Labour Accord

Nepal and the United Arab Emirates (UAE) have signed a deal to arrange and regulate exchange of workers with a view to ensuring that Nepalese labourers working in the UAE are protected and conferred with the rights that are universally granted to the workers employed outside their own countries. This is the first bilateral agreement of its kind which has been agreed upon and initialled between Nepal and the countries of the Gulf. Although a similar accord was said to have been signed with Qatar at the time of the Royal regime some one-and-a-half years ago, it is, according to the Minister of State for Labour and Transport Ramesh Datta Lekhak, the first accord that entrusts legal status to the Nepalese workers employed in any country outside Nepal. The bilateral agreement comes into effect soon, and the salient features of the deal makes the government of Nepal and the UAE accountable for safeguarding the rights of the Nepali labourers and maintaining salary standards and contracting compulsory health insurance for them. Moreover, the accord provides the Nepali workers rights and the legal status to fight against attempts to encroach upon their entitlements.

The most important part of the agreement has been that it seeks to prevent improper practices and deceptive tricks by the private manpower agencies that tend to exploit the workers by demanding exaggerated fees, while providing false information about their working conditions in the host country. According to Minister for Labour of the UAE, Dr. Ali Bin Abdulla Al Kabbi, the deal confirms the importance of the supply and recruitment of the Nepali labour force on a firm foundation in accordance with the laws and regulations in force in both the countries. The positive aspect of the agreement has been that it defines manpower as temporary workers intended to be employed for a specified period of time as per the work contracts and indicates the rights and obligations of the employees and employers. As has been mentioned by the authorities of both the countries, the accord constitutes a milestone in protecting the rights and entitlements of the Nepali workers. Since the trend of the Nepalese people going outside and working there has been consistently on the rise, Nepal should seek to agree upon and sign similar accords with other countries including Saudi Arabia, Malaysia and so on. What matters significantly is not so much the signing of the accords as their implementation in the real sense of the terms.

Source: The Rising Nepal, July 5, 2007

Protecting Child Rights

A report has portrayed a dismal picture of Nepal's children. According to the report, based on a survey by a non-governmental organisation working for the rights of the child, there are 2.6 million working children in Nepal, of which 25 per cent work in the hazardous sector. The survey on the state of the working children, which was released in Kathmandu the other day, stated that 71,500 children are working in restaurants whereas 32,000 work in stone quarries, 19,000 work as porters, about 40,000 work in brick kilns and 16,000 in the mechanical sector. All these sectors are hazardous based on the nature of work and other conditions under which these children are working.The conditions pose serious health hazards and other physical and mental risks to them. Apart from the risk involved, the child labourers have often experienced various kinds of physical, psychological and mental exploitation and harassment. The survey has pointed out incidents of sexual harassment and exploitation meted out to the working children. The UN Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC), to which Nepal is a signatory, has defined a child as one who has not attained the age of 18 years, and the UN instrument has clearly prohibited child labour. However, the reality is different in many of the third world countries.

Many children are working for their survival mainly due to poverty and ignorance. Although governments have signed the international instruments that ban the recruitment of children, there is little progress when it comes to implementing these commitments. The non-compliance of international human rights and humanitarian laws as well as the national legislation is another strong factor for child labour. Nepal is a signatory to several UN and ILO conventions and treaties including the CRC.But a large number of children are shedding their blood and sweat in various sectors. These working children are often denied their basic rights including the right to education. In a country with a population of 26 million, 2.6 million working children is no small number. As these working children are denied an education and other rights, their future is certain to be bleak, which would further push them into the cycle of poverty. Against this background, the ILO convention has focused on the elimination of worst forms of child labour. In the present condition, total elimination of child labour does not seem feasible. Although the goal should be to ultimately eliminate all forms of child labour in the long run, an immediate strategy should be to eliminate the worst forms of child labour.

