But nobody can predict the future. History of Black days for Nepali ehnic people started in Myanmar, Burma. Suppression on Nepali ehnic Burmese during 1940s led a large number of Burmese leave their country. Kewal, his mother, elder brother and sister had to leave not only their land and property but their identity too.

And who knows all happiness is looted in no seconds. Sudden bomb blasts from the sky terrified the province people. Burma – Japan conflicts were on the horizon. Army fighters both in the sky and land were bombing and firing which marked a big question in the lives of thousands of Burmese people. All the bridges and entry-exit ways of the country were sealed. Kewal Ram and his family dug an ‘L’ shaped pit under the ground and stayed there for twelve months. But no signal of war conclusion was sensed.

Kadel's family/photo by writer

They freed all their animals and fare welled all the home workers. They kept all their property under the ground. Tela Kadel, wife to Kewal Ram says, “Kewal Ram used to say; if I get chance to visit my birth place ever, I would take out all those properties”. 

With no transportation, a five year old child Kewal desperately joined a very long, painful and tiresome journey to India with his family by foot. The earth and the grass, the green water on the lake, the trees near and far off hills, and the rocks and mountains were their friends along their journey. It was a long way walk of two months to reach India. Along with the Kadel family, a large number of Nepali ehnic Burmese moved to somewhere, where they were themselves unknown of their destination.

Everyone’s legs were heavy. “But…”, Kewal’s eldest son Devi Charan says, “…my father used to say that they felt a sense of being together in a group sharing each others’ sorrows”. They inhaled peace slowly putting themselves together along their way.

However, there were, for Kewal, no other options to escape or avoid the unbearable pains of sharp pebbles and thorns on their way.

After all pain and sufferings, Kadel and many other families who arrived India were in halfway house to decide their final destination. As days passed some choosed to go to Assam, some to Megalaya, some to Sikkim and Manipur and many other states of India. Among them, a large group entered Nepal. Still a group of Burmese refugees are found in Kakarvitta, Jhapa Nepal.

During their six months stay in India, Kewal’s elder brother left mother and sister with him and vanished in Assam, India. The then, he never met his brother. “But.”, his eldest son Devi Charan stressed, “…he felt his brother’s affection when he met his sister inlaw in Nepal.

Kewal’s family then decided to spend rest of their life in Bhutan, a tiny Himalayan country in South East Asia. Again the same pain repeated, it took almost one whole month for their foot to reach Bhutan. They were relieved when they reached Dagana district in Bhutan; a place which they called their HOME.

Monarch’s tyrannical rule again ended up Kadel’s stay in Bhutan after five decades of their entry into Bhutan. Democratic movement in 1990 AD demanding Human Rights and democratic systems in the country led one lakh Nepali ethnic southern Bhutanese (Lhotshampas) migrate to Southern Nepal as refugees. Kewal Ram with his four sons and five daughters had to leave their mother (died) and sister (married) in Bhutan itself.

Miracles of his life sometimes may be distrust for somebody. When Kewal Ram’s family entered Timai refugee camp in Nepal, the other Burmese refugees were in Kakarvitta, at a distance of some 20 kilometers. With the flow of time Kewal and many other who entered Nepal had a number of sons and grandsons. He became old and was suffered by asthma and was in bed for almost one and a half decade. It was in July 2004 that his physical existence left the earth. He struggled throughout his life to have HOME but couldn’t. This credit is now left on his son’s shoulders.

Kadel family lived for around two decades in exile as refugees in Nepal. Finally, through resettlement program Kewal’s eldest son Devi Charan with his family immigrated to Richmond, Virginia state of USA in June 2008 followed by his other brothers. Devi Charan says, “ this long journey of migrating country to country for safe and home, will definitely end now because USA is believed to be a safe country where every people has equal rights and nobody suppresses no one”. After a long breath he again added, “We have a dignified life here”.

Devi Charan’s words are some of many sorrowful stories of refugees around the world struggling for a safe place called HOME where they can stay permanently with no pressures.

After a moment of thought for the concluding lines Devi Charan concludes, “…let no generations pass a refugee life as we did”.

