Maneesh
P
(1Project
fellow, Department of Econometrics, School of Economics, Madurai Kamaraj
University, Madurai Tamil Nadu, India.He can be reached at maneeshpanakkeel21@gmail.com)
The
freedom of movement of Sri Lankan Tamil refugees was restricted at the time of
the assassination of Rajiv Gandhi in 1991 and they were confined within the
camps. During this period refugees suffered alot due to oppressive rules and
regulations and stringent security measures were adopted to preclude the
connection with LTTE. Refugees were not allowed to work outside the camp during
this period and those staying outside the camps were arrested and shifted to
government camps. The situation has changed since then and refugees enjoy the
freedom of movement with very few restrictions. The government has been providing
free education upto the XIIth standard in government and government aided
schools. In addition, they provide free note books, text books, uniforms, noon
meals and bus passes. A free bicycle is also given to students studying in the
XIth standard. In the earlier years refugees were allowed to go out and earn a
living with an agreement of returning to the camp by 6.00 p.m every day. But now
they may go out at any time and stay anywhere and are required to present themselves
in the camp one day in a month to receive the monthly dole that they are
entitled to. If he/she is absent without a genuine reason he/she will lose the
registration in the camp. Families in a good economic position have settled
outside the camp. These families have to register themselves in the nearest
police station for security reasons. Refugee girls in the camps have opted for
a nursing course so that they may go abroad to make a decent living. The
paradox is that the government has been providing educational opportunities to
Sri Lankan Tamil refugees without creating opportunities for employment. Youth
living in the camps opt for private sector jobs on completion of their education.
Moreover, the monthly dole provided by the government to each member of the
household is not enough to meet the household expenses, which may induce the
children to go out to work instead of going to school.
The
relationship between the dropout rate of refugee children from school and the
absence of employment in the government sector has not been explored by
researchers. Even though a refugee youth has completed secondary education or
degree, he/she has to get a job in the private sector or the unorganised sector
as manual labourer. There is often no connection between their educational
status and the kind of employment they get engaged with. Since the flow of
refugees in the local labour market has resulted in a fall in wage level and refugees
are willing to undertake risky jobs that local people abstain from, trade
unions are fighting for job security and minimum wages. Refugees refrain from
organising themselves in a union to demand their rights due to over reliance on
government schemes and absence of citizenship. Refugees have the fear that if
they protest against government rules and regulations the government may completely
withdraw welfare services and impose strict regulations. Therefore refugees have been obeying government
rules and regulations and lead an unsatisfactory life without any vision of the
future.
India
has not signed the 1951 UN Refugee Convention (Geneva Convention) and the 1967
protocol relating to the status of refugees neither has it enacted domestic law
for refugees. The
legal status of Sri Lankan Tamil refugees in India is officially governed by
the Foreigners Act 1946 and The Citizenship Act 1955 which defines all
non-citizens who enter without visas to be illegal migrants, with no exception
for refugees or asylum seekers. India has not adopted a national refugee
legislation nor have the national asylum procedures been established, but still
refugees are provided with accommodation and financial support. India has decided not to give permanent resident
status or Indian citizenship to Sri Lankan Tamil refugees, expecting them to
return to their home land following the conclusion of the war. As of January
2016, there are 64,079 refugees living in 108 government authorised camps in
Tamil Nadu.
Table 1: Camp population abstract
Month &
Year |
Family
|
Adult
Male |
Adult
Female |
Child Male
|
Child
Female |
Total
| ||||||
01/2009
|
19593
|
27889
|
26832
|
9542
|
9090
|
73353
| ||||||
01/2010
|
19995
|
27631
|
26525
|
9663
|
9107
|
72926
| ||||||
01/2011
|
19741
|
26502
|
25245
|
9160
|
8663
|
69570
| ||||||
01/2012
|
19964
|
25698
|
25091
|
8699
|
8391
|
67879
| ||||||
01/2013
|
19658
|
25168
|
25138
|
8532
|
8080
|
66918
| ||||||
01/2014
|
19575
|
24871
|
24993
|
7958
|
7726
|
65548
| ||||||
01/2015
|
19647
|
25008
|
25345
|
7346
|
7102
|
64801
| ||||||
01/2016
|
19435
|
25157
|
25380
|
6766
|
6776
|
64079
| ||||||
Source: Department Of Rehabilitation, Tamil Nadu
Absence of right to access government jobs in India has compelled the
refugees to get engaged in unorganized manual labour market and private sector.
Agriculture and fishing was the job of these refugees when they were in Sri
Lanka. Refugees have no right to buy land or property to start a business or
engage in agriculture. Therefore, most of them are involved in painting,
digging, construction works and agriculture on other person’s land. This work
is generally available only a few days in a month and they stay unemployed the
remaining days.
In 2011, 1728 persons were
returned to Sri Lanka and 1291 persons in 2012. The return of refugees to Sri
Lanka has been declining gradually (see figure 1). In 2013, 273 families, (718
members) were returned to Sri Lanka. Likewise, 453 persons were returned to their
native places in Sri Lanka during 2015. In the beginning of 2016, 50 families
consisting of 163 persons were returned to Sri Lanka. The educated refugees
return to Sri Lanka to renew their passport so that they may go to foreign
countries in search of a job.