Source: The Rising Nepal, June 30, 2007

Enforcing Life Sustaining Rights

Madhavji Shrestha

Respect for human rights in behaviour and action implies the observance of the fundamental rights of citizens that include economic, social and cultural rights. However, situations prevalent in the developing and underdeveloped societies are not conducive for the much-needed economic, social and cultural rights, despite the fact that a democratic environment enables citizens to enjoy civil and political rights. Economic rights are more significant especially in the want and hunger-afflicted societies than civil and political rights, because the former rights lie at the roots of life that nourish the latter civil and political rights. This realisation is now nudging every political party and civil society to call for the creation of a situation amenable to the genuine observance of the economic, social and cultural rights. There is a bigger demand to make these life-sustaining rights enforceable, just like the civil and political rights.

ConditionsHowever, it is very difficult to keep both civil and political rights alongside the economic, social and cultural rights. In a developing country with a nascent democratisation process, it is not only hard but also looks impossible to enforce these rights. At least, three conditions are responsible for the non-enforcement of these rights. First, the political will on the part of the politicians at the helm has not come forth; second, the ability of the government is highly limited in enforcing such rights, and third, the expectations of the people are ever growing. Of course, other factors like socio-economic stagnation and lack of awareness among the masses are also responsible for the non-fulfilment of the much-needed humanitarian needs.However, the recent development in Nepal, in particular, in the political domain and activities seems encouraging and sounds positive in enforcing the economic, social and cultural rights. Undoubtedly, this is an apparent consequence of the people's movement of April 2006 and the subsequent socio-political events following the democratisation process. Various provisions incorporated in the interim constitution of Nepal promulgated on January 15, 2007 point toward the direction of making the Nepali society egalitarian and democratic. However, their implementation is eagerly awaited as the country now being run by the interim coalition government of the eight political parties of various leanings is facing political and sectarian hurdles. The ability of the current government to deliver the goods is being questioned everywhere, even by the politically non-interested man. They point out to the continued dismal failure of the government to maintain even the primary condition of the law and order, leave alone any noticeable measure ever taken for the upliftment of the socially and economically downtrodden people. Discontent among the common people is fast spreading.

The insertion of the right to employment and other economic, social and cultural facilities as fundamental rights in the interim constitution of Nepal is politically significant, indicating the political parties' willingness to give greater impetus to the welfare and progress of the needy people. This has come about as a consequence of the people's pressure, on the one hand, while, on the other, this has been clearly encouraged and guided by the resolution on the International Covenant on the Economic, Social and Cultural Rights as adopted by the UN in 1966, which was decreed to come into force in 1976. However, to the surprise of all, the provisions contained in this internationally important resolution remains the pious wishes of the United Nations. They also resemble the content of the Directive Principles of the State Policy inserted at the beginning of any progressive and democratic constitution of a nation especially after the end of the Second World War. So in the case of Nepal, the insertion of the progressive economic and social rights in the interim constitution has, thus, given the impression that they are non-implementable and has hardly generated hope for the people.If the politicians at the helm genuinely desire to implement the important provisions of the economic and social rights in a convincing way, they must be resolute with unshakable political will and firm determination to pursue the concerned matter to its hilt. All major political parties, too, must brace up to prod the government to make its capability effective in implementing the provisions. To help realise these rights, due attention needs to be paid to the following propositions in the prevailing Nepali context.

Requisite financial resources can be found within the budgetary management of Nepal. Huge expenditures spent on the military and armed forces and the larger amount of money spent by the government for intelligence purposes are indeed non-productive and in a way hamper socio-economic development. The drastic curtailment of such non-essential expenditures is possible and lies within justifiable parameters. These financial resources, thus, saved could be diverted towards the direction of creating conditions for the observance of economic, social and cultural rights of the people, especially the important rights requiring expenditure from the state coffer.The federal structure as agreed by the eight political parties a few months earlier will naturally become an example of granting the socio-cultural rights to the people of different ethnic origin and various regions of Nepal. However, the federal structure itself will be hardly sufficient to grant the socio-cultural rights unless what the political experts call non-centralisation is maintained both in spirit and letter. The provisions contained therein ought to be put in action not only between the central and state governments but also among various ethnic, religious and linguistic groups living within the state units of the federal system. Among the social and cultural rights, educational, health and ethnic identity-related rights are far more important than any other rights. Specific provisions need to be put in place for the observance of these rights.