(Antim, who is a Bhutanese journalist in exile, blogs at antimnews from Virginia, USA)

Dear Mr. Thinley,

Please acknowledge my tardy wishes, both congratulations and appreciations, for serving the country in the aptitude of the first elected prime minister of a “democratic” Bhutan. In many areas in the country, some positive changes, which are noticeable, have taken place. This is an appreciating initiative. Honestly, you should, however, admit that the phenomenon of modern democracy is yet to be ushered in true guts.

Discrimination on suppressed ethnic groups continues in “democratic” Bhutan. The towering power and monarchy’s direct influence in active politics keeps going. The formation of the Bhutanese Media Foundation under the king’s initiation is an instance. The public’s fundamental rights, in many aspects, have not yet been guaranteed in the practical sense. The question of safeguarding national sovereignty is doubtful — foreign intervention in our politics is the same despite your claim that the country has stepped into the democratisation process.

Initially, your recent visit to Nepal had given hope to the Bhutanese refugees because many had thought that you would present yourself intrepid to speak of their immediate return home. You did, but more in a tactical way; it could be another ploy to keep the protracted issue as it is.

Not being an exception, like in the past, you did not overlook to say that your government was committed to resolving the crisis. Just hours after paying homage to the late G.P. Koirala on the 13th day of his death, journalists in Nepal busied themselves in running after your stories. Their grave concern and continuous follow-ups to your visit developed due to your refugees camped in their country for almost two decades. 

Dear sir, I was a little bit perplexed to read news stories in the mainstream media in Nepal where you were quoted as saying that the governments of both Bhutan and Nepal have given top priority to resolving the refugee crisis. You did not mention back-up points regarding how your government has been giving it top priority, though. Had it been true, the problem could have been solved many years back. You are also well aware of the fact that despite 15 rounds of Nepal-Bhutan bilateral talks, not a single refugee has been able to go back home.

I wonder for how long your “democratic” government will continue to swindle the international community by maintaining that you are solemn towards kick-starting the repatriation process at the soonest possible.

During the meeting with your Nepali counterpart, Madhav Kumar Nepal, you apparently thanked the core groups for resettling “people in the camps”, in your own words. As has been a trend in Bhutan, you were even hesitant to say “Bhutanese refugees” in the camps, thus, you addressed them as “people in the camps”. Often, politicians or media houses in Bhutan address us as “refugees in Nepal” or “people in the camps”, both of which are not the best terms. I would rather not feel odd to let you know that refugees from various countries including Tibet, Burma, Somalia and Pakistan, among others, too live in Nepal.  

There was no coherent basis to thank the core groups if these refugees were not from Bhutan. At least, you deserve appreciation from the exiled Bhutanese for extending your government’s words of gratitude to the resettlement countries. At last you proved that your own regime’s proclamation, quite often, at international arenas labelling those “people in the camps” as “terrorists” is misleading. These “people in the camps” are resettled in various Western countries as refugees from Bhutan, not as terrorists.

Dear sir, I am neither a historian nor a politician. I was a five-year-old boy when my father, besides thousands of others, was brutally tortured — both mentally and physically — for 31 days inside the “black” jail in Bhutan before he was forced to sign the so-called voluntary form at gunpoint in the early 1990s, the time when the mass exodus took place. What I learnt of Bhutan, though I am its genuine citizen, is only through books and from conversations with exiled Bhutanese, leaders or concerned experts.  

Apparently, I might be too immature to remind you about the history, which speaks of the fact that these “people in the camps” had a bigger volume of contribution than anyone in Bhutan to drive the country to this stage. Those politicians undermining the history of these great contributors, for sure, shall be demoralised by the standard set norms and values of “true” democracy.

I wonder with whom your government holds bilateral talks. India, that has been a think tank for Bhutanese politics behind the curtain, claims the issue is a bilateral one between Nepal and Bhutan, citing the fact that a majority of your refugees dwell in Nepal. If you are updated, a clear majority among 108,000 persons will soon reach the U.S. through the third country resettlement programme. Does this now mean, according to India’s definition, that the bilateral talks should be between your government and the US?

I believe you can’t deceive the US, the world’s biggest democracy, as you did to Nepal, which was an all-time-rubberstamp during 15 rounds of bilateral talks. There isn’t any alternative for your government except to expedite the dignified repatriation process through which those willing to go back home will remain blissful.

