Bhutan: Democracy, Refugees & Other Issues: Update No. 85

BHUTAN: Democracy, Refugees and Other Issues : Update No. 86

By Dr. S. Chandrasekharan.

It was no wonder that recently Bhutan was ranked as the most peaceful of the SAARC countries by the Global Peace Index created jointly by the Australia-based Institute of Economics and Peace and the Economic Intelligence Unit.

Unlike the other country in the region the Maldives that started its experiments in democracy at the same time, Bhutan seems to be sailing along smoothly though problems do crop up in the interpretation of some clauses in the constitution particularly in the nature of relationship between the upper house- the National Council and the lower house- the Parliament.

The opposition though small is active and makes it presence felt by asking very searching questions though it is done in a very friendly cooperative manner.

Two statements by the leaders come to my mind. One was by the present Prime Minister Jigme Thinley in July 2009 when he said that "in a democracy everything has to be done as per law. At times it is difficult to work in line with the constitution because most laws including the constitution are new. This poses a challenge of interpretation. Every person has a different interpretation.

Lyonpo Sonam Tobgay the former chairman of the constitution drafting committee said in October 2009 that democracy invokes the building of consensus and making national interest triumph over narrow sectoral and personal interests. Parliamentarians must have the ability and desire to seek harmony, the foresight and capacity to adapt to adjust to the changing circumstances. Indeed the Parliamentarians are looking for a consensus and not confrontation- be it on the issue of financing of political parties or power to increase the taxes etc.

This question of interpretation came up again during the fifth session of the parliament this year. In his state of the nation address on 1^st July, Jigme Thinley said that differences are natural in the course of the nation’s journey on the path of democracy.

He was referring to the differences between the National Council and the Parliament on issues like the authority to pass the budget, whether the ministers should make themselves available to answer questions by the members of the National Council, whether the government is authorised to raise taxes without referring to the parliament etc. He was of the view that such differences in interpretation will have to be sorted out by the courts.

The Refugee Issue:

From what I see, for Bhutan the refugee issue is non existent. No purpose is served either in having any more joint ministerial meeting of the two countries Nepal and Bhutan. But can the problem be wished away? I do not think so.

I had the chance to see the visuals of Prime Minister Jigme Thinley’s interview with Al Jazeera on the eve or during the SAARC summit. While he responded with confidence on the developments, including the concept of Gross National Happiness, I saw him struggling for the right words while answering questions on the refugee issue. And he made the astounding statement that the refugees are not Bhutanese citizens at all notwithstanding the fact that over 70 percent of those counted in the only camp so far- the Kudenabari came under categories I and II. Category I are verified and acknowledged as citizens by the joint verification teams and category II are those citizens who were supposed to have "voluntarily" given up their citizenship to leave the country!

As of 9^th August, the number who have left the camps for resettlement would include

USA- 29496

Canada 1872

Australia 1787

New Zealand 461

Norway 335

Denmark 326

Netherlands 224.

The United Kingdom is the new entrant for accepting refugees and 37 persons are getting ready to go, out of 100 agreed to by that country.

One activist who visited some of the resettled refugees in US had this to say.

* The refugees in the US are spread over 40 States and the major receiving States are Texas- 2961, New York 2183, Georgia- 2060, Pennsylvania- 1868 and Arizona-1594. The refugees appear to have adjusted to the new environment. Many of them have joined community colleges to improve their educational skills. Three of the resettled medical doctors have completed residency and have joined the upper income groups.

* The resettlement package adequately addresses the economic needs of the refugees. Many are undergoing classes on American history and culture to obtain citizenship. In course of time they would become American citizens. In due course they will be able to visit their "home country"- Bhutan.

* The real hardship is in meeting the cultural needs. There is a move to organise themselves into communities for taking care of cultural and religious needs. Social welfare societies are being organised in all the States and common concerns are being addressed.

