A Letter - On Rohingyas by the Asian Centre For Human Rights (ACHR)

[Comments could be mailed to -  secretariat@achrweb.org ; Web site: www.achrweb.org]

 20th February  2017

The United Nations Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights in Myanmar, Ms Yanghee Lee, isundertaking a visit to various locations of the Rohingya refugees in Cox’s Bazar, Bangladesh from today, i.e. 20th February to 23 Febuary 2017 to examine human rights violations on the Rohingyas.

In its submission to the Special Rapporteur titled"Rohingya refugees of Myanmar: Bangladesh is facilitating ethnic cleansing of the Rohingyas in Arakan and indigenous Jumma peoples in the CHTs by using the fleeing Rohingyas" (http://www.achrweb.org/briefingpapers/RohingyaRefugees-BP-01-17.html), Asian Centre for Human Rights (ACHR) stated that while gross human rights violations against the Rohingyas must be investigated but the UN human rights mechanisms cannot be oblivious to the Buddhists of the Chittagong Hill Tracts (CHTs) being made into a minority in their own land by the permanent settlement of the Rohingya refugees by the Government of Bangladesh as part of its racist policy againts indigenous peoples of the CHTs. The Rohingyas  who belong to the same stock of people as the majority Muslim population of Bangladesh have already become majority in Bandarban district of the CHTs and have been involved in grabbing the lands of indigenous Buddhists and attacks on Buddhists monks and Buddhist temples in the CHTs.

Most in the international community has taken "Symptomatic Approach" to the Rohingya refugee crisis, viewed the Rohingya refugee issue only from "Rohingya/Arakan tunnel" and have failed to conduct local impact assessment on the settlement of the Rohingya refugees on the local/indigenous communities of the CHTs. The UNHCR which has access to Nayapara and Kutupalong camps in Cox’s Bazar district and is required to conduct local impact assessment essentially remained a mute witness since 1992. 

1. Current influx and ACHR's findings from the field visit to Rohingya refugees at Ukhia in January 2017

The current influx of the Rohingya refugees started following the attacks on the Border Guard Police of Myanmar in Rakhine State on 9th October 2016 by the Rohingya insurgents in which nine Myanmar police officers were killed. The United Nations Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) reporting about “mass gang-rape, killings – including of babies and young children, brutal beatings, disappearances and other serious human rights violations by Myanmar’s security forces in a sealed-off area north of Maungdaw in northern Rakhine State”. By the end of January 2017, the United Nations was quoted of reporting influx of 65,000 new Rohingya refugees since October 2016.

From 13-15 January 2017,  researchers of of ACHR visited Rohingya refugees who had taken shelter under Ukhia Subdivision under Cox’s Bazaar. ACHR researchers found that the Rohingyas refugees are living in self-made make shift camps and have no intention to return to Myanmar in the light of the gross human rights violations and absolute lack of guarantees against non-repetition of human rights violations by the Myanmar's security forces. At the same time, the Government of Bangladesh is neither registering them nor issuing identity cards to record their origin which is indispensable for repatriation to Myanmar. There is no intention on the part of the Government of Bangladesh to repatriate the Rohingya refugees while Myanmar shamefully agreed to take back less 2,500 Rohingya refugees.

This calls of local impact assessment since influx of the Rohingya refugees from 1992.

2. From refugees to rulers: The case of the Rohingya refugees becoming effective rulers over the Bangladeshi Rakhines i.e. Marmas in Bandarban district of the CHTs 

The latest influx takes the number of Rohingya refugees in Bangladesh to about 6,00,000 i.e. upto 500,000 undocumented Rohingya refugees living outside the official camps as per UNCHR in 2014, 32,000 refugees living in the Nayapara and Kutupalong camps in Cox’s Bazar district as per UNHCR in 2014 and 65,000 refugees who arrived since October 2016.

Majority of these refugees settled in the CHTs. This is confirmed by the fact the national survey of the Rohingya refugees conducted by the Government of Bangladesh from 2 to 14 June 2016 focused all the three districts of the CHTs out of the six districts i.e. Cox’s Bazar, Rangamati, Bandarban, Khagrachari, Chittagong and Patuakhali. Out of these districts, Rangamati, Bandarban, Khagrachari are part of the CHTs Regional Council while two remaining districts i.e. Cox’s Bazaar and Chittagong are bordering districts of the CHTs region. The Government of Bangladesh has refused to disclose the number of Rohingya refugees in these districts as none outside the Nayapara and Kutupalong camps claimed as Rohingyas.

