“We are told that the government of Nepal will soon initiate the verification to decide our status,” said Nandu Paudel of the committee, emerging out of a meeting with the district administration in Chandragadi today. “We have given an ultimatum of 15 days to address our concerns,” he added.

Earlier today, committee’s members and camp secretaries reached the CDO’s office to submit a 10-point demand paper for ending the strike.

They demanded registration of non-registered and de-registered Bhutanese, settling all pending cases for refugee status, issuance of photo identity cards to those whose registration was over, and facilitate local women married to Bhutanese for an aid basket, among others.

CDO communicated to the delegation that he had already notified the Ministry of Home Affairs regarding their demands and concerns.

He also expressed that the registration would begin at the earliest.

These non-registered Bhutanese have forwarded their demands that included

Non-registered Bhutanese display various playcards in the protest program, Beldangi-I

immediate registration to provide ‘refugee status’ and supply ration and other facilities to them as enjoyed by their friends and relatives, among others.

Some five dozen Bhutanese including children, women and youths  started relay hunger strike in Beldangi-I camp from today.

We want to get our status, said Nandu Poudel of the joint struggle committee that has been fighting for ‘refugee status’ since three years.

Bhutan News Service quoted Beldangi-I Camp secretary, TB Gurung, as saying that the committee decided to launch a relay strike in his camp focusing larger flow of representatives from the GoN and other aid agencies to Beldangi camps.

To begin the sit-in protest, hundreds of non-registered Bhutanese marched from Beldangi-II and Extension camps to Beldangi-I this morning. They also carried various playcards.

According to camp statistics, over 3000 Bhutanese are waiting for ‘refugee status’ in all seven camps.

An Australian citizen of Bhutanese origin, Parsuram Sharma Luital has raised various issues relating Bhutan and Bhutanese refugees in the 48th Standing Committee Meeting of the UNHCR and Annual Consultations with the NGOs in Geneva from June 22 to July 1.

Sharma, who was selected to represent the Refugee Council of Australia, was scheduled with the responsibilities to advocate on behalf of the refugees and settlement issues of South Asian countries.

According to Sharma, he met the representatives of the seven resettling countries (core group countries) including the United Kingdom which has declared to take refugees in the near future. Luitel on behalf of the Bhutanese refugee community extended message of gratitude and requested them to keep continuity to support the refugees remaining in the camps.

Meanwhile, Sharma raised the issues of unregistered refugees in Nepal and India, family reunion, concerns of single mothers and widows languishing in refugee camps and some resettling countries, provision of visa issuance to resettled refugees for traveling between the resettling countries, help the repatriation process of the Bhutanese refugees who choose to return back to Bhutan.

The Netherlands delegates informed that the core group countries were updated on the current situation of refugee camps. A briefing was made by delegate from the US who had recently visited the camps in Nepal.

In the second week of the meeting, Sharma met with different senior level UNHCR officials including Pascale Moreau, Deputy Director, Bureau for Asia and the Pacific, and senior desk officer Karim Amer responsible for Bhutan and other officials responsible for other Asian countries. Sharma also raised the issue of unregistered refugees in Nepal (around 1,500) and India (around 25,000) as one of the main concerns.

Sharma also strongly raised the issue of family re-union, single mothers and widows, the inaccessibility of “marginalized” refugees to approach the UNHCR Sub Office Damak in Jhapa, Nepal, among others.

Sharma further informed BNS that the concerns of the silent Internally Displaced People (IDPs) inside Bhutan and Rohinga refugees from the Arakan state in Myanmar were discussed, both in the main thematic sessions and separate meetings with the senior UNHCR officials. The meeting also discussed with top priority about the plight of 81,000 Bhutanese inside Bhutan, many of whom are displaced from their original homes and lands and are stateless without any legal rights.

The director of Human Rights Watch Bill Frelick said in the meeting that there are 82,000 Bhutanese inside Bhutan who are stateless. He further said that this issue is a blind spot for UNHCR for so long and this needs to be addressed.

Sharma also discussed the difficulties faced by the former political prisoners of Bhutan, who were released after several years of imprisonment to get registered with UNHCR and join the family members for resettlement with Monica Zanarelli, Deputy Head of operations for South Asia, ICRC, HQ in Geneva. In response, Zanarelli has assured all possible help, including issuance of lesser passer if there is problem to obtain travel document, given that a host country is willing to settle the concerned refugees.

