Workshop on Power and Influence in the Global Refugee Regime, 23 to 25 September 2015, Carleton University, Ottawa, Canada: A Report

Sreya Sen

(Sreya Sen is a Doctoral Fellow at University of Calcutta. She participated in the workshop as an International Student Rapporteur along with Dacia Douhaibi (York University).)

A workshop on “Power and Influence in the Global Refugee Regime” was organized by the Migration and Diaspora Studies Initiative at Carleton University in Ottawa, Canada from 23 to 25 September 2015. The workshop considered how power and influence may be observed and studied within the global refugee regime before taking into consideration the influence of various states, international organizations, NGOs and other actors within the global refugee regime.

The workshop took off with the presentation of a background paper on “Understanding Power and Influence in the Global Refugee Regime” by workshop host Dr. James Milner, Professor of Political Science, Carleton University. The paper drew from literature on global governance and international regimes and proposed analytical tools which may explain or be used to observe power and influence in the global refugee regime. It also presented a framework for understanding power and influence in the global refugee regime that would stimulate discussion over the three days of the workshop.

UN Report Declares Crime against Rohingyas as Crime against Humanity: News Links

Sucharita Sengupta

(Sucharita Sengupta works at Calcutta Research Group and can be reached at sucharitaseng@gmail.com)

2015 was a landmark year for Myanmar. In the first half it made news for all the wrong reasons and in the second half for a supposedly positive change. The first half of the year saw tragic deaths of thousands of Rohingya Muslims, who, although hailing from the Rakhine state situated in the South West coast of Myanmar, are denied citizenship and hence are ‘stateless’, forced to flee. Starvation deaths in border detention camps of countries like Thailand, Malaysia and images of overloaded boats capsizing in the Bay of Bengal evoked worldwide sympathy for the Rohingyas. The enormity of their being victims of international trafficking-smuggling rackets also came to the forefront making it difficult for states to feign ignorance. Amidst criticism from the UNHCR and other humanitarian agencies, all eyes were fixed on the recent election in Myanmar, on 8 November 2015. It was believed that a solution would be attained if Aung San Suu Kyi’s party, the National League for Democracy (NLD) comes to power. On the contrary, however, even after a landslide victory of her party, Aung Suu Kyi has still now refrained from taking any positive stance on the issue. In fact, following a report by the UN which states the Rohingyas in Myanmar have suffered crimes that “amount to crimes against humanity”; the Myanmar leader has told an UN special Reporter on Human Rights that the newly elected government, sworn in April 2016, will avoid using the term “Rohingya” to avoid controversy of any sort. Aung Suu Kyi’s comments clearly indicate the discomfort that the government has in recognizing the Rohingyas as Myanmar’s citizens, denoting how even the nomenclature ‘Rohingya’ is a subject of controversy in the country. The previously military backed government believed the Rohingyas to be illegal “Bengali” migrants. Although a new committee has been formed to establish peace and development in May, the plans of the committee are not clear.

International Workshop on Gender, Development, Resistance at University of Lapland: A Report

Shreya Sen

Shreya Sen is a Doctoral Fellow at University of Calcutta. She participated in the workshop. She can be reached at shreya69@gmail.com

The Faculty of Social Sciences at the University of Lapland in Rovaniemi, Finland recently organized an International workshop on Gender, Development, Resistance between the 7^th and 8^th of June 2015, bringing together activists, practitioners and academics dedicated to the research, analysis and discussion of upcoming issues in these areas of study. The workshop was a follow up of the Ninth Feminist Research Conference on ‘Sex and Capital” sponsored by ATGENDER, a European organization for gender documentation and research, which also took place at the University of Lapland, from 3^rd to 6^th June 2015. Altogether, there were 21 papers presented at the workshop over eight panels and over a span of two days, with a keynote lecture by Dr. Paula Banerjee of the Department of South and Southeast Asian Studies, University of Calcutta and a concluding talk by workshop host and post-doctoral researcher at the University of Lapland, Dr. Tiina Seppala.

In her opening remarks, Dr. Paula Banerjee (University of Calcutta) explained how the development paradigm favored by much of the post colonial world has resulted in massive displacement, since the cost of development is not borne equally by all sections of society. The most vulnerable of the population such as the indigenous people, minorities etc. she argued, bear the cost of development while the more endowed enjoy the fruits of development. After providing an overview of women’s resistance to dams, mining and other development projects in Northeastern India and in the Indian states of Orissa and West Bengal, Dr Banerjee concluded that women occupied a significant portion of the resisting population owing to a concern for their children and future generations, their training in Satyagraha and their longstanding struggle against state, patriarchy and capital.

Ethnic Violence and Internal Displacement in North East India

IDMC in a report “This is our Land” Ethnic Violence and internal displacement in north-east India” released on November 2011 discusses the status of displacement in North East India. According to the report more than 800,000 people are displaced within the region as a result of: - violence and displacement in Assam and Meghalaya states in December 2010 and January 2011; violence and displacement in Western Assam during the 1990s and 2000s; and violence and displacement from Mizoram state to Tripura state in 1997 and 2009. Since India’s independence in 1947 the North-eastern region have been witness to episodes of armed conflict and generalised violence. The report indicates that though the Sixth Schedule of the Constitution has been a means of India has been used as a tool for some “to establish a de facto ethnic “homeland”, as it provides special protection to some “tribes” in north-eastern states, by recognising “Tribal Areas” administered through Autonomous Councils. A demographic majority in an area is necessary for groups to seek this status. This has created grievances among minorities living in territories falling under Autonomous Councils. The hundreds of ethnic groups in north-east India do not live in distinct areas, and so their demands for ethnic homelands have often led to generalised violence and, in turn, internal displacement. The number of episodes of displacement shows that the Sixth Schedule does not lead to effective and stable protection of the north-east’s many groups, but rather perpetuates potentially violent competition for land and political power”(pp4).

The status report is divided into six chapters. In Chapter 2: Overview of the numbers of people internally displaced, according to conservative estimates approximately 76,000 people from NE India might be IDPs as a result of conflict induced displacement. One of the problem areas regarding assessing the number of IDPs remain that inadequacy of records. The official information on IDPs in camps is the only information researchers have to rely on which means the vast number of IDPs not staying in camps do not count in the official figures. Similarly, when a camp gets closed the official figures they are not considered as IDPs. Going by the conservative estimates the number of displaced in the region is shown in the table reproduced from the report.

Table 1: Number of People Currently Living in Displacement in North-East India


Chapter 3 discusses the displacement in the Assam- Meghalaya Border region. “In December 2010 and January 2011, violence between Garo and Rabha people in Assam’s Goalpara District and Meghalaya’s East Garo Hills District displaced about 50,000 people. The IDPs were housed in public buildings, mostly schools, in both districts. The authorities initially provided food rations and health services, but sanitation was a problem. Rs. 10,000 ($200) and some building materials were given as compensation to those whose houses had been destroyed. The Indian Red Cross Society and NGOs provided additional assistance. The camps were closed in February and March, in spite of the fact that many people were reluctant to return for fear of further clashes. IDPs and returnees had difficulty accessing livelihoods, and the education of displaced children as well as local children in whose schools the camps were set up was interrupted”(pp 4).

Chapter 4 highlights the situation “in Western Assam, more than 46,000 Adivasis, Bodos and Muslims remained in protracted displacement after several hundred thousand of them were forced to flee ethnic violence during the 1990s. The authorities stopped providing food rations in 2010 and distributed a rehabilitation grant of Rs. 50,000 ($1,000) to many families. The IDPs had difficulty finding livelihoods, and children lacked access to education. Durable solutions seemed out of reach for these IDPs”.(ibid)

Chapter 5 discusses the politics of return of the Bru Displaced community from Mizoram to Tripura.

The status reports also list some recommendations to combat the crisis for the central and state governments and they are:-

For Government of India

•Develop a national IDP legislation and policy in accordance with the Guiding Principles on Internal Displacement
•Provide oversight bodies such as the National Human Rights Commission (NHRC), the National Commission for Protection of Child Rights (NCPCR), with the right to assess the situation
•Ensure that state governments have the capacity to respond to internal displacement situations, and hold them accountable to the recommendations of the oversight bodies above.
•Ensure that the Sixth Schedule of the Constitution of India is not implemented in a way that could create or exacerbate incentives to violence and displacement. (pp6)

To All State Governments in North-East India

•Ensure that members of all communities have equal access to economic opportunities and political power, while being able to preserve their specific cultural identities and practices. This would obviate separate “homeland” demands and prevent grievances that could be exploited by those who aim to incite violence.

For details visit:-

http://www.internal-displacement.org/8025708F004BE3B1/(httpInfoFiles)/33F71FE1DC7DA917C125795600303A63/$file/India-SCR-Nov2011.pdf

The Implementation of Urban Refugee Policy in Delhi

Sahana Basavapatna

“Operationalizing UNHCR’s policy document, however, requires a broader, more in-depth understanding of the issues and challenges facing urban refugees. This report attempts to contribute to the development of that knowledge.” page 5.

The Women's Refugee Commission, in collaboration with UNHCR published a report titled, Bright Lights, Big City: Refugees Struggle to Make a Living in Delhi in July 2011 with the objective of contributing to the way in which the Urban Refugee Policy of UNHCR may be implemented in its letter and spirit.

