NATIONAL 4 - (Spotlight Weekly)

‘Refugee Problem Cannot Be Resolved Bilaterally’

— RATAN GAZMERE

Ratan Gazmere is the chief coordinator of the Association of Human Rights Activists (AHURA) Bhutan. He spoke to SPOTLIGHT on the refugee imbroglio.

What do you think was the main reason for the Bhutanese government decision to start persecuting their own citizens of Nepali origin in the late eighties?

The government of Bhutan was looking at what was happening in the former Soviet Union, in China and across the borders in Darjeeling of India. This may have led it to formulate new policies: the new census policy, 'one nation one people' policy and so on. We later found that their objective was to drastically cut down the Nepali-speaking Bhutanese population. When the government started implementing these policies, all these problems started.

What may have led the Bhutanese government to fear a section of Bhutanese people?

Well, there was no evident reason. These people were living in Bhutan in harmony for several generations. Both northern Bhutanese and southern Bhutanese (known as Lhotsampas) were working jointly for the development of their country. Some kind of compulsion in regional politics may have led the Bhutan government to adopt such a policy.

Do you mean some external factor was responsible?

I am sure the government of Bhutan must have sought some kind of advice from outside before adopting such a policy.

What is the main obstacle in finding a solution to the refugee issue even after a decade?

We are citizens of Bhutan. The international community and the Nepalese government have urged the Bhutanese government to take back their people. But this has not happened. The government of India has been requested to use its good offices to help resolve this problem. If these quarters join hands, a solution to the refugee problem could be found.

How optimistic are you about the 10th meeting of the joint ministerial level committee?

This meeting is taking place in a totally different environment. A number of activities have taken place over the last six-to-eight months. Sadako Ogata of the UNHCR visited Nepal and Bhutan, the European Parliament passed a resolution, a donor consortium meeting in Thimpu raised the issue, UN Assistant Secretaries of State Julia Taft and Karl Inderfurth visited Nepal and Bhutan and, finally, there was a letter from the US President Bill Clinton. With all this, the Bhutanese government must be coming to the bilateral talks with a slightly different mindset than in the past. Hence, there is some reason to expect that some kind of breakthrough, some kind of movement forward could take place. However, given the past experience we must be cautiously optimistic that something concrete comes up.

What were the main stumbling blocks in finding a common ground to resolve this impasse?

Number one was the way the Nepalese government agreed to categorize Bhutanese refugees into four groups. That was the biggest mistake taken by the joint ministerial level committee. That was totally unnecessary. If you wanted to categorize the refugees, you could have done so in two categories: the Bhutanese and non-Bhutanese. But two of the categories included are non-issues. We don't think we should be categorized into people who left Bhutan voluntarily or who are terrorists or whatever.

How does the refugee community look at the present Nepalese government?

The Bhutanese refugees think that the Nepalese government has not done enough to ensure early repatriation of the refugees. They think the Bhutanese government could not have treated the refugee issue like this if the Nepalese government had acted in a much coherent way. The Nepalese government should adopt a much more stronger posture.

Do you think the Nepalese government may have been pressured by the Indian government in this matter?

I have no idea. But definitely India being a big power in the region may have influenced Nepal's policies at some time. Unless there were some kind of pressure from somewhere, the Nepalese government would not have taken the position it is taking now.

In case the tenth round of meeting also proves to be a failure, what will be your next step?

We hope there will be some kind of progress in the bilateral negotiations. But if it doesn't happen, the Nepalese government should be courageous enough to take this issue to international community in a very formal and official manner and give the responsibility of the repatriation of Bhutanese refugees to them.

What exactly do you want the international community to do?

One of the main problems we have found in the ongoing bilateral negotiations has been lack of any mechanism in order to carry out verification in the last three rounds or so. What is clearly lacking is an independent and impartial mechanism to verify the refugees. If refugees are verified under the present structure we don't think the refugees will be going back to their homes. There are 90,000 Bhutanese citizens who are holding citizenship certificates, land certificates and other documentary evidence to prove that they are the citizens of Bhutan. If such evidence were not looked into then we will be going nowhere.

Why have you called for involvement of a representative from the refugee community in the bilateral talks?

At the moment only two governments are involved in the talks. Any decision that is going to affect the fate of more than 90,000 refugees must involve their representatives. They have the right to accept or not accept any solution coming out of such negotiations. We have a very able leader, Tek Nath Rizal, among ourselves who has spent ten years in prison for this cause. His involvement becomes very important in finding a long-lasting solution.