The influx of the Rohingya refugees started in 1992 and as per the census of Bangladesh, the population of Bandarban district increased from 157,301 persons as per 1991 census to 298,120 persons as per 2001 census i.e. an increase of 90% against decadal growth rate of 17% in entire Bangladesh during the same period. In a submission under the Universal Period Review of the UN Human Rights Council, the Asia Indigenous Peoples Pact claimed that over 15,000 families of the Rohingya refugees (i.e. about 105,000 persons) had been settled in Nakkhyangchari, Ruma, Lama, Alikadam and Sadar area of Bandarban district with direct support from the authorities of the Government of Bangladesh. The Marma people whose population is less than 100,000 have already been reduced to minorities.

Paritosh Chakma

ACHR

Can E.U. Shift Migrant Crisis to the Source? In Libya, the Odds Are Long

This is an interesting read on how officers in the Libyan Coast Guards were trained by the Italians to intercept and rescue migrant boats near the Libyan coast before reaching international waters. Normally, if European forces intercept migrants, then they should be taken to Italy. But if Libyans pick them up from their water, then they can be taken  to Libya instead. You can find the detail of the news in - Can E.U. Shift Migrant Crisis to the Source? In Libya, the Odds Are Long

More on, No to US Immigration Policy.

Here is a news piece by Walden Bello on Trump's recent immigration ban that hardly is a national security concern. He says, the Philippine government should vocally,publicly condemn this ban on immigration on the pretext of national security, or else it will soon affect citizens across the globe, including Philippines' citizens.

To read the article, please go to -  Trump's ban: It's not about national security

The Rohingya crisis in Burma has become 'a protracted, squalid, stateless status-quo'

Source: http://www.newstatesman.com/politics/2015/02/rohingya-crisis-burma-has-become-protracted-squalid-stateless-status-quo

Last month Yanghee Lee, the United Nations special rapporteur on human rights in Burma (also known as Myanmar), criticised the Burmese government’s attitude towards its own Rohingya people. In Burma’s Rakhine province, there are currently more than one million Rohingya – an Islamic ethnic group – living in apartheid-like conditions.

Don’t feel too guilty if you don’t know much about this humanitarian crisis; coverage in the mainstream western media has been gradually tailing off since 2012. What you should be made aware of, though, is the fact that the Rohingya were previously recognised as the most persecuted people in the world. Just let that sink in. It has actually been possible to identify one ethnic group as the world’s most persecuted people.

But on Wednesday, rather than address its deliberately poor handling of the crisis, Burma’s ministry of foreign affairs issued a statement saying it “unequivocally” rejected the term Rohingya and labelled it “terminology which has never been included among over 100 national races of Myanmar”. The ministry went on to accuse Lee of exceeding her jurisdiction, warning that insistence on using the term Rohingya would make the current crisis more difficult to address.

The Burmese government is complicit in the persecution of the Rohingya, a group it declared stateless through the passing of the country’s 1982 citizenship law. With that law, the Burmese government effectively declared the Rohingya to be illegal immigrants from neighbouring Bangladesh. Subsequently, Burmese officials have made it impossible for them to seek any help and now, following clashes with Burmese Buddhists in 2012, 140,000 Rohingya currently live in displacement camps.

“The displacement camp is no different to a concentration camp,” says Nurul Islam, chairman of the London based Arakan (Rakhine) Rohingya National Organisation (ARNO). Formed in 1998, ARNO campaigns for the self-determination of the Rohingya within the Burmese federation, as well as the repatriation of displaced peoples and “the establishment of a welfare society based on equality, liberty, democracy, human rights and freedom for all peoples”.

While the crisis has been on-going for the last five decades, Islam says that the Rohingya are now waiting for the rest of the world to increase pressure on the Burmese government. “[The Burmese government] are persecuting their own people,” he says. “It is now up to the international community to help us. People are dying; all the ingredients for genocide are in place – a slow genocide is taking place in Burma.”

David Mathieson, a senior research for the Human Rights Watch in Burma, explained that through rejection of the term Rohingya the Burmese government are perpetuating a culture of violence against its own people. “[This] is a betrayal of the principle of self identity, and has acted to justify decades of appalling violence and repression,” Mathieson says.