Thank you in advance for creating this opportunity to write you an open letter. However, I do not wish to keep writing the same way.  

Yours kindly,

T.P. Mishra
Currently camped in New York City

Adopted from The Kathmandu Post, April 8, 2010

The country will start the process for resettlement from next week, in Damak, where all other countries — United States, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, Denmark, Norway and Netherlands — conduct processing.

According to reliable sources at the Minister of Foreign Affairs in Nepal, the country will take over 200 exiled Bhutanese for resettlement in the next two months’ period.

The UNHCR has already prepared the files of those who wished to go UK for resettlement. The agency is looking for sending additional 5000 exiled Bhutanese for resettlement than earlier projection.

According to UNHCR, some 83,000 have expressed their willingness for resettlement while the countries have so far announced quotas for some 75,000 exiled Bhutanese only.

Over 30,000 have been resettled in the last two years majority of them resettling in the United States.

The resettlement of exiled Bhutanese in UK will expand the horizon of Bhutanese Diaspora, even creating larger network for building pressure on the Bhutanese rulers for guaranteeing human rights and genuine democracy for those living in the country.

Pabi Maya Karki of Beldangi II, Sector D4, Hut No 57 hanged her to death in Humse Dumse community forest at around 1:15 this afternoon, Ilaka police post Damak said.

Karki had eloped with her beau Tikaram Timsina from Beldangi I, Sector C1 Hut No 67. The couple had returned to their home after five days.

After their return, the girl’s family rejected the decision of the young love birds to live together. She was forcefully brought back to her parent’s home.

The parents were not available to detail reasons to separate the couple. Timsina is 30 years old and the girl is of the same age.

International Organization of Migration (IOM) generally encourages the youngster of marrying age to tie know before going for resettlement. Encouragement is more for those resettling in Australia, Canada, Norway, Denmark, New Zealand and Netherlands where only handful of Bhutanese are resettled.

This is a census exercise that US Bureau has been conducting since 1790 after the American Revolution. The US constitution mandates that the Census be taken every 10 years and the data is used to allocate congressional seats, electoral votes and government funding.

Unlike Bhutan, where census means categorizing the people up to seven categories to determine their citizenship status, the US Census is a complete count of the population whether they are legal or illegal. By law, the Census Bureau cannot share individual census questionnaire responses to anyone including the law enforcement entities.

The Census Day is April 1, 2010. Questionnaires responses should represent people as it exists on that day. It has just 10 questions and includes some of the basic information such as people living in the household, any additional people living on that particular day, whether rented or owned house, telephone number, information on each person living in the household, sex of the individual, age, and race and whether the mentioned person sometimes lives or stays somewhere else. The questionnaire also asks if there is someone who has no permanent place is staying there on 1 April. But one must be careful not to include people in institutions like college residence, armed forces, nursing home detention facility etc, even if they return in the household as they will be counted in their respective institutions.

One of the most important issues that concern all Bhutanese living in the USA is question no. 9 which asks for your race. This question asks for information such as: White, Black, American Indian, Asian Indian, Chinese, Filipino, Japanese, Korean, Vietnamese etc. etc. and other Asian.  This is the first time ever that Bhutanese are going to be counted in the US Census. Some of our people are of the opinion that we should mention Bhutanese of Nepali origin. I have had a number of discussions with our people and also raised this issue among Bhutanese. It is our firm conviction that we are Bhutanese and not else. We are in America because we are Bhutanese refugees and not by any other status.

Mentioning race any other than Bhutanese would simply dilute our cause and may undercount our number. So, it is utmost important that we mention ourselves as “BHUTANESE”.  We must remember that census numbers are used for a variety of purposes such as planning for hospitals, attracting businesses, drawing federal state and legislative districts, directing funds for services for people in poverty, directing services to children and adults with limited English proficiency, designing facilities for people with disabilities, children or elderly, reapportioning seats in the House of Representatives, drawing school district boundaries etc., which will concern us in the future. Asserting ourselves Bhutanese will only help us to receive facilities as a special new minority group.