A key member of the Australian delegation, Paul Power, CEO, Refugee Council of Australia has stressed to explore all possible means to resettle the political prisoners. He has suggested to raise the issue with the UNHCR separately (which was arranged and discussed), delegates from the core group of countries in the tri-partite meeting starting July 6.

Sharma (left) in a meeting with officials from Red Cross Society

According to Sharma, the senior most UNHCR officials were very supportive of the issues raised and to address them for the benefit of the Bhutanese refugees. As per the official, the Bhutanese refugee issue has been the largest UNHCR resettlement operations in the world in 2009 where the largest numbers of refugees were resettled, followed by refugees from Myanmar. Sharma was also selected as a penal speaker on ‘Violence Against Women’ in one of the sessions in the meeting.

File photo Druk air

A divisional engineer at DCAB said, soon the department would kick start road mapping and site development activities in Bhur in Gelephu.

For construction this airport, the department was looking for around 500 acres land owned by citizens. DCA and district officials of Sarpang finalized the compensation matrices for those who would be displaced from their lands. The government agreed to replace lands of those who qualify for entitlements.

The Ministry of Finance has been asked to formulate the compensation measure and matrices.

The current land compensation schemes for national development projects lack provision to for land replacement while acquire land and farms owned by the citizens if landholding falls below 10 decimal. Such owners are entitled for cash compensations.

Next to Paro, a domestic airport in Bumthang is expected to come in operation soon when a British airline received a contract to operate domestic flights connecting different parts in the country.

DCAB is working for domestic airports in Samtse, Trashigang and Samdrup Jongkhar, and an international airport in Gelephu.

UNHCR’s chief presenting his speech in Nepal Toursim Board

Kathmandu, June 21: Celebrations of this year’s World Refugee Day (WRD) in Nepal has finally come to an end Monday evening following a formal program at Nepal Tourism Board organized by the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR).

The ending program marked presentation of videos clips of resettled Bhutanese, photo exhibition, speeches and Bhutanese traditional dance by artists from camps.

T.B Gurung, camp secretary of Beldangi-I camp formally inaugurated the program with a candle light, while UNHCR’s Nepal Representative Stephane Jaquemet delivered the opening speech. UNHCR brought around a dozen of Bhutanese from the camps to Kathmandu for various performances in the event.

The UNHCR also made presentation of video clips recorded from resettled Bhutanese in various countries and of those who are shortly leaving the same.

Considering Sunday as a holiday in the UN offices, the UNHCR conducted camp based programs on the last Friday and media gathering in the capital city on Monday.

BCN also announced the results of essay writing competition held in the camps to mark WRD amidst a function in Beldangi-I camp, where UNHCR’s chief distributed the prizes sponsored by Global Human Rights Defense from The Netherlands.

Yesterday, Bhutan Media Society, Kathmandu and International creators’ Forum, Jhapa jointly organized drawing competition among the local artists and those from the camps.

Two dozen artists demonstrated their skills this Sunday by painting canvases to depict life in refugee camps, said the event manager Jeetan Subba of BMS.

President of ICF Jhapa informed that 15 participants from various Bhutanese refugee camps and eight from local host
community spent almost the whole day to portray their canvases in the event.

The Hague-based rights body Global Human Rights Defense (GHRD), Bhutanese Community in The Netherlands (BCN) and Youth Organization of Bhutan  from America sponsored the art competition.

According to the organizers, canvases painted by Guna Sunuwar and Deo kumar Rai of Pathri camp in Morang district received first and third prizes respectively, while that of Rajen Gurung from Beldangi-I camp of Jhapa district secured second position.

A famous fine art artist from the region, Pawan Rajbanshi, who was present in the event as the chief judge, presented cash prizes and certificates to the winners. 

BMS is planning to conduct fund raising through auctioning of some of the canvases, BMS Subba said.

Similarly, Khudunabari and Goldhap camps organized cultural programs to mark the WRD. Even dramas were presented to remind atrocities of the regime on exiled Bhutanese. Resettled Bhutanese from Nebraska supported celebrations in Khudunabari, while Youth Friendly Centers sponsored the program in Goldhap.

