not to an exception, is carrying Bhutan under its armpit since centuries. It is one of the major aid countries which is wholeheartedly supporting and monitoring the upcoming so-called general election, to be held in 2008, for the first time in Bhutan’s history.

The findings of the report such as the ethnic Nepalis who reside in Bhutan reported the HRW that many of them are being denied citizenship cards has well backed-up a strong point that India, one of the big democracies of the world, has been indirectly shouldering Bhutanese regime’s silent state terrorism.

Durable Solution
The report has also dealt on the durable solution of Bhutanese refugee issue viz repatriation, local integration and third country resettlement. It has given more emphasis on the third option i.e. third country resettlement, however it has said since the offer is coined there is escalating confusions due to lack of reliable information.

Indeed, the fact that complications has risen after the US proposed for third country resettlement, cannot be denied. Until those countries which are wishing to resettle these refugees deliver adequate information about the offer the situation will further mould into troublesome. The HRW has also urged the government of Nepal to continue to demand that the government of Bhutan respect refugees’ right to return to Bhutan.

It seems that opening ‘single option’ in the name of durable solution for Bhutanese refugee imbroglio would rather add fuel to the fire. This is because refugees can be distinctly seen divided into different categories. Thus, authorities concerned should work towards unlocking all possible options.

Meanwhile, it is equally necessary on the part of the world communities and international rights bodies to probe into the ongoing atrocities inside Bhutan. Otherwise, Bhutan is likely to step onto ‘ethnic cleansing policy’ again thereafter putting an estimated 80, 000 ethnic Nepali into further quandary.

Bhutan's continued Atrocities

2007-07-11T06:47:00.000-07:00

The atrocities inside Bhutan have been at escalating rates. The despotism on innocent civilians by the Royal Bhutan Army (RBA), are quite known to us. The recent detention of at least 39 innocent people within a couple of months is one of the latest subjugation of Druk oligarchy.

Detention
These detainees are extensively accused of hatching plots for armed revolt against the regime. Even their family members have not been given accessibilities and many children are now living alone after their parents get arrested. This certainly deserves condemnation from international rights bodies and authorities concerned. Bhutanese regime’s such initiative at the time it claims for holding fair election in 2008 is appalling.

The security forces have already begun torturing them in inhuman ways. To date there are no any reports that international rights activists have taken measures for their unconditional release. The surprising thing is- for how long will international communities stand as ‘bystander’ for Bhutan’s continued atrocities since centuries?

Not only this, the condition of those imprisoned in the peaceful demonstration during early 1990s is still unknown. Some hundreds are arrested by absolute Druk oligarchy at different times after this period as well. However, the sad part is that their whereabouts is never known and several attempts to rescue them have always failed one after the other.

Druk regime’s these sorts of atrocities are quite known to international communities including rights bodies. Here it also appears that the Royal Government of Bhutan (RGOB) has hatched out fabricated allegations against these people simply to save the face of royal regime as it has been claiming for holding fair election in 2008. Not to an exception the international human rights bodies should be deeply concerned about the life and liberty of those detained by the RGOB.

There are no any ways to predict that the Druk government-controlled Judiciary system would exercise all norms of ‘fair trial’ during the investigation process. Bhutan actually doesn’t have independent judiciary that delivers justice to suppressed and unheard voices. And, it should be well noted here that no any detainees, on whatsoever cases, in Bhutanese jails are left physically untouched even if s/he is kept even for few hours.

The history clearly reveals that human rights leader Tek Nath Rizal was arrested from his residence in Birtamode on December 16, 1989 by the then panchayat government. He was extradited to Bhutan government via Druk air on the very day. It was the same judiciary system that stated Rizal innocent on December 17, 1999 before releasing on the same date.

This shows that question on detainee’s fair trial would just be a blunder. Even if these people are Maoist militia then Bhutan shall be able to bar international criticism only if the investigation process be carried-out amidst international human rights bodies.

This detention, undoubtedly, is a direct violation of the provisions of international instruments like the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (Article 19) and the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment.

The other irony is that India, one of the big democracies of the world, has been backing up Bhutan since centuries. It is India that has extended its full support to the forthcoming general election to be held in 2008. And these sorts of continued atrocities from the Druk government speaks of the truth that India should be held morally responsible as it has been standing as silent spectator to Bhutan’s carnage.
Thus, international human rights organizations should take intervention on the situation and initiate urgent measures for their immediate and unconditional release.

Attack on Media
On the other hand, this month the regime has also blocked one of the popular sites i.e. www.bhutantimes.com , from viewing within Bhutan, accusing it of carrying controversial issues.

Even when Article 7 (4) of the Constitution states that "there shall be freedom of press, radio, TV and other forms of dissemination of information, including electronics”, the government has taken such initiatives.

Bhutan’s claim that it would hold fair election in 2008 is a farce. When viewed upon the increasing atrocities from the regime there are no means to believe that it would step onto a democratic country, a model to 21st century. Attacking media on one hand and arresting innocent people on the other hand clearly states that people’s full fledged democracy can never be expected from the present ruling elites.

