NEPAL: BHUTANESE REFUGEES ANGERED OVER

C O N F I D E N T I A L SECTION 01 OF 03 KATHMANDU 002501

SIPDIS

DEPT FOR SA/INS AND PRM/ANE, LONDON FOR POL/GURNEY, NSC FOR
MILLARD, GENEVA FOR PLYNCH

E.O. 12958: DECL: 12/23/2013
TAGS: PREF PREL BH NP
SUBJECT: NEPAL: BHUTANESE REFUGEES ANGERED OVER
REPATRIATION CONDITIONS

Classified By: Ambassador Michael E. Malinowski for reasons 1.5 (b,d).


1. (SBU) Summary. On December 22, the Nepal - Bhutan Joint
Verification Team (JVT) visited Khudunabari Camp to brief
refugees on conditions for repatriation to Bhutan. According
to the Bhutanese JVT members, Category I refugees will be
returned with full citizenship rights; Category II refugees
will be issued temporary identity cards, settled in camps
with one member of each family entitled to work as laborers,
health and education facilities will be provided, but freedom
of movement will not be allowed; and Category IV refugees
will be handed-over in police custody while their family
members will be kept in a separate camp. The refugees
responded angrily, surrounded the JVT members and verbally
attacked them. As the JVT members attempted to leave the
camp, refugees pelted them with stones, injuring one and
damaging their vehicles. The Bhutanese JVT members cut short
their visit to Nepal, departing early on December 23 for
Bhutan. The refugees' angry reaction does not bode well for
the future of the repatriation process. End Summary.


2. (SBU) On December 22, the Bhutanese and Nepal members of
the Joint Verification Team (JVT) visited Khudunabari Camp in
eastern Nepal for the first of a series of briefings to the
refugees explaining conditions for repatriation to Bhutan.
The Bhutan team was led by Dr. Sonam Tenzin while the Nepal
team was led by Sushil Jung Rana, Joint Secretary at the
Ministry of Home Affairs. According to refugee leaders in
Khudunabari Camp, the JVT's plan was to brief the heads of
households of each of the 7 sectors over 7 days. Khudunabari
Camp's Sector A residents were, therefore, invited to
participate in the briefing, which was held inside the
community hall inside the camp. Because the community hall
can accommodate only roughly 100 people, the remaining Sector
A residents stayed outside the hall listening to the briefing
via microphone. A UNHCR Security Officer was also present
outside the hall. The account described below was provided
by refugee leaders present at the briefing. Some of the
statements have been confirmed by UNHCR, while others are
awaiting confirmation.


3. (SBU) Category I refugees, or those who were forcefully
evicted from Bhutan, Tenzin reportedly indicated, would be
repatriated in the first phase and would be issued
citizenship cards upon arrival. The 274 individuals in this
category will enjoy the full rights of any Bhutanese living
in Bhutan, he said. Tenzin remarked, however, that any
Category I refugee who sold his land either to the government
or to a private buyer would not receive a land allocation.
Those who had not sold their land would be granted substitute
land in equal measure to the land registration document.
According to refugee leaders, Tenzin opened the floor for
questions regarding Category I refugees, but cut off the
questioning before answering even the first question.


4. (SBU) Category II refugees, or those who allegedly left
Bhutan voluntarily, will be issued a temporary ID card upon
arrival in Bhutan. During the 2-year probation period, all
family members must be physically present in Bhutan and
cannot leave the country. To qualify for citizenship,
Category II refugees will not be required to read and write
Dzongkha, but must speak Dzongkha and be familiar with
Bhutan's history, culture and traditions. Citizenship will
not be granted if any re-applicant is found to have spoken
against the King, the country or the people of Bhutan.
According to the refugees and confirmed by UNHCR, Tenzin said
that, after arrival in Bhutan, Category II returnees will be
settled in camps, and one member from each family will be
employed as laborers at road construction sites. The
returnees will be provided with health and education
facilities, but will not have freedom of movement, he added.
(Note. The refugees have inferred from this that the Royal
Government of Bhutan (RGOB) intends to allow only one member
from each family to work, which they claim will not provide
sufficient income for the entire family. End Note.) Tenzin
also reportedly suggested that the RGOB will form a committee
to interview the re-applicants for citizenship. The
refugees, as well as a the Chief District Officer of Jhapa
District who was present at the scene, characterized the
attitude of the Bhutanese JVT members as being "very harsh"
and "intentionally provocative." Some refugees believe that
the RGOB is trying to discourage Category II refugees from
returning to Bhutan.


5. (SBU) Tenzin reportedly remarked that the JVT had
completed its review of appeals submitted by Category III
refugees (non-Bhutanese) and will recommend to the RGOB that
no changes of status be made. He would say nothing more than
that the decision on the results of Category III appeals
would be made by the government.


6. (SBU) Category IV refugees who decide to return to Bhutan,
Tenzin said, would be delivered to Bhutan by the Nepal Police
and processed according to Bhutanese law. The refugee
leaders indicated, and UNHCR confirmed, that the families of
those categorized as criminals would be kept in separate
camps. The refugee leaders fear this would stigmatize the
families as "anti-nationals."


7. (SBU) Following the Bhutanese JVT leader's briefing, the
Government of Nepal (GON) representative, Sushil Jung Rana,
claimed that the GON would treat all Bhutanese like any other
foreigner applying for citizenship. Free transportation for
returnees and their household effects would be provided, he
said. According to the refugee leaders, Rana cautioned that
action would be taken against refugees who attempt to leave
the camps and integrate themselves in Nepal. Rana also
indicated that the GON is not responsible for any statement
made by the Bhutanese JVT members.


8. (SBU) Following the conclusion of the briefing, the
refugees became aggressive, surrounded the JVT members and
verbally harangued them. The Chief District Officer of Jhapa
reported that the refugees prevented the JVT members from
departing the community hall. Nepal police officers were
stationed in the camps to provide security to the JVT, but
were prevented from entering the hall by the refugees. After
an undetermined amount of time, the police officer in charge
was able to enter the building and bring out the JVT members
unharmed. However, outside the hall, some refugees pelted
stones at the JVT team, damaging the vehicles while they
drove away. One JVT member reportedly was hit on the head
with a stone, later requiring stitches. No other injuries
were reported. According to press reports, the Bhutanese
members of the JVT departed Nepal for Bhutan the morning of
December 23.


9. (C) Comment. The negative reaction on the part of the
refugees is unsurprising, given the information provided by
the JVT members. If, as the refugees claim, the RGOB plans
to settle Category II returnees in camps, restrict freedom of
movement, and allow only one family member to work, the
refugees have a right to question the sincerity of the RGOB
in fulfilling the spirit of the bilateral agreement.
Impressions given by the Chief District Officer in Jhapa that
the Bhutanese JVT leader used "very harsh words" while
explaining conditions for return seems to verify the
refugees' opinion that the Bhutanese JVT appeared to be
actively discouraging repatriation. We had hoped that the
JVT's visit to Khudunabari Camp would clarify conditions of
return for the refugees. Unfortunately, clarification has
been achieved, but at a very steep price that could serve to
lower the numbers of refugees who decide to voluntarily
return to Bhutan. End Comment.
MALINOWSKI