I am sure the Bhutanese living in states other than Georgia may have come across the local government or non-profits promoting the need to participate in the Census 2010. We in Atlanta have formed Bhutanese Complete Count Committee and are educating the community through talk program, leaflet and video to participate in this historic exercise.

Remember, this is a one in ten years exercise and we as a stateless people have this great opportunity to be counted in the most powerful nation in the world.

India perceives Bhutan’s democratic movement as one that has a strong ethnic character. In the adjacent area, the Gorkhas of Darjeeling hills have long been struggling to carve out a separate state for themselves. Neighboring Nepal is not easy on matters of national interests, like Bhutan. A resurgent Nepali speaking population in neighboring Bhutan could further catalyze that movement in Darjeeling and other parts of India. In its view, if properly unchecked, this population can transform the entire Himalayan politics to India’s disadvantage. No doubt, the government of the West Bengal state of India has been fighting hard to deny the Gorkhas of Darjeeling, their demand for a separate land.

When human rights and democracy itself are at stake, any government should step up into action in favor of these universal values. India, obviously has been missing that lesson. So, India cannot be a conduit for the resolution of the problem in the true interest of the Bhutanese people. Even though, India played the instrumental role in brokering peace and chasing out King Gyanendra from Narayanhiti, its approach in Bhutan’s case has remained just the opposite. India heavily favors the Bhutanese regime in place of the democratic forces, which has been a cause of apprehension for the Bhutanese democratic forces. India stands as a big stumbling block to their efforts to return to Bhutan. The Bhutanese dissidents feel that they have been betrayed both by their own country and by India.  In fact, they suspect, any mediation navigated by India could be counter productive to their inherent interests in Bhutan and for their movement. Therefore, neither the government of Nepal nor the Bhutanese political leaders in exile should desire India’s involvement in the process of resolving the Bhutanese imbroglio.

Some Bhutanese dissidents charge that the Bhutanese were first repressed by their own country Bhutan and secondly by India. The Indian police forces have arrested, jailed, tortured and shot the Bhutanese democratic activists in the Indian soil, while trying to cross to Bhutan. Surprisingly, they were ‘unnoticed’ when they crossed into Nepal in hordes but when they attempt to return to Bhutan, the Indian government intercepts even a single individual and either locks them up or deports them back to the refugee camps.

The ordeal of the Bhutanese refugees from the oppression from their own government has been matched only by a few autocratic countries. This writer is a witness to both.

Here is an example. On the morning of June 2nd 1999, I led a group of about 101 refugees from the various refugee camps in Nepal to Bhutan. By 8.00 am we were inside Phuntsholing town. Our plan was to put up a protest demonstration. We took out our party banners and started rallying. Before we could walk about 300 yards, the Royal Bhutan Police arrested all of us and walked us back to the building used for booking bus tickets. There, we were confined within the iron chains of building for a couple of hours. A few hours later, we were moved to a different building in the other side of the town, where we were again confined until 12.00 midnight within its iron chains. While inside the chained building we were manipulated, coerced and insulted.  At 12.00 midnight, two Indian state buses arrived and we were led into the buses forcefully. I was seated in the front seat, close to the driver with four alert, Bhutanese policemen guarding me with automatic guns. The bus swiftly moved. When it arrived at Jaigaon, the adjoining Indian town, local Indian authorities greeted and welcomed the Bhutanese team. The Indians took charge and we were driven towards Nepal during the night. Each bus was secured by convoy vehicles of the Indian police force.

By morning we were brought to Panitanki, a small town near the Nepal India border. Then the Indian policemen lined us up and escorted us for about half a kilometer through the tea gardens and finally we reached a steep slope from where we could see the Mechi river. Then, we were ordered to climb down the slope, cross the river and walk into Nepal, while the Indian police men stood on the top pointing guns at us. They did not want us to walk over the Mechi bridge which connects Nepal and India.

Such incidences and even more serious ones repeated every time the Bhutanese democratic forces attempted to return home. The arrest and incarceration of Rongthong Kuenley Dorji in New Delhi is a clear example of how Indian government uses each and every opportunity to punish Bhutanese leaders who oppose the Thimphu regime.