This short note, is at once a review and an introduction to the report, which, in restating some of the conclusions made before in the context of refugees in Delhi, nevertheless makes a worthy attempt in comprehending the Urban Refugee Policy and its implications for Delhi.

The study, conducted over a fortnight in March 2011, focuses on the economic coping strategies of refugees, the protection risks associated with the coping strategies and potential market opportunities that may be exploited, given Delhi's unqiue context.

A number of conclusions in the Report are familiar and may be said to be a restatement and reiteration of existing knowledge. The report talks about refugees in the social and economic context of Delhi, including the hostility of the local communities, or the competition for jobs in the informal sector. It also does a comparison of the financial needs of refugees and the livelihood options currently before them. The report published by The Other Media, an organization that has had a long association with Burmese refugees, published a report in 2010, titled “Battling to Survive: A Study of Burmese Asylum Seekers and Refugees in Delhi” also touches upon these aspects, although the focus on the Urban Refugee Policy is not prominent in the latter.

One of the highlights of the Report is the articulation of UNHCR'S policy towards refugees in Delhi, althought not very clearly. The report states, “ UNHCR is piloting new approaches to working with urban refugees in New Delhi that demonstrate a progressive, rational way of addressing the growing urban population. These approaches include both broad coverage for access to basic services and attempts to address the specific needs of the most vulnerable”. The Report goes on to suggest to UNHCR that “...These efforts should be ratcheted up to the next level focusing on continuing to reduce the number of refugees receiving subsistence allowance by expanding employment opportunities and channeling available resources to job placement and job creation programs as referenced in the recommendations below.”

The Urban Refugee Policy is an important instrument, although it has taken more than a decade for UNHCR to arrive at the terms on which it would approach the issues facing refugees in urban areas. While the Report provides some window to the current policy of UNHCR in India (for instance, the provision of subsistence allowance to refugees being targeted towards on the most needy, the expansion of health care and other services to even those that are not recognized by UNHCR as refugees, the emphasis on government services for education and health care and discouraging private services etc), the implementation of the policy would require on one hand that refugees utilize the Urban Refugee policy to push for better protection and for UNHCR to realize that not all of its policy formulations would work adequately in the current context. Although India appears to provide a rich base of legal mechanisms and institutions on which refugee rights may be built, the actual implementation is full of hurdles, as the Report clearly points out. For instance, the Report talks about UNHCR's policy of encouraging refugees to access government schools and refers to the Right to Children of Compulsory Education Act, 2009, under which it is mandatory for the state to provide compulsory education for every child between 6-14 years; however, the experience of children with government schools, has not been as positive as UNHCR or its implementing partners would want refugees to believe.

To conclude, this Report is a useful addition to the existing knowledge of the status of refugees in Delhi. However, both the refugees as well as the implementors of the Policy would have to strive to make the policy work for them.

The Report can be accessed at
http://www.womensrefugeecommission.org/component/docman/cat_view/68-reports/80-livelihoods?orderby=dmdate_publishedHYPERLINK
http://www.womensrefugeecommission.org/component/docman/cat_view/68-reports/80-livelihoods?orderby=dmdate_published&ascdesc=DESC"&HYPERLINK
http://www.womensrefugeecommission.org/component/docman/cat_view/68-reports/80-livelihoods?orderby=dmdate_published&ascdesc=DESC"ascdesc=DESC
last accessed September 21, 2011)

Javid Iqbal Documents the Conditions of IDP Settlements in Andhra Pradesh and Chattisgarh

Javid Iqbal

[Has worked as an investigative reporter for The New Indian Express from November 2009 to April 2011. We thank him for allowing us to re-publish excerpts from his articles. His articles and photo essays can be accessed on http://moonchasing.wordpress.com]

Flaming Forests of Warrangal, IDP Settlements

Javid Iqbal in his article “The Migrating forests of Warrangal” highlights the the conditions of the IDPs who constantly face the threat of losing their make shift home and livelihood. Reports regarding the IDP population on the borders of Andhra Pradesh and Chattisgarh have always varied. While some activists report that around 50,000 people have been affected by this conflict; people undertaking survey would argue 213 settlements in Khammam district itself have been affected. While the reports of floating populations is true Javid Iqbal also draws our attention to the fact that the fear and threat from Salwa Judum and the Maoists is not the only reason of forced movement of population; but also lack of land, as many Murias had small holdings of land in their villages in Dantewada or Bijapur. The control over resources, particularly rights of communities over forests has become a contentious issue. While land is being used for industrial purposes in Chattisgarh, mining is rampant in Khammam, and finally, over 276 villages in Khammam, East and West Godavari districts, would be submerged due to Polavaram dam along with over 10,000 acres of reserve forest land. These concerns has its far reaching implications and as Javid Iqbal in his photo essays and articles ( links given below) on the IDP situation in Andhra Pradesh and Chattishgarh shows that the rising number of floating population has also led to starvation deaths due to drought in the region. While the Government continues to see this geographical region as the site of internal conflict people are forced to flee homes. It is time that the state should take a note at the larger issue/s over access and control over community resources in these regions instead of guising problems under the umbrella of internal conflict.
For details see
Iqbal, J. 2011. The Migrating Forests of Warangal”.
http://moonchasing.wordpress.com/2011/09/14/the-migrating-forests-of-warangal/

IDP children refused treatment by Nutrition and Rehabilitation Center in Badrachalam, Khammam District in Andhra Pradesh

Javid Iqbal in his article “Internally Displaced Hunger” reports of an incident in 2010 when 8 malnurioushed children were refused treatment by the Nutrition and Rehabilitation Center in Badrachalam, Khammam District in Andhra Pradesh. All eight were children of Internally Displaced Persons from Dantewada/Bijapur District of Chhattisgarh. Apparently the parents of the children failed to provide documentation that were from Tribal and BPL families. As Javed (2010) emphasises, “The Internally displaced persons from Chhattisgarh are in perpetual limbo. They’re occasionally pitted against the local adivasi tribes of Andhra Pradesh over minimal resources and no state government whether Andhra Pradesh, nor Chhattisgarh is willing to take responsibility for them. At the same time, no civil government department is capable of undermining the arm-twisting policies of the Andhra Pradesh Forest Department that wishes to send them back to Chhattisgarh, who would probably dump them in mismanaged Salwa Judum camps”.
For details see
Iqbal, J. 2010. “Internally displaced Hunger”
http://moonchasing.wordpress.com/2010/11/14/internally-displaced-hunger/

Highlights from a Study on Impact of Conflict and Displacement on Education in SriLanka

Ishita Dey

[Research Scholar, Department of Sociology, University of Delhi and Member, Calcutta Research Group]

J.R.A Williams(2010) in this extensive report on “The impact of conflict and displacement (2006-2010) in SriLanka” shows the various methods introduced during conflict and post conflict to improve educational standards. This report is one of the back ground papers commissioned for the EFA Global Monitoring Report 2011, The Hidden crisis: Armed Conflict and education”. The decade long conflict in SriLanka led to displacements of people from their houses. According to “Common Humanitarian Action Plan for Srilanka 2008” (UN: 2007), around 300,000 school-aged children were affected by the conflict in Northern, Eastern and bordering provinces. This was before the ceasefire agreement of 2002 was annulled in 2008. This led to a second wave of IDPs. So not only the school aged children were displaced but also in this period there was a shortage of qualified teachers in certain provinces. What is interesting and significant to note in this context is that the professionals attached to educational institutions in rebel- LTTE controlled areas received salary throughout conflict. Much more important is that the ceasefires between the two sides were respected during national exams.

The first “shelter” for most of the IDPs in SriLanka was school buildings, which were designated as transit camps. From these transit camps the IDPs were relocated to massive closed camps where local educational authorities took in charge of managing school and participation of community in school management was prohibited. Other than that during conflict the displaced children could be enrolled in “host” schools which could create Temporary Learning Spaces(TLS) for IDP children. The model of TLS has been successful along with catch-up programmes aimed at students taking national examinations. Both these programmes generated a key interest among the displaced.

In fact the author also indicates the way the humanitarian agencies made special efforts to distribute educational materials when they were not allowed access to camps in Vavuniya citing security reasons. The UN and NGO workers trained in INEE (2004) Minimum Standards for Education in Emergencies, Chronic Crises and Early Reconstruction: A Commitment to Access, were not allowed to work with camp community. While war has come to an end; and reconstruction work has started in full swing, the problem of lack of educational institutions, lower levels of enrolments, drop-outs due to economic situation persists across SriLanka. For instance, the Northern Province Department of Education states that 115 (35.3%) out of the 326 existing schools in the return areas had resumed activities by 31 March 2010, with 22% (18,561) of the 82,800 student body recorded in 2008 enrolled ( Williams 2010: 6).