Although the UN had passed the resolution on the economic, social and cultural rights four decades ago, the world body has remained passive in forcing the member-states implement the provisions. The UN as a universal organisation commanding respect of the developing countries, in general, should move towards providing convincing schemes and programmes to the needy member-states with assistance from certain funds. It would be even better to link these rights with the much-hyped Millennium Development Goals now in progress worldwide. The UN must be able to stand for reinforcing respect for the economic and social rights of human beings.Moral obligationThe developed democracies also have some important obligations to enforcing these economic and social rights in Nepal. After all, these rights are, in essence, the human rights of the citizens of Nepal. If they are very watchful over the question of human rights, they should, in no way, remain behind in giving the required assistance for the maintenance of these rights.If the election to the constituent assembly, albeit delayed by several months, could be held by mid-November this year satisfactorily, it will certainly come to play an exemplary role in the political history of Nepal. The constituent assembly will be a political organ in ensuring the observance of the economic, social and cultural rights.

Source: The Rising Nepal, June 25, 2007

Nepal: Bhutanese Refugee Tensions Erupt Into Violence

(Washington, DC, May 31, 2007) ? Violent clashes this week resulting in two deaths in Nepal's Bhutanese refugee camps underscore the need for the Nepali police to protect refugees from mob violence and ensure their right to peaceful expression, Human Rights Watch said today. The death of a third Bhutanese refugee in a confrontation with Indian police forces this week indicates that all sides must exercise restraint before tensions escalate further with even more loss of life.

Human Rights Watch is concerned about the escalation of violence in the refugee camps in eastern Nepal and along the Indian border, which some refugees have been attempting to cross in a march to Bhutan.

On May 27, a group claiming to be members of the Bhutanese Communist Party (Marxist-Leninist-Maoist) attacked refugees who have voiced support for a US offer to resettle Bhutanese refugees. The attackers beat at least one refugee leader and destroyed his and several other huts in Beldangi II camp in eastern Nepal. Similar attacks occurred in another camp, Beldangi I, where several huts, including the camp administration office, were also burnt down.
In response to the violence, a contingent of the Nepal Armed Police opened fire on the mob and reportedly killed a teenage boy. By some accounts, police shot a second teenager on Monday who died later that day in hospital.

"Nepali police need to protect the Bhutanese refugees and their right to peacefully express their views on resettlement or return," said Bill Frelick, Refugee Policy director of Human Rights Watch. "Factions of Bhutanese refugees divided over the resettlement issue should reflect on the tragic loss of these young lives and conclude that fighting each other will not solve their plight."
Refugees or others who resort to violence and attack refugees with whom they disagree must be arrested and prosecuted by Nepali authorities, Human Rights Watch said. At the same time, the police should avoid excessive force in maintaining order.

While a US offer to resettle 60,000 or more Bhutanese refugees has given hope to many of the 106,000 refugees living in Nepal, some refugees see the resettlement offer as undercutting the prospects for repatriation and have increasingly resorted to threats and violence to prevent other refugees from advocating for solutions other than return to Bhutan. In a report published earlier this month, "Last Hope: The Need for Durable Solutions for Bhutanese Refugees in India and Nepal," Human Rights Watch warned that tensions in the camps are growing.
"Although there is no question that Bhutanese refugees have a right to return, they also have the right to make choices on essential issues like resettlement without threats, intimidation or violence" said Frelick.

In a related development, a group of Bhutanese refugees this week attempted a march to return to Bhutan. Bhutan and Nepal are separated by a strip of land belonging to India. Indian police forces clashed with the refugees at the Mechi River bridge that serves as the crossing with Nepal. Refugees pelted the police with stones, and Indian police fired on the demonstrators, killing one and injuring others. The standoff ended after local leaders talked with Indian authorities who have agreed to forward their demands to the relevant officials in New Delhi.
Repatriation of Bhutanese refugees must be accompanied by the restoration of rights, and should include monitoring and assistance from the UN High Commissioner for Refugees. At the present time, none of the conditions that would allow them to return safely and in dignity have been met, Human Rights Watch said. "Groups of Bhutanese refugees should not resort to violence in exercising their right of return, and the Indian police should also act with restraint and compassion for the refugees," Frelick said.

