Verification and hope of Bhutanese refugees

By Mandal JN

The bonhomie of Bhutanese refugees in seven different camps is low as no decision on their fate and future destiny has been reached even after the completion of the verification process at the Khudunabari camp. It took the Joint Verification Team (JVT) 153 days to complete the verification of 1964 families and about 12,500 individuals. Every day refugees were ferried by arranged private transport in two shifts from Khudunabari to the JVT office, Damak, a distance of about 50 km. It was very interesting to note people boarding and alighting from the bus with cheerful faces of satisfaction and hope that they would soon be back in Bhutan, the land where they were born and brought up and where their forefathers had toiled and overcome a series of turmoil to make it what it is today.

The verification work was never interrupted nor disturbed by the refugees. Instead, the work of the JVT and other staff of His Majesty’s Government of Nepal (HMG/Nepal) involved with the refugees, particularly in the verification, was appreciated and close cooperation was extended by the camp committee. Some of the Bhutanese organisations kept a close watch on the process and were always ready to extend their help to complete the verification as early as possible. They were further encouraged by time-to-time statements from the Foreign Ministry of Nepal that the repatriation would start any time as soon as the verification was over. But to everyone’s dismay, immediate repatriation seems remote though the verification was practically over on December 14, 2001. No concrete decision has been reached so far. The process that follows immediately will have to do with harmonisation and categorization, nomenclature and perhaps the end to the Bhutanese refugee saga.

Everyone is confused by the stalemate in the refugee problem. Before completion of the verification, the Secretarial Level Talks were held in Kathmandu from November 6-8, 2001 to avoid suspense about the fate of the refugees. Unfortunately, the talks ended in impasse because of both the governments sticking to their own stances. The Royal Government of Bhutan (RGOB) did not budge from its old stand and insisted on four refugee categories: Bhutanese who have been forcibly evicted, Bhutanese who have voluntarily migrated, Non-Bhutanese and Bhutanese who have committed criminal acts. Whereas HMG Nepal insisted on two categories: a) Bhutanese and b) Non-Bhutanese.

The two differing positions on the same issue are keeping the two governments from coming to a common point of resolution. The main bone of contention is category 2---Bhutanese who have "voluntarily migrated". Bhutan claims that the people in this category have filled up their migration forms, taken compensation for their land from the government and left the country. It also says that according to the provisions of the law of the land, these people cannot be accepted back. On the other hand, the refugees argue that they were made to sign the "voluntary migration" forms at gunpoint and evicted from the country. They also ask how a person can migrate without any prior arrangement with another country and wish to become. They also claim that they have a lot of movable and immovable property in Bhutan where they have lived for generations. They never knew before what Nepal looked like. They still feel themselves like strangers in Nepal.

Bhutanese refugees started coming to Nepal for asylum since 1991. Initially, only a few families arrived and eked out their livelihood with the help of local supporters. But gradually the numbers started increasing and there was an time when more than 10,000 people arrived in one week as the RGOB reportedly took harsher steps against the southern Bhutanese. Now there are seven camps hosting about 100,000 refugees in the two districts of Jhapa and Morang in Eastern Nepal. The camps are managed by His Majesty’s Government of Nepal and UNHCR and implementing partners. In an endeavour to find an amicable and permanent solution HMG Nepal initiated dialogue with the RGOB in 1993. Besides, there were international efforts of a similar nature to help resolve the protracted Bhutanese refugee problem. After seven years of consistent persuasion, did the two governments finally agree at the eleventh round of bilateral talks held in Kathmandu December 25, to carry out verification of the refugees in the camps. As agreed, the Joint Verification Team consisting of 5 members each, was formed and the verification exercise started from Khudunabari refugee camp on 25th March 2001.

The team has verified 1935 families and 12091 individuals with the exception of 489 absentees and a few marriage cases. Now the next step is not yet fixed. Apparently, no decision will be taken before the eleventh SAARC summit in Kathmandu from January 4-6, 2002. The heads of states or governments will be discussing and signing documents on terrorism, girl trafficking, HIV/AIDS, poverty elimination, regional trade, etc but not on the Bhutanese refugees issue which is, of course, one of the burning issues in the region as one member country is bearing the brunt of refugees dumped by another member country. Even after the ministerial level talks, it is not certain that the two governments will arrive at any concrete resolution if the RGOB continues to hold to its own previous position. And if the mechanical strategy to speed up the verification in other camps is not improved, the process is going to take years to complete, given the delaying tactics of the RGOB. On the other hand, it should also be remembered that the enduring capacity of people, especially the youths who have spent eleven years in the camps in hope is fading. From the increasing frustration in the camps coupled with the anti-social activities doing the rounds, some aggressive activities are bound to take place anywhere, either in Nepal or in Bhutan. In that case, who will be responsible? Whom to blame? Bhutanese refugees have patience when we look at the aggressive or even subversive activities in similar situations in other parts of the world. Therefore, something concrete should be worked out to rekindle their hopes before their patience wears out.