“This denial has been exacerbated by growing numbers of international donors, diplomats and dubious analysts and experts who kowtow to Rakhine extremists and government hardliners like callow collaborators.

So what needs to happen? Well, most importantly, western governments need to be more vocal in their condemnation of the crisis as it stands. Military aid, supplied by countries including the UK, should of course be halted. We need sanctions and, most importantly, our politicians must use the term Rohingya. Loudly.

Both Islam and Mathieson are vocal in their condemnation of nations that have not spoken out about the rejection of the term Rohingya, describing it as “tantamount to being a co-conspirator in ethnic cleansing”. As Mathieson says, the crisis has turned into “a protracted, squalid, stateless status-quo”; it is becoming increasingly clear that we need to do more to bring about a swift resolution.

Resettlement of IDPs and Challenging Road to Peace and Economic Recovery, 14 April, 2010, by Dr. Palitha T. B. Kohona , (Asian Tribune. com).

Comment by : Sucharita Sengupta

There are so many disasters that result into catastrophes in our lives, and displacement in itself is one such instance. Sri Lanka has remained a hapless witness and victim of a number of displacements till now, stemming out of a varied number of reasons. In the editorial column of the Asian Tribune, dated April 14 2010, Dr. Palitha T.B Kohona, ambassador and representative to the United Nations, traces briefly how despite several displacements, the state of Sri Lanka has recovered its economy and overcome other grave challenges with a fair amount of success. The article is an appraisal of the efforts by the government in rendering aid to the internally displaced and provide basic amenities to the camps where the evicted took shelter.

Starting from December 2004, when Tsunami has wiped away more than a million lives and displaced so many more, to 2007, when almost 187,000 people were displaced from the Eastern provinces of Sri Lanka in process of combating the LTTE, the country has faced tremendous devastation. The victims post 2007, were accommodated to camps with food, water and health care. The UNHCR, ICRC and WFP along with some other international organizations have played active roles in providing aid, specifically, in terms of resettlement of the internally displacement persons (IDPs). The government has been able to provide the people with food, shelter and also medical assistance in the camps. Even after Tsunami, most of the victims have been able to either return or reconstruct their houses. The article mentions that in some areas reconstruction has exceeded 110%.

The author claims that this post displacement situation is in exact contrast to the western countries. The way Sri Lanka has been able to ride over the traumas caused after the Tsunami had lashed out, has not been exemplified there. Similarly, people who were evicted from the Eastern Province after the bitter battle that ensued between the government and the LTTE, most of the victims have returned back to their respective homes. The abandoned villages have been reconstructed, roads have been repaired and the economic progress has also been remarkably well. Those displaced from Vanni have also started coming back.

The challenges ahead for Sri Lanka would be to ensure peace and security for its citizens. Since the defeat of the LTTE in May, 2009, the government has promised a speedy recovery of the losses which have accounted from a conflict spanning over twenty seven years. The return of all the displaced persons to their homes and restoration of the economy are the major priority of the government. Right to return of the people to a normal life again has also been mandatory for the government since providing relief to the displaced in the camps is costing the government millions. The author expresses his hope of a ‘nation building’ and further development of Sri Lanka, now that the LTTE has been uprooted. It has to be well equipped in order to combat tragedies like Tsunami so that the plight of displacement can be avoided. It would pursue its policy of non- alignment and remain committed to dealing with global concerns like terrorism.

Link

http://www.asiantribune.com/news/2010/04/14/sri-lanka-resettlement-idps-and-challenging-road-peace-and-economic-recovery

Update from Human Rights Organization of Bhutan (HUROB) on Resettlement of Bhutanse Refugees