The Bhutanese refugee crisis began in 1991 when Bhutan started to expel ethnic Nepalis, a policy that resulted in the expulsion of one-sixth of the country's population. So far, in complete violation of international law, Bhutan has not allowed a single refugee to return. Consequently, the refugees have endured years in cramped camps with no prospects for solutions, conditions that have led to domestic violence and other social problems that have come after protracted periods in closed camps. Before any solutions can be achieved, Nepal must provide sufficient security in the camps to enable refugees to express their opinions and exchange information freely, Human Rights Watch said.

At the same time, the United States and other resettlement countries should expand an information campaign in the camps to reiterate that the choice of resettlement is voluntary and does not in any way extinguish the right of return. The countries offering resettlement need to provide detailed information about the rights and benefits for refugees that choose to resettle in their countries. Together with the rest of the international community, particularly India, these countries should bring pressure to bear on Bhutan to permit the refugees to return home in safety and dignity and to end discrimination against its ethnic Nepali citizens.

Source: Reuters News, May 31, 2007

For Gender Balance

Gender has been directly linked with human rights. Gender issues have often been linked with the issue and rights of women. In fact, gender is not an issue of women alone but of the society. This issue has greater impact on the overall development of the society and the country. Women, mostly in the developing countries, are deprived of their basic rights and opportunities. As a result, women in the developing countries are backward, less educated and more dependent on their male counterparts. As women are backward, societies are also backward. Thus, the gender issue concerns humanity, and gender equality aims at ensuring equal participation and development of both men and women. Women constitute half the population, so sustainable development of any country and society cannot be achieved in the absence of active and constructive participation and development of women. One of the major causes of backwardness and slow pace of development in the developing world is, thus, the gross negligence of gender issues and lack of gender equality. Realising this, gender, though late, has now received due prominence in all sectors.

As a developing country, Nepal's case is also not much different in terms of gender. Theoretically, Nepal has adequate provisions for gender equality and women's rights. It has ratified the UN Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women. The constitutional and legal provisions have strictly prohibited any forms of discrimination on the ground of sex, colour and caste. However, the reality is different. Majority of women in Nepal are still illiterate. Women have relatively less say in decision making and social and economic activities. Although a law has been enacted concerning equal share for women in parental properties, women are still not being able to enjoy fully the rights due to social and cultural bias. Some leading women have aptly raised this issue and said that only limited number of women have benefited from the new legal arrangements, while the majority of women in the rural areas are still deprived of their basic rights. This is mainly due to the ignorance of women concerning their rights and legal provisions. Against this background, Minister for Information and Communication Krishna Bahadur Mahara, in an interaction organised by Women's Rehabilitation Centre in Kathmandu, has said that the existing discrimination against women should be eliminated through political will and effective social mobilisation. The remarks of the minister are appropriate which need to be put into practice.

Source: The Rising Nepal, June 1, 2007

Shameful act

The act of Indian security forces, which killed a Bhutanese refugee, should be condemned from all sections of society. In fact, the human rights groups must take up this incident seriously and raise it in international forums as it is a crime committed by a so-called largest democratic country, which claims that it honors freedom and people's rights. Unfortunately, the Home Ministry, instead of condemning the killing, asked the refugees to return to UNHCR-administered camps. India blocked the road and imposed a curfew to prevent the refugees from returning to their homeland. Indian security forces acted in tandem with the Druk security forces. Both the Indian and Bhutanese security forces had held meetings last week in Phutsoling and Darjeeling to thwart the refugees' attempt to return to Bhutan. In an attempt to deny them the right to return home, India's border security forces mercilessly killed a refugee and injured scores of others.

On May 29, the Bhutanese refugees were returning to Bhutan to participate in a mock election there. The Druk regime is exercising a mock poll in the run up to a general election slated for early next year. The mockery of such exercise is that Bhutan has been run with the royal edicts. Holding such elections, in other words, is mocking democratic values. Has a country ruled by a tin-pot dictator ever become democratic? India should know it well that it has dishonored the rights of the refugees. India's pet regime has evicted hundreds of thousands of its citizens forcibly. India has protected the tin-pot dictator, who has adopted a policy of ethnic cleansing. And this was not the first incident of killing a refugee. Earlier, Indian armed forces killed a refugee who had crossed the Nepal-India border to participate in a protest rally. Since 1994, India has denied the Bhutanese refugees to hold any sort of protest programs within its territory.