Post war agencies like Save the Children, UNICEF, Gesellschaft für Technische Zusammenarbeit (GTZ) and local NGOs continue to provide support to the improvement of educational standards through creation of educational material. Catch-up programmes have been most successful so far. In addition to that UNICEF introduced a programme in August 2009 “to provide an accelerated learning programme for displaced children which will lead to the eventual reintegration of these students into the government’s mainstream education system. This project involves the development of materials and training to cover two years of the curriculum in one-year programmes at each of levels 1-5 (the equivalent of Grades 1-9)”. (ibid :9)

“A ‘Home–School programme’ is being developed by the Ministry of Education (MoE) with support from UNICEF to “enable children to continue to follow the school curriculum and to attain the required level of learning achievement despite being unable to attend school on a daily basis”. The Home–School modules are designed to provide learning for children in Grades 1–5” (ibid).

The author recommends child-friendly schooling, vocational education, and national Early Childhood Education and Development (ECED) standards, as ways of improving the educational standards and effective ways of making education accessible to displaced children of school going age.

For the detailed report please visit
http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0019/001907/190714e.pdf
(Accessed on 28 August 2011)

We welcome your suggestions, comments and reviews on the report.

Land in the Eastern Province: Politics, Policies and Conflict

Excerpts from a Report by Bhavani Fonseka and Mirak Rahim (Centre for Policy Alternatives)

Most individuals in Sri Lanka will identify land as a fundamental element that defines their life. Ownership and control of land, including the location of and the extent of land owned indicate a person’s wealth and social status. The respect that flows from this has a number of other repercussions including access to schools and marriage prospects. Secure land rights imply economic security and provide surety for loans and thereby facilitate income generation and improve livelihoods. In Sri Lanka, land has been a critical factor in the ethnic conflict that intensified and resulted in the outbreak of a war that spanned over two decades. State aided land settlement projects under development and irrigation schemes, the failure in addressing key land and development related issues, violence against particular communities that resulted in the abandonment of properties, and the establishment of ad hoc security restrictions in areas all contributed to the increasing tensions that ultimately led to the outbreak of war in Sri Lanka. Over the course of the war, the land problem was exacerbated by increased displacement of entire communities from their land, occupation of land belonging to private individuals by the military and LTTE, arbitrary seizure of land belonging to Muslims by the LTTE in the North and East, the establishment of High Security Zones (HSZ), Special Economic Zones (SEZ) and the loss of documentation. Although discussions on land and related issues and attempts to resolve disputes at a community level did run concurrent to the conflict and heightened during the Ceasefire Agreement (CFA) and post-tsunami period, there were no concrete steps taken by the State or any other actor to fully address the root causes of grievances, provide sustainable alternatives and introduce modalities that could have reduced some of the underlying problems and disputes.

In a post-war context, with the defeat of the LTTE in May 2009, the Government, political parties, civil society and citizens at large are faced with an unprecedented opportunity to address the root causes of the ethnic conflict and long-term grievances faced by different communities. Although there is an opportunity to address a fundamental issue such as land through looking at both the constitutional, legal and policy framework and the problems on the ground, very few initiatives have been put forward by the different actors. Nearly a year after the end of the war, with two national elections held and the current Government enjoying an overwhelming majority in Parliament, this is clearly the moment to unveil concrete proposals for constitutional and political reform and a roadmap that introduces changes to the current set up. There are, however, unconfirmed reports of impending constitutional reform including changes to the Thirteenth Amendment and the role and powers of the Provincial Councils. Whether such a framework will guarantee the rights of all citizens or only a certain group or none at all, are yet to be seen. What is noteworthy is that though a significant time period has passed since the end of the conflict, there has been little public information, discussion or debate on Government proposals for possible ways forward. In the current post-war climate, there is no information as to whether the numerous HSZs will be dismantled; whether all IDPs will be able to return to their land; and furthermore, whether there would be a restitution and compensation policy. The lack of transparency and due process with regard to Government procedure into the post-war context are issues of grave concern and need to be reversed.

The present report explores the complex web of land issues in the Eastern Province. At the outset, CPA states that this report only highlights key land issues in the Eastern Province in the post war context and is not a historic study of the use, management and control of land in the area. The specific time period in focus spans 2007-2010. It provides an overview of the situation soon after the Eastern Liberation to that of the post war context in Sri Lanka and the status of land within a three year period. The Eastern Province was militarily liberated by government forces in 2007, following which the region has seen a host of developments related to land. The military liberation of the East and the resulting process of normalization have provided the context for the return of the displaced and land reclamation, the provision of resettlement, reconstruction and development assistance by humanitarian agencies, donors and the Government. This has had a dramatic impact on the quality of life for civilians, even while they continue to deal with the long-term repercussions of the war, including the loss of lives, destruction and damage to property, the loss of livelihoods and incomes, and the disruption of community ties. Some of the critical land issues and problems in the Eastern Province and their impact on larger political and governance issues are highlighted in the report. For instance, access to land is a critical aspect to land use and control. In the East, security restrictions and military occupation have somewhat curtailed full enjoyment of land rights. Furthermore, obstacles to accessing land have resulted in disputes and grievances which if left unresolved can lead to a multitude of problems. Another complicating factor is the manner in which the subject of land has been approached by both state and non-state actors to fuel as well as mitigate ethnic tensions, to facilitate development projects and economic growth, to develop particular communities, dispossess and displace others, establish new administrative divisions and settlements and change ethnic demographics - all of which have had long term implications.

Land as a highly politicised and ethnicised issue was an underlying cause of the war. The report examines the post-war context of new land settlements and land grabbing, landlessness, encroachment on state land, illegal land sales and the implications of the loss or destruction of land documentation in the East. These have all aggravated issues of ownership, access and control of land between land users/owners. There have been reports of communal violence breaking out as a result of land disputes. There are also sporadic reports of intimidation and even assaults, indicating the real potential for violence over land disputes. A number of land disputes were reported to CPA some of which were described as land colonization, but these are claims that CPA could not verify, even though there was a significant level of political and military involvement in some of these cases. Nonetheless, CPA repeatedly encountered a strong perception among many of the interviewees at the community, district and administrative levels of State actors being partial to particular ethnic communities when dealing with land. Hence even when the State is acting in good faith in advocating particular policies there is strong mistrust and fear on the ground. Rather than ignoring these fears the Government needs to ensure greater transparency, information and participation in order to address these perceptions.

The present report also explores the constitutional, legal and policy framework that governs land in the region. The issue of land is further compounded by the different levels of government involved - the Centre, province and district and the powers vested in them. Although the Thirteenth Amendment to the Constitution was introduced with the goal of devolving powers to the Provincial Councils including in the area of land, as discussed in the report, the Central Government overrides provincial council decision-making and policy implementation on land and continues to be the major actor. Even though the number of ministries, including those dealing with land, has been cut in the current cabinet, there continue to be multiple actors at the different levels of administration, especially in the case of the Centre with several departments and authorities overseeing various issues related to land. The lack of progress made in resolving land disputes and the inability to introduce and amend much needed laws and policies demonstrates the ineffectiveness and inefficiency of a bureaucracy and a multiplicity of actors with some overlapping functions. Though CPA has met several government officials who within their limited mandates are attempting to address the grievances of the communities and land conflicts, a common problem documented by the CPA team is the inertia and lack of initiative among some senior political appointees and the disturbing trend of the high levels of politicisation. Though this is not a new phenomenon regarding land and the Eastern Province, the provision of secure land entitlements and development requires that this systematic problem is addressed without delay. A fundamental problem is the lack of political will and political imagination to address the ground realities and grievances of the affected communities and to engage in policy reform. The report recommends possible solutions to the problems and gaps highlighted. It calls for reform at the constitutional, legal and policy levels. While the issue of power sharing and a political solution needs to be addressed and any solution has to grapple with the subject of land, there are areas which the Government can move on without delay, including the strengthening of the powers of the Eastern Provincial Council (EPC) and consulting the EPC on key land related issues. Despite the twenty year lag, it is not too late to constitute the National Land Commission (NLC) which would strengthen the process of establishing a fair land policy. Developing a policy framework on land could be advantageous for long term development provided that it ensures greater transparency and inclusiveness in decision making and formulation of policies. Existing land related legislation has to be amended, including the Land Development Ordinance and Prescription Ordinance. Specific initiatives to provide land for the landless as discussed in this report or compensation and restitution to those whose land and property has been affected by the war, need to be strengthened, taking into consideration the issues on the ground which are set out in the following chapters.

In responding to the problems on the ground, CPA recommends a two-track approach of developing a policy framework and establishing/strengthening community-oriented mechanisms and processes. Land disputes and conflicts which have intensified in the post-war context, probably in relation to an increased feeling of personal security, improved freedom of movement and a greater number of returns, need to be addressed through clarification of the legal status of individual cases. This also requires community-oriented and mediated solutions, be they land kachcheris, land task forces or mediation boards/committees.