S.B.Subba

Almost after 18 years of refugee life in the seven refugee camps in two districts of Jhapa and Morang of eastern Nepal, the Bhutanese refugees heaved a sigh of relief of new hope to start a new life in new land when resettlement offer came from the core countries for Bhutanese refugees- USA, CANADA, AUSTRALIA, DENMARK, NORWAY, NETHERLANDS and NEW ZEALAND. With new hope, inspiration and aspirations of beginning a new and comfortable life away from a place where life was idle and environment was often disturbed by anti-social activities like murder, domestic violence, alcoholism, theft, rape, fight, threat of stoppage of facilities in the camps et al, Bhutanese refugees decided to take a new journey of life to make a new home in a strange land with diverse geography, climate, people, language and culture. Most of the refugees have consider the resettlement a windfall boon whereas few still remaining skeptic and few others holding strong conviction that one must fight for right and go back to ones own land. On the top of the refugees euphoria of resettlement, the UNHCR motivation and mobilization followed by documentary film of luxurious home with cars further bewilder the mind of refugees and their message of existence of peace and tranquility and absence of any violence and threat to life lured the most. Dollar dream, luxurious life and freedom led the refugees rush for application to the extent that some started postering at night of threat of their life and insecurity (a few cases cannot be ruled out)so that they should be given priority and process their case fast. Some sold off their landed properties. Not only that there are rumors even some refugees had bribed and bribing the officials in UNHCR and IOM concern with processing their applications to expedite fast as if they miss the opportunity of facilities there if they are late.

Perhaps those people who thought that nothing can scathe in the land of their destiny and choice must be wondering when hearing the news of murder of Bhutanese refugees, attack on Bhutanese refugees, robbing the Bhutanese refugees and mistreatment of school going children boarding or descending the bus or other places. Therefore, one must remember that everywhere, all is not well.

The news of murder of Hari Lall adhikari aged 22 years by a gun man on 26th July 2009 near his apartment has shocked the refugees here in Nepal and pondering why is such incidence taking place in the land of haven supposed to be peaceful with good people. Hari Lall Adhikari with his parents and two other members residing in Beldangi-II sector B2, hut no. 145/146 left the camp on 21st March 2009 and resettled in Jacksonville, Florida, USA. As heard he was working in a garment shop.

A few weeks ago there was news of attacked on Bhutanese refugees living in Bronx, New York in Syracuse. According to the news, eight men attacked Hari Rizal while walking on Syracuse North Side. He had to be taken to emergency room with swollen eyes and bleeding nose.

In another incidence six men attacked two Odari brothers, Ganga and Tara. One man pulled out a knife and other punched the duo. Surmising upon the incidences, the above cases are just the beginning and one can fathom what will be the consequences once all sixty thousand or more Bhutanese refugees are resettled. So far there is no such report from Bhutanese refugees resettled in other countries but will not be surprising as there is increasing racial feeling in every part of the world.

The Human Rights Organization of Bhutan (HUROB) requests the US government to provide security to the refugees and not let them become the victims of miscreants. It also expresses its deep condolence to the bereaved family of the deceased and sympathy to other victims of attacks.

Appeal by Lavinia Limon, President, USCRI

Lavinia Limon

[President, USCRI]

Because of the quick action taken by people like you, 36,000 refugees in the Mtabila refugee camp in Tanzania are no longer in danger of being forcibly returned to Burundi where they feared they would face persecution.

As you may recall, I wrote to you in early June to ask you to help stop the Tanzanian government from closing this camp on June 30 and forcing the remaining refugees to return to Burundi, despite the danger.

Many people responded immediately and spoke out on behalf of these refugees. Subsequently, Tanzania's Home Affairs Ministry has decided to keep the camp open through the end of September and give the refugees the chance to plan their return. Those refugees who can return safely will be able to do so in an orderly manner. Those who cannot will be able to settle in Tanzania.

The Home Affairs Minister has even given assurances that no refugee will be forcibly returned and reaffirmed that his government’s commitment to upholding international laws and standards established to protect refugees.

On behalf of these refugees I want to thank all the USCRI supporters who contacted Tanzanian President Jakaya Kikwete and other international leaders to stop their forced repatriation. People who speak up for refugees around the world often make all the difference.

I am so grateful that I can call upon caring USCRI supporters to act when refugees are in danger.

You can learn more about refugees in Tanzania and other countries.

Please ask your friends to join our Action Network so they can help refugees too.