In 1991, Bhutan forcibly evicted the Lhotshampas. They were ferried by West Bengal Police and dumped into the Nepali territory. India, since then, has brushed aside the refugee problem citing it as a bilateral issue, siding with the tin-pot dictator. It was a naked crime and a sheer attempt to deny the refugees' right to return home. It is very sad that Nepal has always pushed the refugee issue to the backburner. The third-country resettlement plan will not prevent the Druk dictator from evicting the people of Nepali origin so long as India protects the tin-pot dictator and encourages him to intensify the “ethnic cleansing” drive. What the people of Bhutan need is international support for the fight against the Druk dictator. So, India ought to allow the refugees to participate in the elections slated for early next year in Bhutan.

Source: The Kathmandu Post, May 31, 2007

Another you

The pitiable existence of the more than one lakh Bhutanese refugees of Nepali origin now living in the seven refugee camps in eastern Tarai remains more or less the same as it was 17 years ago when, expelled by the Druk regime from their own country or fleeing torture or persecution at home, they had to enter India, their first country of asylum. Later, they entered Nepal — a number of them had been carted off to the eastern Nepal border by the Indian police and left there. On Monday and Tuesday, thousands of refugees attempted a “Long March” to Bhutan, as on several occasions in the past, and as before, their long march has been cut short by the Indian police (and troops, too, on Tuesday) especially stationed in force as the refugees tried to force their way through the barricades in the Indian side. Inside Nepal, this had been preceded by the death of two refugees in police firing in Beldangi refugee camps. The refugees’ determination to return home was also a proof that third-country resettlement was not everything for them.

However, the offer to resettle 60,000-plus refugees in the US and other western countries should be taken positively, at least in one sense. At the same time, the seeming American unwillingness to pressure Thimphu to resolve the issue according to international conventions has surprised many Nepalis, as well as refugees, especially because wherever it wants the US tends to throw its weight around. This leaves some room for doubt. On its part, India has for umpteen times ruled out the possibility of using its good offices to end the refugee deadlock, terming it purely a “bilateral issue”, except once, during the world conference on the environment and development in Rio de Janeiro in 1992, when the then Indian prime minister P V Narasimha Rao had sounded positive on the idea of India helping resolve the issue.

Serious doubts exist in Nepal on this particular issue mainly for two reasons. First, New Delhi was seen to take an interest in ensuring that most Bhutanese refugees in Indian territory came into Nepal, whereas, since then, it has prevented the refugees, if need be by applying force, from going back home. Secondly, the Bhutanese government, under a 1949 bilateral treaty, is to be guided by the advice of the government of India in its external relations. Therefore, there are people who express reservations about the view that the refugee issue is a bilateral one. This, according to them, is a “heads I win, tails you lose” approach. Besides, they also look at the US position with a pinch of salt — its relative silence on the right of the Bhutanese to return home and its offer of resettling them may indeed strengthen the Drukpa rulers, who, some doubt, may then be emboldened to expel more Bhutanese of Nepali origin. The stalemate strikes one as odd because both the US and India are hailed as great democracies. The first and foremost right of any refugee is to be allowed to return home, but under the formula being promoted, this has been ignored. Options like third-country resettlement may indeed be a good opportunity for the willing.

Source: The Himalayan Times, May 30, 2007

Bhutan : Situation Of Ethnic Nepalis

Kazi Gautam

A New-York based human rights organisation - Human Rights Watch (HRW) - made public its report in Kathmandu on May 17. In the report, the HRW has presented a report on the situation of ethnic Nepalis in Bhutan, the condition of the refugees in the camps and three options available to the refugees. The study has highlighted that ethnic Nepalis residing in Bhutan have been facing constant prejudice and ongoing threats to their citizenship status, and implies there could be more ethnic cleansing in the days ahead. Problems of ethnic Nepalis According to an official census conducted in 2005, 13 per cent of Bhutan's current permanent residents are "non-nationals". Following the census, new ID cards are being distributed to all recognised Bhutanese citizens. But those eligible for receiving the ID cards are F1 (genuine Bhutanese citizens) and F4 (non-national women married to Bhutanese men, and their children). A lack of 'No Objection Certificates' (NOC) barred others from getting the ID.