Over 32,000 Bhutanese from the camps have departed to the United States and other countries since the launch of the resettlement programme by UNHCR in November 2007.

“The United States, with 27,926, has accepted the majority of the refugees,” Stéphane Jaquemet in a statement released by the UNHCR.

The other countries accepting refugees are Australia (1,530), Canada (1,445), New Zealand (447), Denmark (326), Norway (324), and the Netherlands (178), while departure procedures of some 100 refugees are underway.

(With inputs from Arjun Pradhan and Tilak Niraula in camps)

Same country, two delegations come together

The team comprised of Parangkush Subedi, Damber Timsina, Pashupati Timsina, Gopal Subedi, Madhav Acharya, Toya Acharya, Tika Acharya and Harka Khadka who joined the first GNH debates in US this June explained the organizers that the theory is a eyewash by Bhutan.

The conference was held between June 1 and 4 at Champlain College, Burlington, Vermont. Some o the important issues this delegation presented before the plenary for discussion include explanation on Bhutanese draconian policies, suppression on rights and liberty and failure to resolve the long standing refugee issue.

The delegation said that over 84000 Bhutanese of Nepali ethnicity were compelled to leave the country in the early 1990’s aftermath of peaceful demonstration in southern Bhutan demanding restoration of religious and cultural rights. This constituted about 17 percent of the total population in Bhutan.

Three major political parties are operating from exile: Bhutan National Democratic Party (BNDP), Druk National Congress (DNC) and Bhutan People’s Party (BPP). In addition there are two human rights organizations: Human Rights Organization of Bhutan (HUROB) and People’s Forum for Human Rights in Bhutan (PFHRB). They had been at the forefront of campaign for human rights and democracy in Bhutan.

Bhutan has decided to democratize the polity. A two-party democratic system is being practiced. The country’s per capita income has increased by almost five fold over the last two decades recording one of the highest in South Asia. The country considers gross national happiness of people more important than gross national income. With all said and done the trajectory path of socio-economic development sounds acceptable to all sections of Bhutanese society.

Bhutan’s relation with its neighbors has been improving. India and Bhutan enjoy unprecedented goodwill and the effort to tap large hydro-power potential is going-on bilateral basis. Bhutan has signed a treaty of friendship with the People’s Republic of China and time will come soon when Bhutan and China will establish residential embassies to foster economic cooperation. Bhutan is emerging out from the exclusive sphere of Indian influence. The United States of America is keen to promote closer relationship with Bhutan. Bhutan’s relationship with Nepal has been pushed to backburner because of the Bhutanese refugee imbroglio.

The international community has taken a bold decision to undertake rehabilitation of Bhutanese refugees in third countries. Of the total of 110,000 Bhutanese refugees about 30000 have already left the camps. By the end of this year some 50,000 refugees will be resettled in overseas countries. Overwhelming majority of the refugees has applied for third country resettlement options. USA is the destination to most of the Bhutanese refugees. The number of resettled Bhutanese refugees is likely to cross 60,000.

By 2013 Bhutan will have fresh election in the parliament. By then most of the refugees willing to resettle in overseas countries will have left the camps. Bhutan must aim for lock-stock-and-barrel solution to the refugee problem. No residual dissident activities should remain outside the country if we have to keep the country safe from unprecedented political movement.

The delegation proposed the following for resolution of this protracted refugee/political problem:

-    Bhutan must permit the willing Bhutanese in exile to return to Bhutan with honor and dignity, including restitution of their properties.

-    Bhutan must accord non-resident Bhutanese (NRB) status to the resettled refugees. This will in fact enhance the international profile of the country and justify establishment of residential embassies of refugee receiving countries in Thimphu. It is important for a country like Bhutan which is sandwiched between the two competing Asian giants: India and China. This will also encourage investments inside Bhutan from Bhutanese living abroad for the overall socio-economic development of the country.

-    Bhutan must permit the political parties formed in exile to participate in the forth coming election of 2013 and permit the human rights organizations formed in exile to operate from inside the country.

-    Promote inclusive democracy and release all the political prisoners in Bhutan. There are some 200 political prisoners in the country at present.