The Government, political parties and bureaucrats also need to ensure that governance is made more effective and sensitive to community needs. Existing issues such as the confusion over divisional boundaries for instance need to be clarified so as to improve administration. In dealing with issues of military restrictions such as high security zones and occupation of individual properties that obstruct civilian access, there has to be a commitment to review security requirements in the post-war context, and accordingly provide a time line for withdrawal. There should be rent schemes for continuing occupation and compensation/restitution in the case of permanent occupation which should be kept to a minimum. While the cases and issues discussed in the report are very specific to the Eastern Province, these are not isolated issues and trends peculiar to the East alone. These issues and trends have resonance in other parts of the country, but more so in other conflict affected areas such as the North. The latter is presently going through a phase of rebuilding and development and will face similar as well as unique problems with land. If ‘the Eastern model’ is to be used in the North, best practices and solutions in the East need first to be developed and implemented before they can be replicated elsewhere. For Sri Lanka to move forward in a post war context, where fundamental grievances including land issues are addressed there needs to be larger political and constitutional reform. An underlying theme in the report is that this and the policies and programmes it produces must be underpinned by a people-centric approach – one that is pivotally representative of the needs of the people in the area. Such a shift will not only addresses grievances of the affected communities but could also mitigate conflict and ethnic tensions.

The Students’ Workshop on Borders and Forced Migration

The Calcutta Research Group (CRG) organized a day-long student workshop at Jadavpur University in collaboration with the Centre for Refugee Studies, Department of International Relations, Jadavpur University on March 29, 2011. Issues related to forced migration, refugees and statelessness in South Asia (with special reference to India) were discussed in the sessions of the workshop. A special session was devoted to deal with the International legal regimes related to refugees, Internally Displaced Persons (IDPs) and Statelessness.

The inaugural session started with the welcome address delivered by Anindya Jyoti Majumdar, Head, Department of International Relations, Jadavpur University. As the Chief Guest of the workshop Nilanjana Gupta, Dean, Faculty of Arts delivered the inaugural address. The session ended with a short introduction of CRG by Samir Kumar Das.

The first session started with a special lecture on Colonialism, Resource crisis and Migration by Subhas Ranjan Chakraborty. Chakraborty described how people were forced to migrate due to various reasons like resource crisis, natural disasters and governmental policies. In this context, he spoke about the impact of colonialism on the Indian sub-continent during late 18th - mid 20th century. With the expansion of colonial administration a large part of the population was forced to migrate involuntarily. According to him, the British colonial power became de jure after 1757. Mughal Empire granted diwani of Bengal, Bihar and Orissa to the East India Company. The company had invested in these three provinces and wanted to maximize the revenues. They started a unit of exchange – sikka and Rupee. Nayeb Razim Reza Khan was appointed to collect revenues. The Company rule was a new kind of despotism, having power without responsibility- looking for absolute profit unencumbered by any welfare or moral obligation towards the ‘native’ subjects. This caused a great famine in Bengal in 1770 known as the ‘Bengal Famine’. This famine compelled the rural population in Bengal to migrate to Calcutta. Chakraborty quoted Hunter, who on the analysis of data said that Calcutta was emerging as a city of palaces. There was a marginal crisis of labour. Thus, there was an inducement to migrate and work in the city. Chakraborty explained that commercialization of agriculture, rural indebtedness, and rayatwari-mahalwari settlements etc. caused depeasantization. According to Chakraborty migration of people from rural to urban places was sometimes controlled by the state.

There was a panel discussion on Migration, Borders and Women in the second session comprising Paula Banerjee and Anasua Basu Ray Chaudhury. At the very outset of her presentation on Women and Circles of Insecurity: Borders in East and North East India Banerjee said South Asia is a region of unique borders. Borders symbolize the national security of a state. On the one hand, the borders in this region are sites of hatred, disunity and informal connections while on the other borders signify cooperation. Threats of human trafficking, drug peddling and arms smuggling are the few problems that infest these borders constituting a part of non-traditional security discourse. Banerjee mentioned in her presentation that women and children are the most vulnerable group as they are often trafficked through these borders. In this context she narrated a story of a refugee woman who was caught and raped by the Border Security Force (BSF) personnel while illegally crossing the Indo-Bangladesh border. She was later rescued by the villagers. While narrating the story Banerjee opined that the main reasons behind forced migration are endemic poverty and lawlessness. She said that sometimes women have to take care of her families in absence of men, whom they have lost in the course of migration and these women often are trapped by traffickers when they ventured out of their homes to earn livelihood. They usually have nothing to barter except their body. Banerjee mentioned trafficking of women as one of the major causes of HIV/AIDs in this region of South Asia.

Anasua Basu Ray Chaudhury in her deliberation on Stateless women in India started with the legal definitions of Statelessness stated in the international legal regimes like 1954 and 1961 conventions. While conceptualizing de jure and de facto statelessness she said that the citizenship is the legal bond between a state and an individual. To give example of de jure statelessness she elaborated the case of Chakmas and Hajongs in Arunachal Pradesh. During her presentation she shared the experiences of her fieldwork in Arunachal Pradesh. She concluded by discussing the risks that stateless people have to bear and the condition of stateless women. As an illustration, she narrated the story of Kamala Devi from Dumpani village in Changlang district of Arunachal Pradesh. The panel discussion ended with interaction between the panelists and the participants.

In the last session on Refugees and Internally Displaced Persons (IDPs) with special reference to Conventions and Protocols, Sabyasachi Basu Ray Chaudhury defined ‘refugees’ according to the 1951 convention of refugees, Oriental African United (OAU) convention of 1969, Cartagena convention of 1984 and the protocol of 1967. He described the methods in which the UNHCR deals with the refugee problems in South Asia. He also described the evolution of the concept of refugee from 1951 to 1984. While Samir Kumar Das made a distinction between the refugees and the Internally Displaced Persons (IDPs). He said the conditions of refugees and IDPs were the same. He defined IDPs according to the international refugee law and highlighted many important points on the definition which are usually ignored by students. In order to explain IDPs Das talked about the causes of displacement like natural or man-made disasters, development programmes and resource crisis among others. In his deliberation he mentioned that United Nations High Commission for Refugees (UNHCR) remains silent when displacement happens due to development programmes. While explaining the classifications of the IDPs Samir Das gave an example of the situation triggered by river bed erosion of Ganges-Padma in Malda district of West Bengal. The workshop ended with the distribution of certificates among participants.

Workshop on ‘Protection of Refugees and Stateless Persons in India and her Neighbours’

Priyanca Mathur Velath

[CSLG/J.N.U, New Delhi]

A two-day workshop was organised by The Other Media in Delhi on March 30 – 31, 2011 titled ‘Protection of Refugees and Stateless persons in India and her Neighbours’. Ravi Hemadri (TOM) began by remembering how this workshop emerged out of an idea that had come up during an earlier workshop organised by TOM, SAFHR and CRG. The idea was to take up a study on the status of all refugee and stateless communities in India in light of the absence of refugee law.

The objective of the workshop was to bring together representatives of refugee communities, organizations, NGOs, scholars, researchers, other concerned institutions and individuals committed to refugee protection in India, as well as in South Asia, towards examining the current status of the state of refugees and the protection of their rights. The two-day conference focussed on specific issues concerning the Refugee Convention, 1951, Convention Relating to the status of Stateless Persons, 1954, and the 1961 Convention for Reducing Statelessness.

The workshop was a great opportunity of building networks, for refugee communities, both amongst themselves and also between them and the NGO and academic community; at the national and South Asian level and to promote collective action and involvement in removing impediments in protecting the rights of stateless persons and refugees. Since refugees and stateless persons are essentially a regional phenomenon, it was urged that the national governments work out a Regional Framework for solving the problem. However, a proactive role is expected from the Indian state in coming out with a domestic law or the protection of refugees and resolving the outstanding issue of stateless persons.

On the first day the inaugural lecture was delivered by Prof. Partha Ghosh of SIS, J.N.U. titled “Thinking Beyond Security – Migrants and Stateless in South Asia” where he identified various causal categories behind migratory flows. The Chief of Mission, UNHCR, New Delhi Office, Montserrat Fixes Vihe, while chairing the first session appreciated that it was not often that she had the opportunity to be amongst so many people working with refugees and committed towards their cause. It was acknowledged that this workshop would bring together people from diverse backgrounds and different perspectives that can really contribute to enriching our thoughts.

The second session chaired by E. Deenadayalan (TOM), comprised of voices from the refugee community where representatives from the Chin Refugee Committee, Chin Human Rights Organisation (CHRO), Kachin Refugee Committee, Arakan Students Youth Congress, Zomi Refugee Group, Afghani Refugee community, Seemant Lok Sangathan (Pakistan Visthapit Sangha), Somali refugees, Sri Lankan refugees (Jesuit Refugee Service, Chennai) and the Iranian Refugees expressed their concerns regarding their present protection status and living conditions in India. More than ten representatives of refugee/stateless communities expressed their concerns regarding the issues of legal protection and survival, lack of right to work, adequate housing, health care and education, particularly in the urban context. Refugees from Pakistan living in the western state of Rajasthan lamented the climate of suspicion existing in the process of their recognition. Activists working with Sri Lankan Tamil refugees in Tamil Nadu expressed the need to end the climate of heightened securitization that prevailed during the months of war. Urban refugee communities living in Delhi like those from Myanmar, Afghanistan and Somalia worry about the threats to their lives and safety from violent attacks and deplored the inability of the local police to provide them adequate protection.