During my stay in lock up inside Bhutan, I have found out that Bhutan is looking for answers in easy places. My impression was that Bhutan government basically views this problem as an administrative issue. It does not in way see the need to solve the problem politically. And there lies the crux. As long as Bhutan does not feel this problem is a political one, needing a political solution, it will not be resolved. Thimphu sends its beaurocrats as emissaries to talk to dissident leaders when they protest inside Bhutan. The outcome of the bilateral talks would have been different if it was approached with a purest political sense.

Indian double standard has also been seen during Bhutan’s transition to ‘democracy’. Instead of lending its support to the struggling democratic forces, the Indian government sided with the  autocratic regime. Bhutan’s Constitutional development did not happen in the villages of Bhutan. Bhutan inherited its first Constitution as a gift from India. Only a few handpicked courtiers of the King were involved in drafting the Constitution. Unfortunately, the central government of India, which is a coalition government of several political parties did not foresee that the Constitution they gifted could kill pluralism in Bhutan.

Apparently, Bhutan’s much touted transition to democracy piloted by the king is a sham. The abdication of the throne and the election was a political gimmick. Monarchy is still the most powerful institution in Bhutan. Elections do not ensure the emergence of democracy, they do happen even in countries governed by authoritarian rulers. Bhutan’s ‘democracy’ did not provide any political space to the dissident groups functioning in exile. A third political party formed and operating inside the country was declined registration by the Royal Election Commission and therefore, could not participate in the polls. Neither, did it lift the ban on political parties struggling for the establishment of democracy and human rights in Bhutan.

The elected government has not imbibed a culture of political tolerance and respect for political pluralism. It feels revolted if anyone tries to genuinely criticize its malevolent actions and policies. The government still tortures political prisoners to extract information and to weaken the dissent. It still considers the refugees as ‘illegal immigrants.’  ‘Change’ has not really come to Bhutan in its true meaning.

One finds hard to reconcile how a Constitution devoid of a real Bhutanese flavor can represent the aspiration of the people. The constitution does not envisage a truly inclusive democracy for all the political minorities in the body politics of Bhutan. Approximately 30,000 southern Bhutanese who are related to the refugees but living inside Bhutan and 100,000 Bhutanese refugees in exile were disenfranchised in the general elections of 2008. Bhutan has not learned lessons from recent political developments Nepal.

Conclusion:
Despite India’s cynicism, it is clear that Bhutan’s democratic movement will continue to grow. There is a large section of Bhutanese refugees in Nepal and India who would favor repatriation to Bhutan in the first place. Those refugees who have accepted resettlement may not fight anymore to return to Bhutan, but they will still continue to love Bhutan. They will continue to speak out in favor of democracy and human rights. For many of them, the desire to sustain and stay the course of the struggle for democracy in Bhutan is a core mission of life. The resettlement program has reshaped the general landscape of the Bhutanese movement. In fact, it has triggered an ambitious international campaign on the part of the refugees to lobby favorable parties and governments in favor of the Bhutanese movement for democracy and human rights.

If India continues to nurse its own agenda of coaxing the King, she may lose her own credibility in the international arena. The Bhutanese haven taken stories of Indian paranoia to every country of settlement. India should clearly stay away from an active involvement in cooking a solution to the Bhutanese problem. But it would be a big help if they could educate the Bhutanese government on the long term benefits of instituting an inclusive democracy, rule of law and allowing the dignified return of willing citizens from exile to Bhutan.

Bhutan Media Society (BMS) called upon leaders from diverse background on Friday in Kathmandu to put up their view on role of India in resolving the issues of exiled Bhutanese, who have spent decades in Nepal and are flying beyond seven seas in search of better days.

Speaking at the interactions, chairman of the Indo Bhutan Friendship Society (IBFS) Prof. Anand Kumar, who is also the chairman of the South Asian Citizens’ Initiative for Democracy, said his organization is set to launch various activities that would pressure on Bhutan for repatriation of exiled Bhutanese who wish to go back.

He said, the peaceful means are the only best measures for securing rights and democracy. “IBFS will dedicate the year 2010 for democratic struggle in Bhutan and rightful repatriation of those who wish to go back,” he added.