This is a unique opportunity for Bhutan to solve the protracted political and refugee problem. The solution not only will enhance the international image of Bhutan but will pre-empt any untoward political upheaval in the country from the residual political force operating from outside the country.

The concept of Gross National Happiness floated by Bhutan is a mere eye-wash to the International community if it fails to address the Bhutanese refugee issue and other concerns as just discussed.

A plenary session on GNH in motion

It will be a lost opportunity if the government of Bhutan and the dissident organizations outside the country failed to seize this movement. There is a need to forget about the past grievances and come over the table for National Reconciliation.

Local newspapers (Seven Days) and TV channels (Channel 17) published/telecast the discussion with exiled Bhutanese with interests.

Karma Tshiteem, secretary of Bhutan’s Gross National Happiness Commission and the only speaker from inside Bhutan failed to answer the questions raised by Bhutanese in exile regarding the mass exodus in early 1990. He simply skipped the issue saying it was not the appropriate forum.

A separate plenary focused on Bhutan’s happiness theory and refugees. Entitled ‘GNH, Bhutanese refugees and National Reconciliation’, the plenary was attended by a group of people including Tshering Tashi, co-author with Tim Fischer of the book ‘From Jesuits to Jetsetters, BOLD BHUTAN BECKONS, Inhaling Gross National Happiness’ and Sonam Ongmo.

Linda Wheatley, the president the GNH USA project in an interview with local paper had said that she doesn’t condone actions by the Bhutanese government that might have led to the exodus of residents. She distinguishes between the effort to develop new indicators and events in Bhutan. “Bhutan is not perfect,” she said.

In a letter dispatched to the home minister P. Chidambaram and external affairs minister S. M. Krishna, IBFS chairman Prof Anand Kumar said India police officials are helping the Bhutanese security officials in re-arresting such Bhutanese citizens who are released on bail by the Indian courts and whisking them illegally to Bhutan.

“It is more frequent in the states of West Bengal and Assam. We request you to kindly make inquires into the following two instances of such misdirected cooperation between our police and Bhutanese security officials.”

IBFS has mentioned two such case of Sangla Drukpa, a Bhutanese dissident arrested in Siliguri on February 1, 2002 for his alleged involvement in unlawful business and Tenzin Zangpo.

As soon as Drukpa’s arrest was known to Bhutanese authorities through Indian media, the Bhutanese security swiftly avail of bail for a non-bailable offence from the Siliguri Magistrate and whisked him away to Bhutan. On February 6, 2002 Kuensel had reported he was arrested on February 5 in Bhutan.

Similarly, Zangpo who was arrested on November 10, 2008 in Assam for his alleged role in Assam bomb blast, was granted bail by two CBI courts on March 30 and 31, 2009. He was released on April 6 at around 5: 30 pm from the Gawahati jail. Bhutanese security officials along with Indian security officials rearrested him from the Court premises within a few minutes, and whisked him away to Bhutan. Presently he is lodged in the Central Jail in Thimphu.

IBFS requested the ministers to kindly ensure that the people to people bond between India and Bhutan is not damaged due to such uncalled engagements of police officials.

It also feared security of Druk National Congress president Rongthong Kunley Dorji, whose extradition case against was withdrawn on April 21 this year.

INFS demanded security arrangement for Dorji who is keen to visit his friends, supporters and family members in different parts of India including border districts between Bhutan and India.

IBFS letter to Krishna mentioned that it is now equally important that India reviews its policies towards Bhutan under his leadership in order to promote new bond with young democratic government of Bhutan and more frequent people to people relationship between the masses of the two countries.

“A lot of harm was caused in last fifteen years due to our indifference towards their quest for democracy. We have also suffered due to our ignoring of the problems of Bhutanese refugee who are forced to live as refugee since 1990. The time has come to proactive policies and program in the sphere of culture, education, health, economy and environment. Indo-Bhutan Friendship Society will be happy to join you and your colleagues in this process,” the letter reads.

Entitled diminutive progress, the report gives details of the media development and the constraints media and media persons faced in Bhutan and in exile. The government draft of the advertisement police and increasing management interference into the editorial contents have been noted as major threats to healthy growth of independent media in Bhutan.