The NOCs were introduced by the government following political instability in the south in the early 1990s when the Lhotsampas (Nepali speaking people) revolted against the Druk regime. NOCs are issued by the Royal Bhutan Police (RBP) only if they receive confirmation from the Dzongdag (district administrator) that a person in question is not in any way involved in "anti-national activity". NOCs are required for enrollment in higher education, employment in the civil service, obtaining business and trading licenses, travel documents and the like. During the last census, the Royal Government of Bhutan (RGB) did not allow a large portion of Lhotsampas to enlist their names in the voting list. They were asked to produce NOCs before their names could be included in the voting list. But the RBP did not provide them the NOC, alleging them that they had constant touch with the refugees living in Nepal. Some 70,000 Lhotsampas were not included in the mock election that Bhutan conducted last month. The lack of NOCs does not allow the Bhutanese to get involved in any sort of political or governmental activities. On the other hand, ethnic Nepalis are always in fear that their NOC and citizenship might be snatched away if they keep relations with the refugees. Some refugees who sometimes visit the camps refuse to talk about their present condition in Bhutan. They fear that the source of information might be revealed to the Bhutanese authorities and that might eventually become a reason to get evicted from the country.

The practice of forced labour still exists in southern Bhutan. Ethnic Nepalis must provide free labour. They have to assist the Drukpas to get resettled on the land that was once owned by the refugees. There is no instruction in the Nepali language, even in schools in the southern districts - only Dzongkha and English are taught. Ethnic Nepalis are still expected to wear gho (for men) and kira (for women), the traditional Drukpa clothes, in schools and other public places, as stipulated by the king's 1989 decree of Driglam Namza. A draft constitution released in March 2005 incorporates the discriminatory provisions of the 1985 Citizenship Act, and provides that Dzongkha is the national language of Bhutan, and that Buddhism is the "spiritual heritage of Bhutan".During the 14th SAARC summit, Nepalese Prime Minister Girija Prasad Koirala and Foreign Minister Sahana Pradhan pressured their Bhutanese and Indian counterparts to accept all the Bhutanese refugees unconditionally. It was the first time that India and Bhutan had appeared positive. Bhutan had agreed to accept at least some refugees. However, instead of repatriating the refugees, it plans to evict more southerners from the country.

The people in Bhutan have often been tortured and harassed for no good reason. Due to lack of agencies to address their sufferings, they cannot be publicised. Moreover, the ill practices of Bhutan rarely reach the concerned authorities due to lack of an independent media to impart factual news. The Kuensel, a mouthpiece of the Druk regime, supports only the king's activities. The two private publications that have recently started, The Bhutan Observer and The Bhutan Times, are also under the clutch of the king. So they have failed to relay uncensored news. Also, there are no human rights agencies to look after and safeguard the rights of the people. The long endeavours of the Nepalese government to repatriate the refugees have not been able to bear any fruit. The steps taken so far to solve the impasse, including the bilateral talks, have turned out ineffective. Hence, the US has proposed third country resettlement. But Bhutan has considered this scheme to be in its favour, and decided to evict more Lhotsampas so that they could also be handled by the western countries.

Conscious people By this time, all the people residing in Bhutan - be they Sarchhops or even Drukpas, or Lhotsampas - have become highly conscious about their rights. They have eventually realised that the people in the refugee camps have been struggling to safeguard their rights as well. It should also be remembered that the Bhutanese - both inside and outside Bhutan - are committed to overthrowing the Wangchhuk dynasty. The united revolt of the people can put an end to any sort of government. The Great Revolt of 1857 in India against the British regime and the popular revolt of the Nepalese in 2006 to restore the rights seized by Gyanendra are common examples.When the Bhutanese political movement started in the early 1990s, only some people participated. The movement also lacked able leaders, and, thus, the movement turned out to a failure, forcing the people to become refugees. There were no inspection teams from human rights activists and other similar agencies. The movement also could not get wide media coverage as the international media did not get the information. The condition has, however, changed now. Slowly, the violation of human rights and other atrocities of the tin pot dictator are being slowly revealed to the outside world. Hence, other members of SAARC and the international community must take immediate action to safeguard the rights of some 100,000 Lhotsampas residing in Bhutan before they are made refugees.