Poles are the Fall Guys of the Immigration Debate

Denis Sewell in “Poles are the fall guys of the immigration debate” seeks to make an analysis of the impact of migration in England over a period of time. In contrast to the earlier reluctance of the English political class to talk of immigration for fear of being branded racist the taboo no longer exists. The change of attitude has been undoubtedly prompted by the popular pressure which recognized the issue of immigration as one of their primary concerns. The arrival of migrant workers from East Europe has provided a further fillip to the recent engagement with the various dimensions of immigration. However this new attitude of openness is not without its share of ambiguousness. The unilinear perspective with which the politicians and the media seeks to address the issue of migration makes the problem unidimensional and the migrants an undifferentiated whole. Such an approach naturally does not provide solution nor answers. This can be illustrated by the media’s continuous portrayal of the east European as the culprit. The need of the day is for the government to devise a realistic sensitive immigration policy which will successfully address the divergent strands of an essentially complicated problem.

To read the full article please visit:-
http://www.spectator.co.uk/the-magazine/features/903066/poles-are-the-fall-guys-of-the-immigration-debate.thtml

Climate Change and the Future Ahead of Us

Ishita Dey

Walter Kälin, Representative of the Secretary-General on the Human Rights of Internally Displaced Persons and Co-Director, Brookings-Bern Project on Internal Displacement has introduced a new dimension in the discussion on climate change. He strongly feels that the debate needs to move beyond what terms we propose to use for the affected. Do we term them as “ environmental migrants”, “climate change refugees: Instead he feels that we need to identify specific scenarios which will trigger displacement and migration. He has proposed five specific scenarios which is likely to create migration and displacement. He feels that the international protection mechanisms should be abe address to the following problems. Excerpts from his speech are provided below:-

1.The increase of hydro-meteorological disasters (flooding, hurricanes/typhoons /cyclones, mudslides etc) is going to affect the African and Asian mega deltas. Though the displaced should receive protection under the existing 1998 Guiding Principles on Internal displacement some people might be forced to cross “borders” and according to the present international protection mechanisms they will not qualify as economic migrants or as refugees.

2.Disasters will increase the need for governments to designate areas as high-risk zones too dangerous for human habitation. This means that people may have to be (forcibly) evacuated and displaced from their lands and prohibited from returning to them, and relocated to safe areas. This will occur, for example, because of an increased risk of mudslides in mountain regions, andalong rivers and on coastal plains prone to flooding. The difference between this situation and other forms of disaster-induced displacement is that return usually will not be possible.

3.Environmental degradation and slow onset disasters (e.g. reduction of water availability, desertification, recurrent flooding, salination of costal zones etc.).

4.The case of “sinking” small island states caused by rising sea levels constitutes a particular challenge.

5.A decrease in essential resources (water; food production) due to climate change may well trigger armed conflict and violence: This is most likely to affect regions that have reduced water availability and that cannot easily adapt (e.g. by switching to economic activities requiring less water) due to poverty.

For the detailed speech please click on the link given in the right hand column

http://www.brookings.edu/speeches/2008/0716_climate_change_kalin.aspx?emc=lm&m=217424&l=23&v=875580

Displaced Lives

Debdatta Chowdhury

‘Once a displaced, always a displaced’. Instances are abounding as if to hold the phrase true. Lebanon is just another story in the already full plate of displacement and re-displacement stories. The report on 23 July 2008 by Internal Displacement Monitoring Centre (IDMC) put the figure of displaced Palestinians and Lebanese to 24,000 from Nahr el-Bared camp in Lebanon following three months of fighting in 2007 between Fatah al-Islam and the Lebanese army. The camps having been hard-hit by the fighting is not being able to accommodate its dwellers. The displaced lot is living a life of perpetual displacement. For those who have returned to the camps, life is all the more miserable due to the lack or rather absence of the minimum living facilities or livelihoods. Twenty-five years of instability and occupation have destroyed the basic socio-economic fabric needed for return of the refugees.. Most of the displaced Palestinians still have to rely on the humanitarian agencies for the supply of food and shelter. With increasing security measures in Lebanon since June 2008, the refugees are concerned about their own safety. The United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East and the Government of Lebanon launched a comprehensive three-year plan to rebuild the camp and the surrounding areas.

But these humanitarian actions are not able to raise hopes. And not without reasons. Though the Taif Agreement of 1989 declared the return of the displaced necessary for reconciliation and sustainable peace, most of the displaced people after the hostilities between Hizbullah and Israel in 2006 were unable to return to the camps due to continuing instances of sporadic attacks, cluster bombs and lost livelihoods. Unresolved cases of property disputes also make the process of returning of the refugees complicated. Life threats coupled with inflation in building materials make the process of return difficult by delaying the process of compensation payments and rebuilding. Most of the cluster munitions are planfully dropped around 72 hours before the ceasefire to create a prolonged atmosphere of threat and inhibit the process of return. Thus, surveillance measures and humanitarian efforts are no signal that the displaced are soon to return to their camps. With bombings and attacks being a constant fear-factor around the camps, the refugees continue to live a displaced and thus, uncertain life.