However, the Royal Government of Bhutan should not put the lives of the 100,000 Bhutanese refugees at stake. Both the Governments should sincerely do some soul-searching to reach a peaceful and permanent solution acceptable to the refugees. They should not be left in limbo with their fate undecided. The verification in other camps should be started outright within a time frame and all the verified Bhutanese refugees should retain the right to return to their homesteads with safety, dignity and honour.

(The author is deputy director of Refugee Coordination Unit)

It is so frustrating

By Reema Shrestha

Wow, I was really excited when I got admission in Mumbai after SLC. From the beginning of my education, I geared up by taking sociology. After bachelors’ degree in arts, I had planned to do masters in social work. As planned, did masters in social work from India. During my study, I had very good field work experience and from university we were labelled as professional social workers. The day I got master’s degree, I was so overjoyed and assured that I would be working in NGOs as a social worker to serve the deprived community people. After achieving master’s degree certificate, I rushed back to my hometown, Katmandu with lots of enthusiasm, dream of serving deprived community and using my knowledge, creativity in action, with lots of expectation from NGOs where I was dreaming of working with.

Unfortunately when I applied for a job, I was totally disappointed. Wherever I dropped applications, they rejected me saying I was raw and inexperienced, despite my master’s degree in social work and quite a good work experience during my studies. Then I got a chance to work in one NGO. They appointed me as a trainee, where I had to do all secretariat work as typist and almost similar work which was supposed to be done by a well paid permanent worker. We social workers are just taken as volunteers and exploited by saying, "you are new so you have to learn". I just want to know aren’t we, social workers, a human? Can’t we have to eat and live in society? With volunteer job how will we be able to survive in this commercial world? How long we have to volunteer to gain the so called experience ? It’s been seven months since I began working as a volunteer. Now, I wonder if I ever get an opportunity to work as a permanent member with defined designation. I am confused of my profession being social worker. I ask myself, is master’s degree that important to get a good job or a right jack is needed to get a job in NGOs? All my enthusiasm and knowledge is just fading away, I don’t know what to do I cannot leave the volunteer work and sit idle and if I work, I feel so frustrated being master’s degree holder and professional social worker still struggling as a volunteer worker. I just want to know from the concerned person as to how we will gain experience.

Today’s debate on local governance

By Prem Raj Goutam

The debate fails to acknowledge that the value of democracy is not judged merely by its capacity to deliver quantitative goods and services. Rather, its value lies in its ability to generate a process by which the people learn and interact and create a social and economic network among themselves. Countries around the world offer ample lesson that any miracle of abundance, either of goods or services, created without true participation of the people, can have monumental and historical significance but would not raise society from social, economic and political chaos.

We have to recognise that democratic and social forces can deliver the goods and services as efficiently as one can expect out of emergency rule. We tend to forget that even without the Nazis, the trains in democratic Germany today are most punctual and efficient.

The point I am making here is to identify those elements and factors in governance which are very critical for effective and efficient performance. There is no need to be haunted by a ‘soft state’ syndrome which was considered a normal phenomenon under the past governance system. The important element of a democratic governance system is its ability to counteract the effects of the soft state syndrome.

The principles of participation in governance have widely expanded the definition of democracy in recent years. As a result the decentralization of power and local government have taken a central place in the discussions that take place around the socio-economic development in the country. The importance of local government was demonstrated by the fact that soon after the sitting of parliament after the promulgation of democracy, legislation affecting decentralisation and local government was passed, albeit not in the form expected. Nevertheless, it was a demonstration of the commitment of the new democratic government towards the constitutional provisions on greater participation of the people in the governance of the country and the concept of decentralisation.

To redress poverty and the miseries of the people hundreds of experiments and studies were carried out and several thousand reports were prepared during these periods. Three draft bills on local government were prepared separately by different political parties, during their respective administration. The debate in parliament was very intense and even took a violent turn. But unfortunately the debate was directed to an issue which had little connection with the cause of decentralization or the devolution of power. Nor was it on issues relating to the participation of the local people in governance, and not in the least on the minimum autonomy of local government.