Source: The Rising Nepal, May 29, 2007

IDP still facing threat

Integrated Regional Information Networks

May 23, 2007

Hundreds of thousands of people displaced from their homes during the decade-long war between Maoist rebels and the government are having difficulty returning to their homes, despite the conflict ending in November 2006, aid workers say. Last year, the Nepalese government estimated that there were more than 200,000 internally displaced people (I.D.P.'s) in the country but there is no accurate information on whether that number has reduced after peace was achieved five months ago. The lack of an I.D.P. registration system has made it difficult to determine who has actually returned home, aid groups say. Most of the displaced are scattered in major towns and cities or have migrated to India.

But we can easily gauge that very few have returned because the Maoists still rule the villages and are selective about who can return to their homes safely," said Dilliram Dhakal from the Community Study and Welfare Center (C.S.W.C.), a local N.G.O. that has been advocating for the rights of the displaced. Dhakal added that despite commitments pledged by Maoist leaders in the capital to ensure the safe return of displaced families, their local Maoist cadres in the villages have not been fully cooperative. "There are issues of local Maoists not adhering to commitments made in the peace agreement," Paul Handley, humanitarian affairs officer with the United Nation's Office of the Coordination for Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA) in Nepal, told IRIN in the capital, Kathmandu.

So far, only those I.D.P.'s who support or have close affiliation with the Communist Party of Nepal, Maoists (C.P.N.M.) have been able to return to their properties, said Dhakal. But a large number of other I.D.P.'s are still unable to retrieve their farms, livestock and houses that were seized by the Maoists, he added. "What's the use of returning home when they have no property and land to live on for their livelihood?" asked rights activist Bhola Mahat from N.G.O. Informal Sector Service Center (INSEC), which has been actively helping the displaced return home.

Land Issue Is Major Problem for I.D.P.'s

It is no longer the threat of physical security but more of food and land security that has been impeding returns, said aid workers. "I have nothing to eat or survive on. So how can I return home? Just to starve myself?" asked Ramesh Biswakarma in Kathmandu, where he is living in poverty after he fled from his remote village in the northwestern Jajarkot district. A large group of displaced people from Jajarkot is still living at an I.D.P. camp in the Rajhena area of Nepalgunj city, 600 kilometers west of the capital. Camp residents are desperately seeking help from aid agencies to ensure their protection, safety, and the return of their properties. "Land continues to be a problem in rural areas with I.D.P.'s not being able to access their lands," Aidan Goldsmith, director of International Rescue Committee (I.R.C.) in Nepal, told IRIN.

He said that major challenges for resolving the displaced persons issue were the return of their farmlands and generating livelihoods from whatever remains of their resources in their villages.
I.R.C. has been working in the country for the past two years with a focus on I.D.P.'s, other conflict-resolution issues, and health projects. "There is a prime need for assisting the I.D.P.'s to restart their lives and help them to become functioning members of the community," said Goldsmith.

New I.D.P. Policy and Legal Assistance

A new policy for assisting the displaced, formulated and passed by the Nepalese parliament three weeks ago, is seen as key to resolving the displaced persons issue. "It's a good policy and critical toward assisting the I.D.P.'s," Alexander Jones, Nepal's country director of the Norwegian Refugee Council (N.R.C.), said. In addition to OCHA, other key U.N. agencies and I.R.C., the N.R.C. was also part of the task force to help the government develop the new I.D.P. policy. Jones said that according to the new policy, citizens forced to leave their homes will have the right to protection from the state. The policy also helps to clearly define the status of an I.D.P., which was not the case before.