Bhutan has drafted and circulated the draft ad policy, government ads to media outlets will be give based on reach and contents. The government proposes that only those carrying news about gross national happiness will get government ads while those carrying entertainment news or criticizing government will not.

Managerial interference into editorial content of the Bhutan Times weekly, government’s attempt to influence the first daily Bhutan Today and obstruction in live telecast of parliamentary proceedings are some of the hindrances observed in the report, which includes all incidents related to media between Amy 3, 2009 to May 3, 2010.

Download APFA-Bhutan full report here
Download IFJ South Asia 2009-10 report here

There will be no miracles in Bhutan. We will only have yet another high-sounding but low-yield declaration in which the SAARC leaders will credit themselves for another “comprehensive and forward-looking milestone” in regional cooperation. But in reality, it will be only a rehash of the same old and familiar promises and commitments that have had no meaning to the region’s peoples and masses.

SAARC has been described as a talk-shop. An essential part of it is the “retreat” where the participating leaders meet in an informal setting for discussions on the overall regional situation. But the problem is that discussions on bilateral and security-related issues in the region are barred in SAARC.

This year’s central theme is climate change, on which the member-states will try to evolve a common SAARC position to be followed at the UN’s Climate Change Summit in Mexico later this year. Progress in implementation of outstanding projects, especially operationalisation of the $300-million SAARC Development Fund and a governing mechanism for the proposed SAARC University in Delhi will also be reviewed. The question of food security might figure in the talks.

Besides these routine activities, there will be no new groundbreaking initiatives in South Asia’s regional landscape. SAARC is notorious for its paper-loaded and meetings-oriented approach. It holds too many meetings with no results. Postponement of SAARC summits is a regular phenomenon. In 25 years it has held only 15 summits. Other meetings always materialize behind schedule and contribute nothing to regionalisation of trade.

It took ten years for SAARC members to agree on a preferential tariff arrangement and another ten to come round to a consensus on the South Asia Free Trade Agreement (SAFTA), which became operational in 2006. Although it has been expected to have potential, intraregional trade is less than 2 per cent of GDP.

SAARC leaders have been talking of their organisation’s regional potential and stressing the need to make SAARC a “more vibrant institution” so that it becomes a strong voice in international economic forums, meaningfully contributing to regional peace, progress and prosperity. They also do not tire in expressing concern on the “inherent weaknesses and shortcomings” in SAARC’s “regional approach” and in calling for more pragmatic action plans in pursuing “attainable” regional cooperation goals. We are familiar with this rhetoric at every summit meeting where the leaders regularly “reaffirm” their commitment to the principles and objectives outlined in the SAARC Charter. This is what the Colombo Declaration adopted at the 15th SAARC Summit in 2008 said, and this is likely to be the sum total of the 16th Summit in Thimphu.

SAARC came into being as an expression of South Asia’s collective resolve to develop a regional cooperative framework and for the region to adapt itself to the changing times for the socio-economic well-being of its peoples. Woefully, even in the silver jubilee year of its existence, the desired change is nowhere in sight.

Despite the commonalities and strengths of the region, which is home to one-fifth of humanity, South Asia today remains one of the world’s poorest areas, with a vast majority of its peoples still living in grinding poverty and subhuman conditions. Five of SAARC’s eight member-states – Afghanistan, Bangladesh, Bhutan, the Maldives and Nepal – belong to the UN’s category of Least Developed Countries, or LDCs. South Asia’s total external trade is only a small fraction of the region’s GDP while its intraregional trade is equally non-consequential.

With its unbroken legacy of poverty, hunger, disease, illiteracy and conflict, SAARC, as a regional cooperation organisation, has not gone beyond declaratory pronouncements, with no tangible achievement to its credit. It has neither helped in improvement of the quality of life in the region, nor accelerated South Asia’s economic growth and social progress, nor even to the cultural development of its member-states. With one or two exceptions, SAARC countries also lag behind in development of genuine democracy, rule of law and good governance.

What has gone wrong with SAARC is a question that keeps agitating the minds of policymakers and practitioners of all sorts both within and outside this region. With its negligible output and a yawning gap between its promises and performance, SAARC still has a long way to go before it really comes of age. The common vision upholding the ideals of peace, stability, good-neighbourliness and mutually beneficial cooperation among its member-states remains a distant dream.