Attempts to ‘Overcome the limitations of conventions and protocols and protecting refugee rights way beyond the absence of law or way beyond law’ were sought to be addressed in the next session. Dr. Sudeep Basu (GDIR, Ahmedabad) pointed out that finding a way beyond the absence of law was quite a difficult task as in India while one hand law has always been absent, on the other at best one can say that refugee policy has been present. One needs to thus enquire within this framework how refugees have been able to deal with their existence and lives in the absence of the law. He brought into the discussion some of the work he had done with Tibetan refugees. post 9/11, particularly with the SAARC Convention, there has emerged a notion that there should be a refugee policy for us. There has arisen the need also to have a citizenship law that caters to the needs of Indian state along with the need to ‘securitise’ our borders. This increases the danger of clubbing together migrants of all categories. One thus has to understand and revisit the durable solutions and our intuitive self confidence of thinking that we can do with local integration. It must be realised that for years now India has been host to so many communities, her borders have been very fluid and so local integration as a viable solution is not a easy task. Mr. Ravi Nair (SAHRDC, New Delhi) reiterated that it was clearly evident that the Government of India especially the security establishment, which principally has the last word on migration policy, could do much more then what we give them credit for. They look only at it through the security prism rather than the humanitarian prism and there was little awareness in both government and civil society about the need for a broader policy framework.

Then while discussing ‘Population Movements To and Fro India and Her Neighbours’ it was asked if a ‘South Asian Regional Framework the Answer?’. In this session, the chair, Prof. V.G. Hegde (J.N.U.) spoke of how within this move from specific national legal issues to a more broader South Asian legal framework, if India is located in this context, it must be seen through the lens of the Indian nationality laws, especially in view of the kinds of amendments that have come through. The same have in fact all generally reflected on the cross border population movements because India has borders with all the major south Asian countries. So in that context the nationality laws of other south Asian countries also will have equal impact. There are serious implications resulting in creation of persons of statelessness. Dr Gopal Sivakoti (INHURED, Nepal) humbly stated that being a person from the neighbouring country of Nepal he had a lot to learn from the Indian experience. It’s important to see and assess how the Indian Government has functioned in the field of human rights democracy, in dealing with migration, refugees, and IDPs. He said that as a source country of migration Nepal has learned a lot from India and that it needed to be deliberated if a regional framework could frame a base mark to protect displaced persons in this region.

Next, Hindu Singh Soda (Seemant Lok Sangathan/Pakistan Visthapit Sangha) highlighted the plight of the group of refugees that he worked with i.e., those coming from Pakistan. He explained how the different dimensions of the policies of the Indian government in treating refugee groups can be better understood through the conditions of this group. Anasua Basu Roychowdhury (Mahanirban Calcutta Research Group, Kolkata) elaborated on the possibility of formation of regional framework through the lens of Statelessness, it’s meaning and it’s difference from refugee according to international law, illustrating it through her field experience in Arunachal Pradesh.

The participants, that included Dr. Achan Mungleng, highlighted that the plight of refugees in the North East India deserve more attention than they usually get and that the lack of political will of the Indian state must not be forgotten. Participants expressed concern that in such a scenario what would be the role of UNHCR, of refugee committees and of refugee right activities. Unfortunately, not much co ordination is seen when refugees urgently need legal or medical help. Activists usually get so lost that there is no coordination between different NGOs and refugee organizations and no desire to come together and share. Different refugee communities also do not know what is happening with each other. Here the participants expressed their concern at the increasing problems of refugees and stateless persons in the South Asian region and the lack of a legal mechanism for their protection. The participants discussed policy responses to population movements, current position of the refugees and stateless persons and the legal hurdles in the way of their recognition. They resolved to organise themselves into a ‘Refugee & Stateless Persons Rights Network of India’ for better sharing of experiences and to campaign jointly for a better deal.

What has emerged from this workshop is that there are larger issues of state responsibility in ensuring democracy, rule of law, minority protection – both at the national and regional level. Noting that many of the refugee situations are human rights crisis situations, the participants have implored that measures should be taken where all the states ensure better protection of human rights standards and human rights defenders.

Displacement and Rehabilitation: Solutions for the Future

Nanda Kishor M S

[Consultant, Centre for Energy, Environment, Urban Governance & Infrastructure Development, Administrative Staff College of India]

Recently in the month of November 2010, National Institute of Technology (NIT) Rourkela, Orissa, had organized an International Conference on “Displacement and Rehabilitation: Solutions for the Future”. The conference lasted for two days with some concrete discussions on the latest developments and trends in displacement and resettlement pattern.

There were sessions in which bureaucrats were of the opinion that the NGO’s and some civil society groups in the name of protecting the rights of the displaced and tribals are making money and hampering the growth of the country. This comment came from none other than Prof. A B Ota (IAS) Director SCSTRTI, Bhubaneswar. This came as a mere shock as he was addressing a gathering in an academic institution and in front of large number of academicians from all over the world. This approach was severely criticized by the speakers who were in the session held after the paper of A.B Ota. The gathering also took strong opposition such type of categorical statements, and unanimously agreed that being academicians and activists we should not conceive to the notion of the State in sensitive issues like displacement.

There were five sessions of which three sessions having 29 papers were deliberated on 13th Nov and two sessions having 13 papers were deliberated on 14th Nov, 2010. The papers centered around the themes like ‘Issues on Displacement and livelihood’; ‘Gender, Ethnicity Indigenous Communities and R& R issues’; ‘Rehabilitation Policy and Implementation Issues’ on 13th Nov and ; ‘ Civil Society and Corporate Bodies’; and ‘Displacement and People’s Response’ on 14th Nov 2010 followed by the valediction being chaired by Prof. Premananda Panda, a practicing anthropologist of Sambalpur University .

The theme oriented sessions of the conference were chaired by Prof R Siva Prasad, Prof. S.N.Tripathy, Prof in economics and Head , Centre for Exclusion Studies and Inclusive Policy, Gokhle Institute of Politics and Economics, Pune, Prof. Premananda Panda and Prof Bhasakar Majumdar, Prof. in Economics, G.B.Panth Institute, Allahabad, D.P. Mishra, GM, Nilanchal Ispat, Odisha.

Penal members being authorized by the floor participants of the Conference recommended the following:

•Since most of the displaced are SC and ST and have the history of being marginalized, the displacement of people should be avoided as far as possible. In unavoidable situation the displaced families should be resettled in the spirit of ‘community transplanted’ so that the displaced will have less scope to feel alienated from their cultural ecology.
•The PESA Act be extended to all non-PESA Mineral belt rural and tribal; areas with spirit and words and non-coercive open discussion / public hearing be encouraged and in it the emergent consensus be put to action .
•The quality of existing human resources of the people are likely to be displaced due to forthcoming projects. So, it is need of the hour to make them the beneficiaries of the projects almost at par with the project personnel on pay roll
•Beside the usual compensation assessments made on tangible substances of the displaced, the intangibles like loss of indigenous social support system, the cost of culture, cost of loss of skill and techniques be assessed and accordingly compensation payment be extended.
•After duly rehabilitated and resettled a fixed share of the profit incurred by the organization be made available to the displaced for whom the project could grow and the government being the acquiring body take the responsibility in streamlining the benefits through effective loss of seepage of benefit to the affected people.
•CSR be mandatory and be a part of constant and continuous process to empower the affected families at least for two generations.
•The Panchayat (Extension to the Tribal Areas) Act 1996 is the Most Revolutionary legislation. Powers vested in the Gram Sabhas but the definition of Gram Sabhas is different and based on localities. Consultation with the Gram Sabhas at the appropriate levels before making acquisition for development projects should be a mandatory. It should be cross checked by a expert committee before any displacement.
•Amendment to the Land Acquisition Act in the following areas important- Most significant amendment to LA Act is doing away with Schedule II of the Act; land acquisition for the private companies will not be possible in the same manner as earlier;
-Public Purpose defined; exclusive and inclusive definition;
-Consultation with Gram Sabha mandatory for consensus before acquisition;
-Power of restoration of the alienated land very significant;