Leader of UCPN (Maoist) C. P. Gajurel however, said the only option for oppressed Bhutanese to get justice is to take up arms. “For years, you waited for peaceful means to get justice but ultimately it was resettlement that you were offered against your interest to go back.”

He added, since the issue is of political nature, seeking solution on humanitarian ground would not give a justifiable solution of the crisis.

He expressed his party’s readiness to extend any form of solidarity and support for struggle inside Bhutan.

Bhutanese human rights leader Tek Nath Rizal said he is optimistic of positive roles from India in resolving the issues. He said, pressure on Bhutan to liberalize the politics, withdrawal of travel restriction clamped on Rongthong Kuenley Dorji are some of the latest hints that India has given in favor of oppressed Bhutanese citizens. “The process should continue to new heights,” he added.

Chairman of Bhutan People’s Party Balaram Poudel urged the government of Nepal to clarify its stand on bilateral issue. “Unless Nepal withdraws from bilateral process, India will not engaged in this process,” he said.

Other Bhutanese leader R. P. Subba said even after two decades, India’s attitude on the Bhutanese movement remains cold and questionable.

He added, “If India continues to nurse its own agenda of coaxing the King, she may lose her own credibility in the international arena. The Bhutanese haven taken stories of Indian paranoia to every country of settlement. India should clearly stay away from an active involvement in cooking a solution to the Bhutanese problem.”

In a statement issued by Druk National Congress on the occasion said the party wants the process of repatriation start alongside resettlement process. The party said, since there are some thousands of exiled Bhutanese willing to get repatriated, the process must start at the earliest possible.

The hope is that the emergency-only phones, which require no payments, will help refugees reach paramedics and police to prevent future trouble, said Scott Snow, director of the Denver police Victim Assistance Unit.

“It gives a sense of security,” Snow said.

A dozen refugee victims of recent attacks now carry police-issued phones. Police are talking with a potential corporate partner to supply 50 phones, he said. Ultimately, police aim to give phones to all refugees, along with orientation information and safety tips.

On Dec. 11, a group of men beat and robbed teenage refugees from Bhutan in east Denver, following them from an RTD bus, according to police.

Six were beaten, one requiring emergency-room treatment. The attack spread fear among refugees from Bhutan, Burma and elsewhere — who are concentrated in low-rent apartments and have been victims of previous robberies.

“If they kill me and my son, what will my daughter and wife do?” said Dambar Bhujel, father of an 18-year-old victim, who is now wary of letting his son go to school.

“At first, I was happy to come to the United States. After one year, I’m feeling very bad and I don’t want to stay longer. But we can’t go back to Bhutan and we can’t go back to Nepal,” Bhujel said. “They told us America was secure.”

A police-issued cellphone to call 911 helps — but arresting the attackers would be better, he said.

The U.S. government granted the refugees special permission to enter the country as protection from persecution in Asia. Violence in Denver “is not what they expected,” Snow said.

Police and social workers launching the cellphone initiative “aren’t talking about putting $300 BlackBerrys into the hands of these people, but we want good equipment so people can count on it working,” he said. “This is concrete. It gives immediate contact with emergency services. It’s one step to building a bridge to a community that is traditionally underserved.”

Police increased surveillance on RTD buses after the Dec. 11 attack, which followed several assaults and robberies reported in May.

This time when police arrived, about 50 refugees approached. Many spoke little English. “Several members of the group had been assaulted by a large group of black males,” the report said.

No arrests have been made. “It’s possible it is bias-motivated,” police spokesman Lt. Ron Saunier said. Detectives “are still looking at that aspect of it.”

Police also are looking into a possible retaliatory assault, Saunier said.

Officers recently attended a community meeting in a basement apartment where elders and a social worker expressed worries.

“You have older folks. Usually they don’t speak the language. You have younger people. There’s a feeling of fear. Uncertainty. ‘What do we do?’ ” Denver District 3 Commander Kris Kroncke said. “Sometimes we’ve had incidents were people are hesitant to come forward.”

Police previously have issued emergency-only cellphones, giving text and voice access to 911 dispatchers, to help low-income victims of domestic violence.

These efforts are appreciated, said Paul Stein, director of refugee services in the Colorado Department of Human Services. Federal funding for refugee resettlement is insufficient for safer apartments, Stein said.