The present Act is the child of the silence of the constitution. The form and structure of local government are not specified in the constitution. There are only two references in it on the mechanism of local government. Under the Directive Principles and Policies of the State, the state is assigned with responsibility to ‘maintain conditions suitable to the enjoyment of the fruits of democracy through wider participation of the people in the governance of the country by way of decentralization’. And secondly, the constitution requires 15 members elected, three from the district, town and village level local ‘authorities’ in each of the five Development Regions to the National Assembly.

The Act could not utilize the wide leverage and flexibility offered by the constitution. It lost an opportunity to establish genuine autonomous local government agencies with as little control as necessary by the central government agencies.

However, the Act, following the spirit of the Constitution, has some novel ideas. It enlists the devolution of power, responsibility and resources, building institutional mechanisms in local bodies, establishing civil society, developing accountable local leadership, and encouraging the private sector for service delivery as the principles of local government. But later, these declarations proved to be illusory, because the structure and mechanism provided in the Act proved not to be tuned to the declared Principles. The structure and style of functioning of local government institutions which were supposed to deliver democracy, and reach goods and services to the people failed to meet expectations. On top of that the performance of leaders was at a dismally low level. The isolation and exclusion of people in the outer margins of society continued as ever before.

To this institutional shortcomings in the Act, the Maoists inflicted the so called ‘people’s war’ causing the loss of more than two thousand lives and staggering destruction of financial institutions in the rural and petty urban areas of the kingdom. Many local government agencies are at present psychologically and physically demoralised. The comatose DDCs and Nagarpalikas in Dang are examples of the hundreds of VDCs, Nagarpalikas and DDCs which have been crippled and mutilated. It was a designed and deliberate move by the Maoists because they knew that only by destroying the people’s democratic institutions, could they win the war. No wonder, these institutions are currently non-functional.

There are other facets of the destruction as well which, I am afraid, can never be quantified. It will cast its long shadow over the lives of the people for years to come. During this period of Maoist violence, the whole social, economic and political fabric of the country, specifically of the countryside has been shattered. With the destruction of the local institutions which nourish social bonds in society, be they traditional or communal or created by legal instruments, the communications apparatus of the communities has also been destroyed.

Why the communications linkages are necessary can be learnt from a case which this author, a couple of years back, came across during a field survey in connection with a different study.

Out of grant money, Bakdhuwa VDC of Saptari was building a ‘gilesan’ (market complex) to be rented to shopkeepers so that the VDC could have its own source of revenue. At the time of our visit, a row over the construction was at its height. Charges of corruption and misuse of funds were levelled by the opposing members of the VDC against the Chairman; as a result the project was on hold for some time. We could feel the disappointment of the general public over the performance of political party members. Despite this gloomy side to the story, the shinning lesson which was emerging round the dark clouds could not be missed. The incident had created intense political and social interaction among the citizens, enhancing their conflict resolution and problem solving capacity. Open debate in the community for and against the local leaders and a keen watch by the opposing parties ensured transparency in the use of the funds. During the construction of this small project, the participation of ordinary citizens was on and a democratic process was in the making.

The lesson which emerges out of this small case study is that democratic principles are not limited merely to the delivery of goods and services but more importantly they encompass the process and communicating linkages by which these goods and services are generated. This process is functional only in local government institutions.

Therefore the goods and services that are created by taking advantage of the emergency, without popular participation, can neither be sustainable nor will they be helpful for the institutional development of democratic institutions in society. Minimisation of local level community forces and the local government agencies tends to erode democratic values in the communities. And ultimately local communities will revert to the situation which was created by the Maoists a few years ago.

The people’s morale and their confidence is the cornerstone for winning the war during the emergency. Therefore the local government institutions to day have greater importance than at any other time. This period should be utilized for reviewing the present LSGA to make it a real document of the local people. The aftermath of the emergency will make a greater demand on local government agencies which should function like a real local government, not as central agents deputed to the local level. For instance most of the schools in the country are currently without management committees and the management of the schools is in complete disarray. Central Ministries and departments strongly argue that the local level agencies are not efficient and there is a great chance of misuse of funds and corruption. As a result, they argue, the central departments and ministries, on behalf of the local agencies, should continue to make central purchase and central construction.

Thus the emergency has created a challenge as to how the post emergency period can be managed so as to invigorate the local level communities, especially in areas lying far from the central authorities. This is a time when all the political leaders and civil societies should rise above the rhetoric and put their heads together to undertake a serious review of the legal and institutional provisions of the present Local Self Government Act. This is the time to acknowledge the fact that a democratic process that embraces all the partners, including civil societies, social groups, private sector entities, groups representing specific interests, women, and entities hitherto excluded, is a must for the transformation of society. This can happen only when genuinely democratic local government institutions function in the backyards of the communities themselves.

(Concluded)