N.R.C., which provides legal assistance to the displaced in more than 10 countries, also launched an Information Counseling and legal Assistance project a month ago in Nepal. Since then, many displaced families have been able to get advice on their legal rights and access to justice as well as guidance on legal documents which would give them access to their properties. However, Jones said that many I.D.P. families lost their land and property legal documents after they were forced to leave their homes. At present, many of them lack enough documentation to even get any compensation from the government for their lost properties. © IRIN

Source: Worldpress.org, May 24, 2007

Ethnic cleansing

New York-based Human Rights Watch has rightly assessed the gross violation of human rights in Bhutan. The Druk regime, which evicted over one hundred thousand people back in the 1990s, continues to deny the rights of minorities living there for centuries. Now, the fear is that the third country resettlement plan undertaken by the United States may further encourage the Druk dictator to evict the remaining Lhotshampas. And this is happening at the behest of India -- the largest democracy, which is backing Bhutan's policy of ethnic cleansing. Bhutan has adopted several ways to evict the Nepali minority. First, it has introduced a 'No Objection Certificate' system. It is a must for admission in schools, registration of any firm, running a business establishment for a living or employment. Issuance of such certificates has denied the basic education to the children of Lhotshampas. Second, Bhutan has no constitution as to ensure the rights of the minority. The royal edicts are the supreme law of that country. As a result, hundreds of innocent people have been languishing in the Druk jails for decades.

No country has committed such heinous crimes against its people. Bhutan has denied no objection certificates to the Lhotshampas, with a clear intention of evicting them gradually. It has denied the right of over one hundred thousand refugees to return to their homeland. Yet, some Western countries, which are defending democracy across the world, have funded development projects in Bhutan. India has gone to the extent of protecting the autocratic regime. Earlier, Northeast Indian states did so to uproot the Nepali settlement. Hundreds of thousand of people of Nepali origin were forcefully evicted from Manipur, Meghalaya and Assam states in the 1980s citing them as foreigners. Now, Bhutan has done the same thing as Northeast Indian states did in the 1980s.

Bhutan is planning to hold polls early next year to eyewash the international community. The refugees languishing in UNHCR-administered camps in eastern Nepal will not be allowed to participate in the elections. Although the Druk regime has admitted that the refugees are bona-fide Bhutanese citizens, it has refused to take them back. Besides, the mockery of Bhutanese democracy is that the regime has allowed no individuals to form a political party. While one-fifth of the population is languishing outside Bhutan as refugees, how credible and authentic would such elections be? Obviously, Bhutan has not given up its state policy of ethnic cleansing. It continues to adopt techniques to block the repatriation attempt and sweep the minority out of its territory. Bhutan could do so by taking the side of the largest democratic country, India.

Source: The Kathmandu Post, May 19, 2007

End Impunity

THE United Nations Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) has expressed satisfaction over the efforts of the government to improve the human rights situation in Nepal after the success of Jana Andolan II last year. Issuing a statement on the occasion of the first anniversary of the April Uprising that restored democracy and human rights, the OHCHR has demanded that those who were responsible in suppressing the people's rights should be punished to end the culture of impunity in Nepal. It is absolutely true that the culture of impunity must end, and all those responsible for human rights abuses must be brought to book. The tendency of impunity has continued in Nepal, which is one of the reasons for human rights violations at different times. After the 1990 political change, there had been a demand from human rights activists and civil society members to punish those who suppressed the people's movement and violated the rights of the people. The Mallik Commission, the panel formed to investigate the atrocities during the 1990 movement, had clearly pinpointed at some people responsible for violating human rights, and had recommended necessary action against them. However, the governments formed after the 1990 political change could not take any action against them. These people again became active during the king's authoritarian regime and suppressed people's rights. Had action been taken against those pinpointed by the Mallik Commission, the king would not have dared take over power.

We must now learn lessons from the past. The Rayamajhi Commission has also found some people guilty of suppressing the movement last year and violating human rights. Thus, it is necessary that action be taken against them so that the culture of impunity is ended once and for all. All previous atrocities and human rights violations must be thoroughly investigated and action taken against the culprits. Against this background, there has been a demand for the ratification of the International Criminal Court, which is popularly known as the Rome Statute that deals with investigation into the atrocities perpetrated on the people and punishment for the perpetrators. Nepal so far has not ratified the Rome Statute, as a result of which the international criminal investigation body has not been authorised to probe crimes against humanity and book the culprits as per national as well as international humanitarian and criminal laws in Nepal. Now this treaty needs to be ratified as early as possible. Although there has been marked progress in the human rights situation after the establishment of Loktantra, Nepal, as stated by the OHCHR, needs to be done to institutionalise these achievements on the human rights front.

Source: The Rising Nepal, April 26, 2007