•The training different traits for entrepreneurship to the youth of the likely to be displaced families be given so as to get observed in the organizations for which they are displaced.
•Societal Cost Benefit Analysis of Project should be undertaken before expressing the intent of any project, and the result should be widely circulated in local language to affected families and general public.
•The formation of all evaluating committees should comprise of stakeholders, academia, civil society, and government representatives
•Notification should be widely circulated and publicized in local and language of the ethnic/tribal groups
•Compulsory Social Impact Assessment with respect to Cultivation and CPR Rights should be undertaken
•Compulsory Pre and Post - Environmental Impact Assessment with reference to Tribal Rights, CPR and Carrying Capacity should be undertaken
•Resettlement/Rehabilitation area should be identified in consultation with and with the participation of the people who would be affected.
•Gender participation should be integrated fully in all the processes, consultation, design, and implementation in achieving consensus.
•All the relocation should be in similar geographical terrain, without the loss of cultural and communitarian identity
•No minimum number of households should be laid down for qualification for compensation and R&R
•Resettlement areas should cover or include all sources of livelihood- such as agriculture, horticulture, livestock, fishing, forestry, artisans, CPR products, shops, SSIs, OAME-Own Account Manufacturing Enterprises, family enterprises
•Resettlement sites should be fully developed before any relocation or resettlement including houses, sanitation, schools, drainage, community hall, wells/drinking water, roads, health centers, Ration Shops, Common space- play ground, burial/ crematorium ground, spaces for cultural reproduction , green cover.
•While constructing houses size of the family, needs of the family and future expansion of the family should be taken into account. All the houses should designed in consultation with the affected communities. All houses should be accompanied by homestead land. Ownership right of the house including homestead should be in the names of the husband and wife, and solely in the name of women in the case of female headed house
•Compensation should include all economic and social aspects, including monetary, land, live stocks, CPRs- both priced and un-priced equipment, wells, trees, houses etc
•The resettled area should have full facilities interns of micro finance, SHGs, extension services, with subsidies being provided for all livelihood.
•There should be gender parity with regard to compensation irrespective of age and marital status
•Single window disbursement of beneficiary scheme should be adopted
•All self governance institutions such as Gram Sabhas should be constituted immediately after the rehabilitation with fifty percent gender representation
•All the rehabilitated areas should be declared as revenue villages with the power of PESA even if it is not in scheduled area and scheduled areas in respect of tribals.
•Compulsory employment for at least one member of the displaced community be made available
•Free vocational training and skill up gradation must be provided by new projects from day of MOU with Govt. till the organizations continues to survive
•Amount of compensation to landless should be based on man days and prevailing wages
•It should be made mandatory for the project authorities to sponsor the education of the deserving children from the displaced families.
•The Government should set up committees to look into the matters of resettlement and rehabilitation of the displaced families of the old projects, (projects taken up during/after the 1950s and before 2006), where still many issues remain unsolved.
•Land pattas should be issued to the families in the resettlement colonies, (where it has still not been done) which are very essential for the future education of their children (for getting residential certificates).
•The different bodies under the national skill development programme should take up skill development initiatives in the resettlement colonies on a priority basis.
•Displacement has important psychological implications. Therefore, counseling centers should be there in the resettlement colonies which can help in finding out the psychological effects of displacement on children and how it affects their socialization process.
•The Government must make provisions for regular follow up actions, in order to ensure that the rehabilitation measures have been effective. The National R&R Policy 2007 should be made an Act and it should be enforced with uniform guidelines in all the states of India /The Orissa R&R policy should be made an Act so that strict compliance can be ensured.

Media and Forced Migration

The recently concluded two and half day workshop on Media and Forced Migration from 21-23January 2011 by Calcutta Research Group was aimed ay media practitioners from East and North East India. The workshop began with the welcome address by Ranabir Samaddar, the director, Calcutta Research Group (CRG). At the very outset while welcoming all the participants Ranabir Samaddar mentioned that eviction from one’s homeland occurs because of various causes, including conflict, natural or manmade disasters and the so-called development drives. As a result, people are forced to migrate and relocate often amid poor living conditions, uncertainty and insecurity. This problem is encountered in many parts of the world, and the North-east is one of the hotspots today. However, it often does not get due coverage in the media, and many journalists feel that the resources, tools and skills to cover this issue at their disposal is inadequate. He said that the idea of bringing out this media reader emerged from a two-day workshop on ‘State of Research on Forced Migration in the East and North-east’, organised jointly by the Indian Institute of Advanced Study (IIAS), Shimla, Panos South Asia and Mahanirban Calcutta Research Group (CRG) in Guwahati on 12-13 February 2010 where the media persons pointed out the unavailability of data on forced migration to follow up on a reported story. Samaddar indicated that the media persons requested Panos South Asia and CRG to hold a two to three-day workshop on forced migration and displacement issues where new technologies that could be used to cover news and issues related to forced migration could be explored.

The second day of the workshop started with a special inaugural lecture by Bharat Bhushan where he talked about various causes of displacement; second, he dealt with the rights of the displaced people; and finally, he talked about the various sources that might be used while reporting displacement. While discussing causes of displacement, he pointed out five factors, namely, political conflicts, identity-based conflicts -- precisely the conflicts between locals and migrants -- religious conflicts, natural disaster and development induced displacement. He identified five major sources for reporting displacement. These are: state, promoters and developers, local political parties, NGOs and activists and the victims. During discussion on his lecture, the role and purpose of media in reporting displacement was analyzed in detail. He reminded that, the NGOs sometimes tend to dominate as the displaced people are often not that articulate to their difficulties.

The participants shared their experiences while discussing on the role of media in the time of violence. The question was raised on the structure of the sources discussed by Bharat where the state is at the top and the victims are at the bottom of the hierarchy. It was argued by a few that, the victim voices get marginalised in the dominant representation by the media. According to Bharat, a journalist needs to do the required homework before going to the field and need to master the art of reporting displacement issues in view of odds posed by the media houses and situations on the ground. He emphasized that, there is no point reporting displacement if it is not done in a big way. If it is not possible for any reason whatsoever, then it is better not to report at all.

This was followed by a discussion on the theme Refugees in the North East. In the beginning, Sabyasachi Basu Ray Chaudhury pointed out that, while discussing refugees in India’s northeast, it is important to take note how colonial rule and the subsequent process of de-colonization of the Indian sub-continent have led to the making and unmaking of borders in the region. Paula Banerjee initiated the discussion by highlighting the fact in view of the massive and fixed flow of refugees/immigrants in India’s Northeast, any neat categorization between the refugees and IDPs is difficult, if not impossible. She proposed that, the reader, therefore, should have one introductory section explaining this reality. She also argued that, the reader should include necessary references to the work done on this field earlier by CRG, particularly, Internal Displacement in South Asia: The Relevance of UN Guiding Principles (Sage, 2005). Paula also suggested that, there should be some references to some leading cases filed by NHRC in relation to the refugees and the IDPs in India’s Northeast. She also emphasized the need for including a separate section on the gender dimension of displacement in the reader.

Irene Lalruatkimi highlighted the relationship between the Mizos and Chin refugees in Mizoram. She talked about the illegal immigrants, who come from the neighbouring country to Mizoram for their economic benefits and how it complicates the situation. She talked about the Mizo threat perceptions vis-a-vis the Chins. According to her, while reporting displacement, it is important to take note of the sensitivity involved in the entire issue. In order to understand the complex nature of the situation, it is important to have the views from both sides, Irene pointed out.
In the discussion it was suggested that:

•As India’s northeast is contiguous to the other eastern parts of South Asia comprising Bangladesh, Nepal, Bhutan and Myanmar, it is important to include the other South Asian sources especially the Bangladeshi sources when we deal with the refugees in India’s northeast. A comparison of the situation of the Rohingya refugees in Bangladesh with that of the refugees in India’s northeast may be interesting.
•In the reader, there should be cross-references in the sections that would help the users to link one section with another.
•It was felt that, there could be a solid section in the introduction on state, borders and sovereignty.
•It is also necessary to take note of the cultural resistance to the other, immigrant communities and ‘outsiders’. Similarly, it is important to understand why the local inhabitants of an area, who are in a majority, feel marginalized by the refugees.
•It is important to include the role of perceptions while preparing the reader.

The session was chaired by Sabyasachi Basu Ray Chaudhury
The next session on Conflict/violence-induced displacement began with Pradip Phanjoubam’s intervention who drew attention to the spirals of insecurities at the very outset. He mentioned that there are no primordial causes of conflicts by highlighting the examples of conflicts between the Nagas and Mizos, or Meiteis and Kukis. Sabyasachi Basu Ray Chaudhury initiated the discussion on displacement by referring to three major phases in the course of any displacement: causes of displacement, state of displacement (including the camp conditions, if any) and rehabilitation and repatriation of the displaced. He mentioned that in the context of India’s northeast, massive and mixed flows of displacement made the whole issue more complicated for the researchers/journalists to report. He also said that, in cases of conflict or violence-induced displacement, it is quite difficult to get the actual figures of the displaced persons. Contrasting and competing figures always create problems, and it very often entails a numbers game. We need to recall how the boundaries were carved out in this region, while we deal with the issue of refugee flows and the IDPs. He mentioned that, the post-colonial era did not start with a clean state and the current problems related to the refugees and IDPs in this region have their roots in the colonial past. He argued that, the reader should include the case of the conflict between Garo and Rabhas in January 2011 that has reportedly displaced about 50,000. He opined that, while reporting and analysing these displacements, we have to take into account the histories of identity politics in the region. He pointed out that, while considering the right to return of the displaced persons, it is also necessary to observe whether they are willing to return to their habitual residence or not in the context of their continuous sense of insecurity.