To read the full article please click on the link given on the right column:-

http://www.internal-displacement.org/countries/lebanon

2008 Global Refugee Survey by USCRI Focusing on India

Sahana Basavapatna

The US Committee for Refugees and Immigrants (USCRI) in its recent Global Refugee Survey for 2008 gave India a distinction that it would not be proud of. India, according to this survey, is one of the 10 worst violators of refugee rights in the world.

The note on India is interesting for a couple of reasons. For a country that has for long complimented itself on how generous it is in accepting and allowing refugees to live in India, this heavy criticism should bring into focus the real meaning of ad-hocism and the risks it brings to the lives of refugees. It is indeed one of the worst violators for not only the ambiguity in the refugee policy, but also for how this translates in reality. It is one thing to allow refugees to live in India, but altogether different to have the discretion to deport them at will without any explanation or information. Further, this unsavory distinction would hold true when one considers “protection” – a core function of UNHCR and the States- in reality - slum like conditions in which refugees more often find themselves in, lack of basic services such as water, electricity, space, privacy, education and health and the response of agencies such as UNHCR and its implementing partners.

However, a word of caution is also essential as the Survey’s argument that Chins are “the least favoured” among the refugees does not give a complete picture. The Survey should have taken into consideration other refugee groups such as Afghans, Somalis, and Palestinians and others, who undoubtedly have their own experiences to share about living as refugees in a democracy like India. So, while deportation and threats of deportation or lack of protection of Chins in Mizoram/New Delhi is real, it is, one can argue, worse for the Somalis and ethnic Afghans in New Delhi (and elsewhere). By that yardstick for example, the Somalis can be considered to be equally “least favoured”, evidenced by their determined struggle against suspension of registration of asylum seekers, the often long delay in decisions on applications and the deterioration of even basic standards of living in Delhi.

It can only be hoped against hope that there is some change from status quo given that the Government of India is believed to be working to table a refugee protection bill in the parliament.

Please read the full article: -

Five Asian Nations Branded 'Worst' Violators of Refugee Rights by P. Parameswaran

WASHINGTON, June 20, 2008 (AFP) - China, India, Malaysia, Thailand and Bangladesh have been identified as among the worst violators of refugees' rights in a global survey released ahead of Friday's World Refugees Day.

They joined Iraq, Kenya, Russia, Sudan and Europe as the 10 worst places for refugees last year, according to the World Refugee Survey 2008 released in Washington on Thursday.

The annual study, conducted by the US Committee for Refugees and Immigrants (USCRI), a non-governmental group, also showed the total number of refugees growing to 14 million at the end of 2007, the largest it has been since 2001.

Driving the growth again were Iraqi refugees, with more than 550,000 fleeing their country. In all, more than two million refugees from the insurgency-wracked nation are awaiting an end to violence in their homeland.

The worst places for refugees list was based on violators turning refugees away to face further persecution, violence, and possibly death, or letting them enter a country and subjecting them to deprivation and stultifying limbo, USCRI said.

"We've tried to call attention to these countries because they have been particularly egregious in their treatment of refugees," USCRI president Lavinia Limon said.

"Some of them have forced refugees back into dangerous situations, some of them have warehoused refugees in camps for decades, and some of them have done their best to make sure refugees never enter their territory. Some of them have done all of the above," she said.

The United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) has made refugee protection the theme of this year's events marking World Refugee Day.

In a report card, where countries are graded from A to F and that formed the basis for the USCRI worst violators' list, China, Malaysia and Thailand received an F grade following a study on forcibly returning refugees to their homes and physical protection of refugees.

Some of the North Korean refugees repatriated by China have reportedly been executed.

Malaysia forcibly sent refugees from Myanmar to Thailand, where "some of them were sold into slavery -- men to fishing boats and women to brothels," said Merrill Smith, USCRI director of international planning and analysis.

Thailand also forced refugees to return to Myanmar and Laos, he said.

