 |
Kathmandu Friday November 02, 2001 Kartik 17, 2058.
|
Premature optimism
The optimism that the spokesman of the foreign ministry
displayed about the return of some refugees to Bhutan by early next year may be a bit
premature. The excruciatingly slow verification of refugees at the Khudunabari camp belies
any such optimism. The camp that houses a little over 1,200 refugee families was the first
one to be taken up for verification in March this year. A study report by Nepalese
parliamentarians showed that at the present pace it would be 10 years before all those in
the seven refugee camps in east Nepal complete the verification process. This surely is no
tribute to the officials of Nepal and Bhutan who are engaged in the verification. It is
expected that verification of the refugees at Khudunabari will be completed by the end of
November. The foreign ministry spokesman’s optimism on the return of the refugees to
their homeland seems to be based on this assumption. However, there are still many more
hurdles to cross before the first Bhutanese begin trickling back home. Among the very
first hurdles is categorization of the refugees. It is indeed a pity that Nepal should
have been a party to the categorization concept. It was an unwise move. The only two
categories that Nepal should have accepted were Bhutanese and non-Bhutanese. But having
accepted the four categories, it is now important for Nepal to ensure that Bhutan is made
to take back all the refuges except those who are proven to be non-Bhutanese.
The rubber stamp assembly at Thimpu is said to have enacted a
law under which those leaving Bhutan "voluntarily" will not be taken back, nor
will it take back alleged "criminals". For one thing, this is an unjust act that
must be repealed if only to make way for the return of the refugees. Bhutan will not
obviously repeal the act simply because we say so. What is needed is a diplomatic
offensive aimed at mustering support for the refugee cause and pressuring the Bhutanese
government to repeal the inhuman act. In any case, most of those who are in the camps did
not quit Bhutan voluntarily but were surely forced to do so. This forcible
"exit" from Bhutan can have taken any number of forms. Bhutanese security
personnel do not have to beat someone up in order to force him or her out of the country.
State coercion can have taken many forms including spreading disinformation among the
simple folks. The international community and human rights groups the world over will do
well to take heed of the subtle methods used to force people out without actually beating
them up or torching their abodes. As far as "Bhutanese with criminal records"
are concerned, they too are a Bhutanese responsibility and Nepal should ensure that we do
not end up accepting so called criminals simply because Bhutan refuses to have them back.
In any case, Bhutan has to prove in what way they are criminals in generally accepted
international parlance. Have they broken into banks or robbed people or indulged in other
heists? Or were their "crimes" related merely to demanding a liberal democratic
dispensation for their country? Bhutan surely must prove how and in what way they are
criminals. The coming secretary level talks may not be able to solve these difficult
questions there and then but we hope they will at least be a step forward.
Other Stories
|