Jayanta Bhattacharya, highlighted the developments in Tripura. He pointed out that, Tripura, a state with 856 km long border with Bangladesh, is free from insurgency now. But, the Bengalis now constitute 70% of the total population of the state, while the indigenous people constitute only 30% of that, whereas before partition they were 60% of the total Tripura population. During the post-colonial era, the indigenous communities lost everything and got marginalised in every sense due to the population influx from East Pakistan. He mentioned about the conflict between locals and the Riyang refugees in Tripura. He also talked about the displacement due to the construction of fencing. He argued that the insurgency has come to an end in the state main due to good governance provided by the Government of Tripura.
During discussion, the participants pointed out that, there should be a long and more comprehensive backgrounder to the section on conflict/violence-induced displacement. It was felt that Tripura has been slightly ignored in this section. The section on Tripura could be based on government reports. Even a book chapter written by Subir Bhaumik and Jayanta Bhattacharya earlier could be shortened to add in this section. Even the report prepared by CRG earlier (in Bengali) Obiram Raktopat could be translated and included in this section. This section needs to include the displacement of the Nagas due to deployment of Assam Rifles personnel in the Naga-inhabited areas. Similarly, more attention could be attached to the reports prepared by the human rights organizations like MASS, NPMHR. There could also be an entry on the R&R policy of Government of Tripura. Similarly, something should be added with regard to the cluster approach followed first in Mizoram and then Tripura in resettling the displaced indigenous people. It is also important to note how the jhum cultivation is being transformed into sedentary form of cultivation in Tripura. It was suggested that, the relevant sections from the Report of the Naga Mother’s Association entitled ‘Shade no more blood’ could be included. Amena Mohsin pointed out that, in Bangladesh, there is a distinction between documented and undocumented refugees. She argued that, one should take into account the role of NGOs, INGOs and donors while reporting displacement. Nitin Sethi pointed out that importance there is a need to take note of different aggregates of the data available.
In the session on Resource Politics, Climate Change, Environmental Degradation and Displacement, Nitin Sethi and Xonzoi Borbora pointed out how different indigenous communities in India’s northeast have come into conflict with one another over the control of the natural resources. Similar clashes take place between the local population on the one hand and the ‘outsiders’, on the other. Nitin alerted how the issue of climate change is gradually being manipulated by certain agencies for their own benefits. This also has to be taken into account. During discussion, the participants pointed out that, if a distinction is being made between the state property and common property. If that is made, then one has to examine how common is the common property, it was felt. Attention should be given to the phenomenon how the traditional common property is turned into state property. The session ended with a presentation made by Mayal Mit Lepcha of ACT on dams across the Teesta and impending displacement and role of Media.

On 23 January 2011, in the session on Laws/Policies relating to forced migration Sabyasachi Basu Ray Chaudhury stressed the need for looking at the laws at the international, national and state levels in relation to the policies adopted at various times by various governments towards the refugees and IDPs.

Nirmalya Banerjee initiated the discussion by saying that most of the displacements in the North-east have taken place over disputes centering on tribal lands, it is necessary to take stock of the policies to prevent land alienation. He cited two examples: 1) Bodoland in Assam and 2) Tripura.

In the colonial times, the first efforts to prevent land alienation began with the introduction of the ‘line system’ and then with the demarcation of ‘tribal belts and blocks’. However, these measures did not have much impact. The amendment of the Assam Tribal Land Regulation Act with the inclusion of Chapter 10 in 1947, too, left a few loopholes through which land alienation continued. The Brahmaputra river bank erosion further complicated the issue with thousands being rendered homeless and occupying tribal land. When the Bodoland agitation started, the All Bodo Students Union highlighted the importance of land and so did the NDFB website. The Bodoland Autonomous Council set up in 1993 had little power except that it was supposed to be “consulted” on any administrative measure. The Bodoland Regional Council formed in 2003 had more powers under the Sixth Schedule, but since the measures it adopted were given only “prospective” effect, they did not have any impact on the existing situation. Meanwhile, the Bodo-Santhal riots took place in 2008 resulting in massive displacements and the problem still remains.

In Tripura, the alienation of tribal lands started during the time of the kings. In 1960 the Tripura Land Regulation Act was enacted but it had several lacunae and became ineffective in protecting tribal land. The demographic composition of the state had begun changing. In 1985, the autonomous councils were set up under the Sixth Schedule. However, since all tribes were not in the same stage of development, their problems, too, were different and this fact is yet to be addressed properly.

Xonzoi Barbora began by pointing out the huge amount of ambiguities in census categorisation. He referred to the 2005 Karbi-Dimasa clashes during which entire villages were displaced and resettled. A visit organised by the CRG to the IDP camps revealed 16 years later that he problem was still prevailing. People from the camps had to migrate as far as Lucknow in search of work, but their permanent address remains the camp. The law is still being formulated as we speak, he said. So, we should look at the more everyday negotiations rather than the law itself. How did the Chakmas and the Tibetans come to be settled in the areas in the North-east? Do we say laws and policies actually messed things up, he questioned.

Taking part in the discussion, Paula Banerjee said that the refugee debate was no longer confined to the 1951 Convention. One has to look at the evolution of the legal framework and the corpus of judgements delivered in this regard. There was also a need for a comparative study of the Indian situation and the experience of other South Asian countries like Nepal and Bangladesh. Ranabir Samaddar recalled that the Supreme Court of India as well as the state high courts such as the Guwahati high court had constantly referred to international laws in connection with refugee protection. The Punjab high court even referred to an Australian high court judgement.

The people displaced during the Bodoland agitation and the Chakmas in Arunachal Pradesh have been in a protracted state of displacement. What about their right to return, he asked. Forced repatriation, however, creates problems. There is a need for protection of the returnees. In respect of protection, the role of laws is perhaps 30 per cent and the role of regulations is much more. Finally, the bureaucracy gets the power. Is it always good, or should we think about other mechanisms? The political parties, too, have a role. He suggested the inclusion of the following in the media reader:

•The work of Walter Fernandes on policies
•Evaluation of the actions of the National Human Rights Commission
•The policies of the Arunachal Pradesh government
•One or two exemplary pieces on how the laws/policies have worked here.
•A list of relevant AIR case references.
•The Guwahati Law Research Group documentation.

Amena Mohsin referred to the importance of customary laws and customary rights. We also cannot overlook the role of the donors and the kind of policies they are playing, she said. Ranabir Samaddar, however, cautioned that the authenticity and acceptability of customary laws had to be taken into account. Tongam Rina said that the customary laws in Arunachal Pradesh were not very women-friendly. Under these laws, women cannot own immovable property and polygamy is also sanctioned. Yet, people normally would go to the traditional courts rather than the official courts. But since every tribe has its own laws, the codification of customary laws becomes unrealistic.

This was followed by discussion on the media reader. The two day workshop ended with an interesting session on From the field to the newsroom: Challenges of news gathering, politics of editing and media ethics where the following points were raised. Tongom Rina mentioned that the journalists in her newspaper, Arunachal Times, often obtained a lot of information by making applications under the Right to Information Act. Nilanjan Dutta remarked that the ‘filters within ourselves’ often posed greater hurdles before the presentation of objective news than the other ‘filters in the newsroom’. One has to try harder to overcome them. Xonzoi Barbora urged everyone to think how to adapt to the new environment in the ‘era of Wikileaks’. Jayanta Bhattacharya and Nirmalya Banerjee said the problem of confirmation of news and figures be dealt with more elaborately. Ranabir Samaddar stressed the role of small and local newspapers as they had more persons of the place on their staff and often produced some of the finest news reports on forced migration. Jayanta Bhattacharya, too, agreed that the local newspapers had a good network that was helpful in newsgathering. While chairing the session Saumya Bandyopadhyay drew attention to the need for good follow-up reporting.

Care and Protection of Refugees and IDPs in Nepal

Mahanirban Calcutta Research Group (CRG) and Nepal Institute of Peace (NIP) in collaboration with United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees(UNHCR), Kathmandu organised a three day orientation workshop on “Care and Protection of Refugees and IDPs” in Nepal from 21-23 November 2010 which attended by representatives from refugee groups (primarily Tibetans and Bhutanese), research scholars, advocates, social workers and students who are interested to learn and excel in the field of forced migration studies. The resource persons were practitioners and academics who had immense expertise on the field of forced migration as well as socio-political dynamics of Nepal and the region.

The lectures, roundtable discussions were organised under the following themes:-
•Gender dimensions of Displacement in South Asia
•Conflict and Forced Migration in Nepal
•Forced Migration and Protection Practices for Refugees in Nepal
•Resource Politics, Climate Change, Environmental Degradation and Displacement.

The workshop started with the inaugural roundtable discussion on the theme Displaced Voices: Voices from the Camps on 21 November 2010. This was a public event and was attended by noted scholars, activists and university students. Shiva Kumar Dhungana, President, NIP in his inaugural remarks presented a historical background of Refugees and IDPs in Nepal which was followed by self introduction of the participants and guests of the session. The session was moderated by Lok Raj Baral, Professor of Political Science, Executive Chair of National Centre for Contemporary Studies (NCCR). Mr. Nar Bahadur Giri and Mr. Bishnu Magar, both Bhutanese Refugees, shared their experiences of camp life and the protection mechanisms initiated by humanitarian agencies and the Government of Nepal. Paula Banerjee, Senior Researcher, Calcutta Research Group highlighted the gendered experiences of camp life drawing experiences of her work in SriLanka, Nepal and India. She also highlighted the vulnerabilities and risks of women and children in the camps and how women are subject to double marginalization owing to the increasing domestic violence in camps which often goes unnoticed in such conflict situations. She also brought into the discussion the situation of IDP camps in Nepal. Following the three presentations, various other concerns were raised by the participants; primarily durable solutions of refugees problems especially Bhutanese refugees and Tibetan Refugees in Nepal, the issues of displacement, return of IDPs, UN Guiding Principles on IDPs, national IDPs policies, International refugees law, roles and responsibilities of UNHCR to protect refugees.