Malaysia and Thailand also got an F grade together with Bangladesh and China in a study on conditions in which refugees were detained and provided access to courts.

In the category where freedom of movement of refugees was gauged, Thailand and Bangladesh received the worst grade. "Thailand confined about 140,000 refugees in special refugee camps where they are not allowed to leave -- mostly those from Myanmar and Laos," Smith said.

Malaysia, Bangladesh and Nepal also received the worst grade in a study on whether governments allowed refugees to earn a livelihood.

One of the reasons that India was listed as among the worst places for refugees was because of its "radically discriminatory treatment of refugees," said Smith.

"They treat refugees depending on their nationality -- at the better end of the spectrum would be the Tibetan refugees, they are treated the best. Sri Lankans not so well but worst of all would be the Chin ethnic group from Myanmar," he said.

Smith pointed out that treating refugees well did not mean that they would remain permanently in their host countries, citing Malaysia as an example.

He said that Malaysia in 2005 issued documents to refugees from neighboring Indonesia's Aceh province allowing them to work and move about freely following the tsunami disaster that devastated the province.

Of the 32,000 Acehnese who received those documents, only 6,000 remained in Malaysia as of this year while the others returned home, Smith said.

"The interesting part about that is that treating refugees well does not cause them to stay," he said.

Western nations were also criticized in the report, including the United States and the European Union which received grades of F and D, respectively, for their poor physical protection of refugees including the forced repatriation of some asylum-seekers.

Human Rights Watch Reveals Disturbing Realities of Conflict-Induced Displacement in Chattisgarh and Andhra Pradesh

Ishita Dey

In a latest finding by Human Rights Watch, which is based on four weeks on-the-ground research in Chhattisgarh and Andhra Pradesh in late 2007 and early 2008, including approximately 175 accounts from affected villagers, Salwa Judum leaders, government officials and police, and former Naxalites the group called for an end to all government support for unlawful activities by the Salwa Judum vigilantes, and urged affected state governments to take immediate measures to protect the tens of thousands of persons displaced. Human Rights Watch also called on Maoist rebels known as Naxalites to end attacks on civilians and other abuses.

The 182-page report, “‘Being Neutral is Our Biggest Crime’: Government, Vigilante, and Naxalite Abuses in India’s Chhattisgarh State,” documents human rights abuses against civilians, particularly indigenous tribal communities, caught in a deadly tug-of-war between government security forces and the vigilante Salwa Judum and Naxalites.

The report highlights the impact of this conflict on children’s lives. The Naxalites have long used children as young as 6 years old as informers and children from 12 years old in armed operations. The Chhattisgarh police have recruited and used children as special police officers to assist government security forces in the region, often deploying them in high-risk anti-Naxalite combing operations. While the Chhattisgarh police have acknowledged this as an error, the government is yet to devise a scheme for systematically identifying, demobilizing, and rehabilitating such underage special police officers.

To read the full article please click on the link given in the right column below: -

http://www.hrw.org/reports/2008/india0708/

A High Court Ruling in Bangladesh in July 2008 Declares 250,000 Biharis or “Stranded Pakistanis” as Citizens

Ishita Dey

On 26 November 2007, 11 members of the Stranded Pakistanis Youth Rehabilitation Movement (SPYRM), including its president, Sadakat Khan, filed a petition seeking High Court orders to register as voters Urdu-speaking people living in 70 camps across the country. In the ruling in July 2008, 250000 Biharis or stranded Pakistanis were declared as citizens. This judgment has drawn a mixed reaction from others in refugee camps of Dhaka and elsewhere. People who have migrated before Bangladesh was formed still feel that they had come to settle in Islamic Pakistan and not secular Bangladesh and some of them did want to go back to Pakistan after Bangladesh was formed. Unlike their parents, the younger generation of Biharis do not feel like aliens in Bangladesh. Most speak both Bangla and Urdu, go to Bangla-medium schools, have Bengalee friends and spouses. Many of them identify themselves as Bangladeshis rather than claiming to be “Biharis” or “stranded Pakistanis”, and are working for stronger integration.

Most of them feel while they have won the right to vote they still need to fight to reclaim their properties and want to enjoy the rights of a citizen of Bangladesh.

To read the full article please click on the link given below: -
http://www.irinnews.org/report.aspx?ReportID=79033