Refugees
are unskilled labours therefore they have least bargaining power for higher
wage rates. Simultaneously, the increase in supply of labour force in the
domestic labour market has resulted in a fall in wage rate. Refugees have
experienced discrimination in payment and recruitment. Refugee camps are
located in interior parts of Tamil Nadu where employment opportunities are
limited. If a refugee youth is
made to discontinue his education, he will enter the local labour market
to search jobs. This will result in further decline in the wage rate. It is necessary to give citizenship
and access to government jobs to these refugees in order to curtail dropout of refugee youth and solving their unemployment problems.
Refugees
can achieve higher socio-economic well being only by ensuring better employment
and effective social security schemes. Provision of education in skill
development and loans to setup small business units through NGOs and banks will
help to reduce the problem of unemployment.
References
1.
Alison. M. Armed Violence and Poverty in Sri Lanka: A
mini case study for the Armed Violence and Poverty Initiative, Centre for
International Cooperation and Security, University of Bradford, UK, 2004;
available
at:http://www.brad.ac.uk/acad/cics/publications/AVPI/poverty/AVPI_Sri_Lanka.pdf
2. Amirthalingam,
K. and Lakshman R. W. D. Displaced Livelihoods in Sri Lanka: An Economic
Analysis. Journal of Refugee Studies.
2009; 22(4):502–523.
3. Arunatilake,
N. S. Jayasuriya and S. Kelegama. The
Economic Cost of the War in Sri Lanka. World
Development. 2001; 29(9):1483–1500.
4. Brian.
G., and Khan, S. R. Refugee Protection and Human Rights Protection:
International Principles and Practice in India, Refugee. 1997; 16(6):39-43.
5. Burn Cathrine. Local Citizen or Internally
Displaced Persons? Dilemmas of Long Term Displacement in Sri Lanka. Journal
of refugee studies.2003; 16(4):376-397.
6. Chimni,
B. S. Symposium on the Human Rights of Refugees \The Legal Condition of Refugees
in India. Journal of Refugee Studies.
1994; 7(4): p.379.
7. Dasgupta,
V. Long-term Camp Life and Changing Identities of Sri Lankan Women Refugees in
India. Bangladesh e-Journal of Sociology.
2005; 2(2):1–12.
8. Dasgupta Abhijith. Repatriation of Sri Lankan Refugees.
Economic and Political Weekly. 2003; 38(24):2365-2367
9. George Miriam. Sri Lankan Tamil Refugee Experience:
A Quantitative Analysis. International Journal of Culture and Mental Health.2013;
6(3):170-182.
10. Government of Tamil Nadu Report, Camp Population of
Sri Lankan Refugees at various Camps Centres in Tamil Nadu, dated 14 July,
2008.
11. Hans,
A. Repatriation of the Sri Lankan Refugees from India. Bulletin on IHL and Refugee Law. 1997; 2(1): 97-108.
12. Hennayake K Santha. The Peace Accord and the Tamil
in Sri Lanka. Asian Survey. 1989; 29(4):401-415.
13. Information Handbook, Department Of Rehabilitation.
Government of Tamil Nadu.
14. Jayapalan Athithan. Refugee Status and Citizenship:
The Refuge of Sri Lankan Tamils in India (South India)/ Sri Lankan Tamil
Refugees in India, 2012. http://www.countercurrents.org/jayapalan120612.html.
Date accessed: 25/05/2016
15. Kearney.
R. N. Language and the Rise of Tamil Separatism in Sri Lanka. Asian Survey, 1978; 18(5):521– 553
16. Kristine
Hoglund (2005) Violence and the Peace Process in Sri Lanka.
http://www.operationspaix.net/DATA/DOCUMENT/5703~v~Violence_and_Peace_Process_in_Sri_Lanka.pdf.
Date accessed: 01/10/16
17. L.M.
Grobar & S. Gnanaselvam. The Economic Effects of the Sri Lankan Civil War. Economic Development and Cultural Change.
1993; 41(2):395–405
18. Mills, Megan Stuart. Mental Health Resilience of
Refugees: The case of Tamil Refugees. Refuge. 1993; 13(3):26-29.
19. P Maneesh and C. Muniyandi, Deprived Outlander in
India: An Analysis of Sri Lankan- Tamil Refugees. International Journal of Applied Research,2016;2(7):
332-38
20. Raizada Himanshi. Sri Lankan Refugees in India: The
Problem and the Uncertainty. International Journal of Peace and
Development.2013; 1(1):01-29.
21. Suryanarayan.
V. and Sudarsen, V. Between Fear and Hope: Sri Lankan Refugees in Tamil Nadu.
1993; T. R. Publications, Chennai.
22. The Refugee Council, London. The Sri Lanka Project.
Sri Lankan refugees in the Indian state of Tamil Nadu. August, 1999.
23. Valatheeswaran C, Irudaya Rajan S. Sri Lankan Tamil
Refugees in India: Rehabilitation Mechanisms, Livelihood Strategies, and
Lasting Solutions. Refugee Survey Quarterly. 2011; 30(2):24-44.
24. Weiner
M. Rejected Peoples and Unwanted Migrants in South Asia. Economic and Political Weekly. 1993; 28(34):1737-46
No comments:
Post a Comment