On 22 November 2010, in the inaugural lecture on “South Asian Experiences on Forced Migration: A feminist view point” Paula Banerjee highlighted the issues of women, children and other dependents, different layers of problem craters in Camp. Subhas Ranjan Chakraborty, noted historian and senior member, Calcutta Research Group chaired this session. This was followed by Amit Sen’s (Protection Officer, UNHCR, Nepal) lecture on “Relevance of National and International Instruments for Protection of Refugees and IDPs with special reference to 1951 Convention and UN Guiding Principles. In this lecture, the legal definitions of refugee, IDPs and the international instruments were examined and discussed. In the next roundtable session on “Practices and Challenges of Refugee Protection”, Diane Goodman (Deputy- Representative, UNHCR, Nepal) in her lucid presentation highlighted certain important and crucial ways of looking at protection mechanisms. She began her presentation by sharing with us the definition of International Protection referring to the series of ICRC conducted workshops. She also went to discuss the actors involved in the protection mechanisms available to refugees. Finally she emphasised on the invisible sections of population who are often left out in discussion on protection. She felt that youth, women and elderly population need special assistance. She concluded her presentation with a need for three kinds of safety mechanisms that any protection mechanism should achieve: physical safety, material safety and legal safety. After this presentation Stephane Jaquemet Hon’ble Representative of UNHCR Nepal engaged in an interactive session with participants where he addressed several concerns and issues relating to various refugee populations in Nepal. He addressed several interesting issues relating settlement and international refugee law, 1951 convention and discussed the status of certain refugee groups namely Bhutanese and Tibetans. Hari Sharma (Director, Social Science BAHA) the moderator of the session ended with a comment that refugee issues are primarily humanitarian issues and it is significant the group sees the inter linkages between humanitarian issues and political issues as both are interdependent on each other. This was followed by a discussion on the assignments that the participants had submitted during the course of the distance education segment. The participants were divided into two groups where they presented a summary of the assignments and they received feedback on their respective presentations.

The day ended with two interesting presentations on status of conflict induced IDPs in Nepal. Subodh Raj Pyakurel, (Human Rights Activists and chairperson of Informal Sector Service Centre (INSEC)) highlighted the national policy on IDPs and INSEC’s contribution to protect the IDPs in Nepal. He began his presentation with a brief overview of the armed conflict in Nepal. He then went on to discuss the international framework for the protection of the IDPs and the national framework for the protection of the IDPs (under Interim Constitution 2006, National Policy for Internally Displaced People, 2007). Under National Policy for Internally Displaced People, 2007 the three main aims are: protection of human rights, regarding relief and rehabilitation. INSEC has practical experiences on working with internally displaced persons during conflict situation in Nepal. INSEC had started its working in the field of IDPs since 2005, during the phase of armed conflict itself. Most highlighted work during that phase was the successful returning of the IDPs in Jumla on June 27,2005 for the first time with the support of DFID. Total of 1173 persons were successfully returned to their respective homes from 2005-2006 with the support of various stakeholders namely, DFID, ActionAid, Luthron and Caritas. A project entitled "Advocating for Appropriate and Coordinated IDPs Return" was implemented in 5 districts (Morang, Dhanusha, Baglung, Surkhet and Kailali) in 5 development regions from February – May 2007, where large number of IDPs had been living. Monitoring and research, documentation, networking and coalition building, communication and information sharing were the modalities of the program implementation. The main objectives of the project were to return and reintegrate IDPs in their respective residences and to ease the environment for government to commit for providing short term relief support to the IDPs. INSEC implemented the project named "Assistance of IDP Returnees in Nepal" in 24 districts of Mid and Far-Western development regions from August 2007 to August 2008 with the financial support from USAID and technical support of SC/US and in co-ordination with NRCS. This project was aimed to make the environment favorable to return back the displaced people in their places of origin, INSEC conducted 35 events of district level interactions with the concerned stakeholders to share the findings of assessment as well ass to make then aware on the provisions in the CPA, the Interim Constitution and Policy and Directives on IDPs. Uma Joshi from National Human Rights Commission, Nepal in her report on “Conflict induced IDPs : Return and Reintegration” mentioned causes of forced displacement, human rights issues of IDPs, facts and figure and various aspects of IDPs policy Implications. In her discussion on way forward, she highlights the policy initiaves undertaken by the Nepal Government : Adoption IDP Policy 2063, Formation of local Peace Committees (LPCs), Return & Reintegration Package. She argues that Government has undertaken few initiatives and initiated interventions for addressing displacement problem in Nepal. Besides, various humanitarian agencies(national & international) also have been doing several IDP-focused programs as obligation of non-state actore stated in the UN Guiding Principles. The state initiatives and interventions should largely be complimented and supplemented by humanitarian agencies in coordinated manner. Similarly, some implementation gaps are identified that should be taken seriously by all actors for its mitigation. Effective implementation needs capacity, will power and determination among government agencies those agencies should be enhanced with some mechanisms for the documentation of the information related to the displaced people. Since we are in the post conflict situation, the relief is no longer required because it never helps to establish their rights for the durable solutions. All the activities being undertaken by various agencies focusing for relief should be transformed to right-based activities with the ultimate target of any durable solutions such as Return, integration and resettlement.

On 23 November, 2010, the session began with Sharad Ghimire’s(Martin Chautari) presentation on “Climate change and displacement; Learning from Koshi Flood” where he discussed the brief situation of Kosi flood disaster, displacement, management of relief camps, return and resettlement. His presentation basically pointed the effects of climate change, its effects, possible disasters, response and protection mechanism at the affected regions. This was followed by Roopshree Joshi’s (Lutheran World Foundation) presentation on “Tibetan Settlements in Thangboche and Jawalakhel”. The main objective of this essay is document the lives of people in these settlements, and how their available livelihood options has been responsible for their assimilation and generated employment opportunities for the Nepalese as well. Roopshree in her presentation discussed the life in urban settlements like Jawalakel, Lalitpur and compared it with rural settlement like Thangboche settlement in Rasuwa. Having lived in exile for more than 50 years, the settlements have been following various livelihood measures that are available to them, considering the setting of the settlements and the environment. The handicraft centre at Jawalakhel is a pioneer of carpet weaving business. It brought about the revolution in the sense that when the carpet factory was established, many Tibetans who had the traditional skills could take it forward as livelihood measures in exile and also many Nepalese were employed in the carpet factory. The handicraft centre soon became a flourishing business and the carpet movement spread through out the country not only in the other settlements but also through out the country where people starting being involved in the enterprises. Tibetan carpet factory brought lots of revenue to the state coffers and also generated employment for Nepalese and Tibetans. After her presentation, Dorjee Damdul presented the problems relating livelihood, expectation on durable solutions for Tibetan Refugees. He spoke briefly about the New Arrival Project where UNHCR facilitates their safe transit through Nepal to a third country. He thanked UNHCR for the cooperation they extended towards Tibetan refugees. According to him, there are some areas that needed immediate attention : particularly identity documents, and travel documents. In the roundtable session on “Challenges to current policies on Bhutanese Refugees and Urban Refugees, Nini Gurung(UNHCR Kathmandu) and Shiva Dhungana raised certain crucial questions of protection policies. The workshop concluded with an evaluation session where the participants felt the need to organise such workshops on an annual basis in Nepal.

The valedictory session began with a note by Shiva Dhungana on the proceedings of the workshop after which Ajit Acharya (Nepal Institute of Peace) presented a short report on the course. This was followed by certificate distribution ceremony. 25 participants received certificates and 10 participants from Kathmandu University received letters of participation. Stephane Jacquemet, Hon’ble Representative from UNHCR Nepal where he congratulated Calcutta Research Group’s initiative to collaborate with Nepal Institute of Peace in hosting a workshop which brought representatives from refugee communities and scholars and activists on the same platform. He encouraged the organisers and the participants to take such initiatives in the near future. The workshop concluded with a valedictory address by Ranabir Samaddar (Director, Calcutta Research Group) on “Ethics of Care and Protection of the Displaced”. In his address, he began with a significant question “Why should we care for and protect the victims of forced displacement?” The “we” he went on to argue refers to those who have not had experienced displacement themselves, yet harbour some form of an ethical commitment to the victims of forced displacement. The ethical language is a means of establishing some form of a connection between them and us – between those who are not forcibly displaced and those who are. Ethics in other words cannot but be dialogical. Its language in no way denies agency to the victims. Ethical language therefore is a language of universality that cuts across the given boundaries of the victims’ groups and communities. One can therefore say that while ethical language has to be universal, the phenomenon of forced displacement is not. It is true that the incidence of forced displacement has been alarmingly on the rise – thanks to the forces and processes of globalization. However their number is still considerably smaller than that of the world’s settled population. Much of what the settled population groups do for the displaced population in the framework of various linkages is not to be seen as ethical practice. Ethics is considered essentially about the self, which cares for and holds itself responsible to the other. Caring for the other is regarded as the means to care for the self. He also briefly summarised the arguments in justification of the advocacies for care and protection of the displaced: (i) the rights-based argument (ii) community based arguments and both of them have their own limitations. He urged the audience to re-think the implications of power and its linkages with ethics to understand the way protection policies are framed and implemented. The session concluded with a vote of thanks by Shiva Dhungana.