Elsewhere, an Australian citizen of Bhutanese origin, Parasuram Sharma Luitel who was selected to represent the Refugee Council of Australia to advocate on behalf of the refugees and resettlement issues of South Asian Countries raised various issues relating to Bhutan and Bhutanese refugees in the 48^th Standing Committee meeting of the UNHCR and Annual consultations with the NGOs in Geneva between June 22 and July 1.

He raised the issues of unregistered refugees in Nepal and India ( 30,000 in India alone), family reunion, concerns of single mothers and widows languishing in camps and provision of visa issuance for travelling within the resettled countries and also help the repartition of those who choose to return back to Bhutan. The last point is tricky and not easy either.

The exiled Bhutanese political groups have finally joined together. They held a press conference a few days ago. The Conference was addressed by Teknath Rijal, Chairperson of Bhutanese Movement Steering Committee, R.K. Dorji (who was recently released) President of Druk National Congress, Balaram Poudyal President of Bhutan People’s Party and Dr. D.N.S. Dhakal Chief executive of the Bhutan National Democratic Party,

The leaders declared that the future movement for democracy will be launched under the leadership of R.K. Dorji. The meeting called upon Bhutan to repatriate the refugees to Bhutan( of whatever that will be left?), release of political prisoners and create a climate for the political parties to return to Bhutan for an "inclusive" democracy. It is a tall order particularly, when Nepal where they are located is itself tottering in unstable political conditions. Once 90 percent of refugees are resettled, what will be left for an inclusive democracy?

One redeeming feature for those still languishing in the refugee camps- it is now 19 years- is the UNHCR which is doing good work. Its Chief serving in Nepal, Stephane Jaquemet, gave an excellent overview of the problems of resettlement and the efforts taken by them to help the refugees to the extent possible. It must be said that now there is hardly any opposition to those who are opting for resettlement unlike earlier days and the rejection rate is also very minimal. Conditions in Nepal being such, it is quite likely that most of the refugees would opt to go for resettlement. The points made by Mr. Stephane Jaquemet were

* Nepal has become the largest resettlement country in the world and the rejection rate is just one percent. This year, there has been no rejection.

* Repatriation will continue and UNHCR will continue so long as the host countries are willing to accept. With Bhutan not encouraging the return of the refugees to Bhutan and in the absence of Nepal not offering to take anyone, the only way out for the refugees is to go for resettlement.

* The Nepal Government is not blocking the resettlement process and this continued even when the Maoists were in power.

* There are some 78000 refugees still left in the camps and of these 22000 of them are till undecided. Every month they have around 1000 to 1500 new registrations for resettlement. If this trend continues, probably 90 percent will express their interest for resettlement.

* In resettlement they do find problems in some of the families. They have families with divided opinions with younger people wanting to go. They have families with elderly people who do not want to go and do not want to send the younger generation too. There are complicated cases relating to separated families.

* Another issue is about unregistered refugees. In their view there are not more than 3000 in all in the camps.

*There are also problems relating to some Nepali or Indian woman married to refugee men. Those married to the refugees cannot be classified as refugees but only as dependents. The UNHCR is looking at those cases sympathetically as they have to take into account the principle of family unity which is one of the core principles of refugee law.

To the charge that the UNHCR is looking only for resettlement and not repatriation, Mr. Jacquemet pointed out that the only realistic solution is resettlement and not repatriation. I quote-

" We don’t want people to return as a second class citizens. We need to have a guarantee by Bhutan that if the refugees return they will return with full citizenship, with their human rights respected. Short of that we are not going to promote repatriation because we have so far no such guarantee."

So what are the political parties in exile going to do? To repatriate those people who are not welcome in the host country? They should focus on those who are in custody and whose whereabouts are not known. One such case is that of Zangpo whose wife is said to be going

from pillar to post to trace him. He is the general Secretary of the DNC who left Bhutan in 1993 as a refugee and now said to be arrested by the Assam Police and then handed over to Bhutanese authorities.

But the most important thing for them would be, not to disturb the 25 percent of the population- the Lhotsampas who are still left in southern Bhutan!