“Affordability drives everything,” he said. “The newest to arrive are the most vulnerable. Bullies will target who is available and who is the most vulnerable.”

Source: Denver Post)

Created on the lap of Armed Police Force base camp in Beldangi I, the security village turns to be a shelter for all refugees getting threats for opting to go third country as part of the resettlement.

The village contains only few huts where people recommended by the UNHCR, having felt the need to provide security due to increasing threats, are sheltered in. Attached is four-hut separate shelter called transit huts.

The first to enter this security village is Thug Bahadur Thapa of Beldangi I who has recently received death threats. Thapa shifted to the village in November last week along with his seven-member family. The Bhutanese refugee camps in recent years have turned to be the heartland of warning, threats and killing of public figures.

Security Check Post in Bel-II

Those kept in transit huts say, they would be soon pushed up for resettlement while those in security village have to wait for some longer time before UNHCR forwards the case to resettling countries. Currently, Tashi Sherpa, T. B. Poudel and Subash Acharya have been camped in transit huts.

Acharya says, this a jail life. No one is allowed to enter the village without permission and registering an entry is only through APF personnel. Conversely, those sheltered in the security village and transit huts are not allowed to go out without security escort. The world for them is the distance they could see through their huts and visiting relatives has been limited through phones. APF personnel provide security vigilance for 24-hours around.

Neither the APF, refugee coordinating units and local administration in Jhapa can decide who lives here. The sole authority rests on UNHCR to identify the family in threats and require security at most.

Few days after K. B. Khadka’s murder, Acharya also made a narrow escape to similar attempt. The only alternative to the Acharya was to accept this jail-like life. Confinement is better than death.

Threats are unending. Acharya’s other family members in Beldangi II Extension have become target after his shift. Mental torture to mother has heightened. Even the RCU officer has received threats for sheltering him on transit hut. He has received warning to remove him from the transit.

Poudel of Beldangi II Sector G/2, 46, who has been sheltered in transit huts along with his family since November 25, says he still loves to get repatriated to homeland but situation compelled him to opt for resettlement to third country at the earliest possible. His children stopped attending school due to the possibility of being kidnapped.

Sub inspector of APF Gunaraj Baniya said crime rates are in decreasing trend but threatening has increased in camps. Can the UNHCR and police provide similar veil to all families inside security villages if threats continue to rise in the camps? Baniya says no and adds, we are providing security to all in the camps.

The resettlement has already brought separation of the society that remained tight together for years. The security village and transit huts added sours to hearts that are separating but compulsion rests above all. As felt by Beldangi I camp secretary T. B. Gurung, separation from society on the eve we are departing to unknown destinations would be as bad as we left our homes and properties back in the country during eviction.

S.B. Nambang says people need to respect the individual rights and Bhimlal Dhamala stresses that people need to know the reason why they targeted  by armed groups while seeking solution.

The AIDS day celebration with music. Photo: UNHCR

The list of the celebration days includes campaign against domestic violence on women, AIDS Day, Disability Day, Volunteers Day and Human Rights Day. Most of these days began to be celebrated since 1997 when Save the Children (UK), which was responsible for health project in the camp, formed Children Forum and instigated children to raise awareness on these issues.

The campaign against domestic violence on women has already begun in the camps. The aiding agencies pick up the pace for AIDS day celebration on December 1 in all camps, with the slogan – Take the Lead, Stop AIDS and Keep the Promise.

Primary Health Care Project of the Asian Medical Doctors’ Association (AMDA) will organize HIV awareness programs through street drama, HIV/AIDS related songs, dances, sports events and rallies.

Officials from Refugee Coordinating Unit (RCU), Camp Monitoring Officer of Lutheran World Federation (LWF), UNHCR, camp secretaries and police force will join their hands in the programs.

Shital Beka, a staff of AMDA, PHCP for Bhutanese refugees said program is entirely targeted to the refugees to create awareness and prevent spreading of the AIDS. AMDA said 18 refugees have so far been detected to have infected with AIDS.

The camp residents also wait for Disability Day, Volunteer Day and most importantly the Human Rights Day on December 10.