Therefore, it should not be forgotten here that Bhutan is hoodwinking the international communities for stepping onto so-called a ‘Democratic Bhutan’, simply without being serious to its protocols. The RGOB shouldn’t be led freed from delivering entire justification to continued atrocities since centuries.

2008 Election in Bhutan and Repatriation

2007-07-11T06:02:00.000-07:00

The date for the first historic general election in Bhutan is drawing closer. After the repeated calls by the chief election commissioner Kunzang Wangdi for formation and registration of the political parties, two parties have been announced by this weekend.

People’s Democratic Party (PDP) and Bhutan People United Party (BPUP) have been formed with declared objectives to take participation in the 2008 election. It is learnt through the Bhutan Observer, weekly newspaper run inside Bhutan that the serving Minister Tshering Tobgay is probable to lead the PDP, which mostly has retired government officials and king’s former advisors. From this particular scene we can easily predict whether those parties would work on suppressed Bhutanese peoples’ behalf.

The atrocities that have been on full swing inside Bhutan from the Druk regime haven’t yet stopped. The recently released ‘SAARC human rights report-2006’ has kept Bhutan in the list of ‘2nd in the SAARC Human Rights Violators Index 2006.’ Not only this, it has entirely revealed out the unseen atrocities ongoing inside Bhutan. This sorts of fact based reports at a time when Bhutan claim for holding democratic election in 2008, shows that the fairness in the election is a farce.

The other party, Bhutan People United Party (BPUP), whose chief is not yet made public, claimed it is ready to contest in the forthcoming election. The formation of political parties at a time when confusions exists whether who is the present King of Bhutan, shows that the going-to-be-held election in Bhutan would not be fair.

The Oxford educated, so-assumed new King Jigme Kheshar Namgyal Wangchuk has recently signed newly reviewed ‘Indo-Bhutan Friendship Treaty’ representing Bhutan. On December 14 last year, it was announced that the Bhutanese King Jigme Singye Wangchuk abdicated throne to his son. Even most of the countries including Bhutan’s border sharing neighbor, India also lauded the move of Jigme Singye and have extended congratulations to the new Oxford educated King.

However, when referred to the newly drafted text of the reviewed treaty, it is clearly mentioned that Jigme Khesar has signed it representing Bhutan in the capacity of Crown Prince. It is written in the text as ‘For the Government of the Kingdom of Bhutan, Jigme Khesar Namgyel Wangchuck, The Crown Prince of Bhutan.

Meanwhile, it is equally necessary to know whether Bhutan at present time is kingless otherwise, the whimsical statement of fourth King, Jigme Singye Wangchuk stating his abdication of throne to his son and the latter’s capacity of only being crown prince, as mentioned in the text of reviewed treaty, is a strong point to question on whether Bhutan can hold 2008 election in the country.

The other most significant thing is that the political parties existing in the refugee camps, which are struggling for Bhutan democracy for the last two decades, are ignored totally from getting registered in the coming election. Their history of struggle is on the verge of extinction. Until Bhutan guarantees media freedom and allows the human rights organization to legally probe, it cannot step onto a democratic state.

Bhutan’s delaying tactics to derail the repatriation process of over one hundred and six thousands, currently languishing under the UNHCR-administered camps in Nepal, is a means to bar their right to caste vote in the forthcoming election. Now, the 17 years long refugee issue is gaining further complications.

It is true that except for the few instances, the Bhutanese refugees are now confronting a dark future inside refugee camps. Frustration and mental depression within individual refugees is heightened due to long term stay inside the unimproved camps. Besides this, the aid agencies including the UNHCR are trying to get sidelined from helping these refugees further more.

The US government has proposed Nepal for the establishment of the OPE, intended at assisting the Bureau of population, refugees and Migration, Department of State, USA, providing it the processing support needed to prepare refugees for resettlement. It is expected that the OPE is being set up primarily to process up to 60,000 Bhutanese refugees over the next 4-5 years.

This is one of the welcoming moves of the US for those refugees, who are enthusiastic towards getting resettled at the earliest, considering Bhutan’s delaying tactics for dignified return to their original homeland. Meanwhile, those still wishing for repatriation process has began criticizing it stating that it would further shadow the movement for Bhutan democracy and their right to return.

It should be carefully considered and regulated in a manner that refugees’ right to return home, should be promoted by all concerned authorities and individuals as still majority of people in camps have a wish to get repatriated provided in a condition that it should take place in a dignified way with a guarantee of their safe living inside Bhutan.

The State government’s offer of third country resettlement will gain widespread support and solidarity if still it pressurizes Bhutan for dignified return to those who are wishing. And this particular step certainly would be proven as a ‘milestone’ for Bhutan democracy. Not only this, it would discourage Bhutanese regime towards further eviction of people from the country.

Meanwhile, Bhutan should clearly understand that if these refugees opt for third country resettlement and still posse a feeling of nationality, it would be at menace because those refugees would be well equipped both economically and mentally to step towards working for transforming power from the absolute regime to people. However, it would be too early to say that those ‘going to be resettled’ would work for Bhutan democracy.