To perform, SAARC requires an enabling environment in the region, free of mistrust and hostility, without which no regional arrangement anywhere in the world has worked. In fact, political differences and bilateral disputes have impeded SAARC’s performance from the very outset. While many regional organisations around the world, including the Association of South-East Asian Nations (ASEAN) came into existence to face common external challenges, the main problem of the SAARC region is internal: mutual mistrust.

SAARC, as an organisation, has many faults and weaknesses inherent in its structural and functional architecture, and even some glaring shortcomings in the principles and objectives laid down in its Charter. But the absence of an enabling environment is the biggest and deepest fault line that cuts across the region, leaving South Asia with little regional impulse for any notable process towards genuine regional cooperation.

The absence of an intraregional mechanism for settlement of disputes has also severely limited SAARC’s capacity to contribute to regional peace, security and development. Like ASEAN, this region also needs a Regional Forum to reinforce an intraregional process of confidence-building, preventive diplomacy and peaceful settlement of disputes.

SAARC’s faults can be removed through the rewriting of its Charter, redefining of its goals and objectives, reordering of its priorities and action plans, redress of its systemic aberrations, restructuring of the Secretariat, rationalisation of the decision-making and budgetary system, reinforcement of the organisation’s operational capacity and streamlining of its functional methodology.

But SAARC’s fault line will not be removed unless the member-states bring in greater political will, rising above narrow national interests and, instead, assuming joint ownership of their regional effort for mutual benefit.

South Asia needs an exceptional impulse to keep abreast with the changing times. This fresh regional impulse must spring from within South Asia. Only then will our peoples be able to harness the full potential of their region and to join the worldwide quest for economic growth and development.

The absence of any political role in SAARC has had a crippling effect on the organisation’s capacity to provide an environment for mutual cooperation. The absence of any political role in SAARC has had a crippling effect on the organisation’s capacity to provide an environment for mutual cooperation. No wonder, a former Sri Lankan foreign minister once warned that unless SAARC dealt with bilateral issues, “it will remain a deaf, dumb and blind Association.”

 The writer is a former foreign secretary. Email: shamshad1941@yahoo.com

Adopted from The News

The counsel of the Union of India submitted in the Delhi High Court that the Royal Government of Bhutan preferred not to pursue the extradition of Rongthong Kunley and withdrew its extradition request.

Dorji was arrested on April 18, 1997, by the Government of India at the behest of Royal Government of Bhutan to have him extradited to Bhutan, when he arrived in Delhi to garner support from the government and the people of India for the Bhutanese peoples’ struggle for the establishment of democracy and human rights in Bhutan.

He was imprisoned for 14 months at Tihar jail and released on bail on July 12, 1998. However, his bail condition prevented him from leaving Delhi without permission, and he had to report to the local police station twice a week.

Back in Bhutan, on May 18, 1991, Dorji was arrested and tortured for fifty days on charges of treason for being involved in the pro-democracy movement. After his release, he fled to Nepal for the fear of re-arrest, torture and elimination. In August 1991, the Nepal granted him political asylum. On June 16, 1994, he formed the Druk National Congress, a political party, to demand the establishment of democracy human rights in Bhutan under Constitutional Monarchy.

His extradition case in India, which began on July 1, 1997, at the Patiala House Court and shifted later to Tis Hazari Court, had been proceeding at a snail’s pace, with the Union of India unable, apart from its first witness, to produce any of its other designated witnesses even after 11 years. Thus, to expedite his case, Dorji had submitted a petition in the Delhi High Court on October 22, 2008, requesting the Court to quash the extradition proceedings.

On April 9, 2009, the counsel of the Union of India submitted to the Tis Hazari Court that they were no longer able to produce its second witness. After the 13th adjournment/hearing on Dorji’s petition at the Delhi High Court, the extradition proceedings finally came to an end with the Delhi High Court’s order.
 
After the Court’s judgment, Dorji has expressed his satisfaction at the outcome. He said this judgment was a victory not only for himself but also for the people of the Bhutan and India, and democrats the world over. He said that this conclusively proved the politically motivated allegations against him were false, and that his faith in the Indian Judiciary was finally vindicated.