Statelessness in India

Shuvro Prosun Sarker

The principal objective behind any research on statelessness in India should be to find out the communities/groups within India who are lacking nationality, rather protection of nationality, and to find out the means and methods to cover them under state protection or international protection. However, there is possibility that, this kind of research may trace communities/groups from both ways that ‘do not have the nationality of any state legally’ or ‘do not count on their state for protection’. It is noteworthy for a country like India that the second category has emerged from neighbouring states in relation to episodes of irregular migration because of sustained or systemic violation of basic human rights towards some communities/groups by their own state/ majority community. The situation actually leaves the victims virtually unprotected by the agencies of the state. This category of persons indicates that effective statelessness may no longer reflect in the relationship between the state and the person concerned. In one side there is hope that the host state will play a compassionate role and in other side there are strict law of the land which is defining the nature of nationality. All these factors raised the question of protection for this vulnerable class which may be called on by advocating for a new international protocol or evocative acts or advocacy for regional pact or direct national legislation.

Though there are two UN conventions on statelessness, but these two can’t make India liable to go by their terms as India has not acceded/ ratified/ adopted/ signed the conventions. The limitation of these conventions to reduce statelessness for a country like India is a writ of bit large as there is a growing number of people who are stateless de facto. Their human rights are more vulnerable as they have left the state to which they have a formal connection and also do not get protection by the host state as doubtful citizens. The relationship between protection of these stateless persons and human rights is one of the primary issues in India. It is necessary to consider for alternative protection for these stateless persons under the two human rights covenants as the hierarchy of non-citizens in a state highlights the gap between protection and human rights. There is expansion of non-derogable rights and the concept of social, economic and cultural rights started in the twentieth century, along with international affirmation of universality, indivisibility, interdependence and interrelatedness of human rights. All these should come together to consider the identification of specific groups/ communities whose human rights require special protection.

With regard to customary practices of international law, non refoulment is the principle with regard to refugees and stateless-refugees which is non-derogable in nature. Apart from that there is a significant body of international law that has elaborated the principle of nondiscrimination as a non-derogable norm that prohibits discrimination on the basis of race, ethnicity and related criteria. India’s acceding of ICCPR, ICESCR, CRC and ratification of ICERD and CEDAW have excelled the quantum of protection from the idea of compassion to rights. This development of a body of international law which triggered the prohibition of nationality based discrimination has been further encouraged by the advocacy efforts of international organizations, non-governmental actors, and particular states. Also the recent increase in public information and advocacy has served to remind international bodies and non-governmental organizations that the persistence of statelessness is a complex matter that underlines the centrality of effective protection. There is growing pressure from international NGOs, refugee organizations, and human rights monitoring bodies to provide protection to those who do not fall under either the refugee convention or the conventions on statelessness.

There is a specific case decided by the Supreme Court of India in the matter of chakmas from CHT, East Pakistan (presently Bangladesh) where the Court decided the case in favour of the chakmas with specific direction to process their citizenship application through the process established by law. It is mentionable here that a new public interest litigation, Swajan & Anr. Vs. Union of India & Anr., is pending before the Supreme Court right now asking for specific direction to confer citizenship/ refugee status to the Bangladeshi minorities staying in the State of Assam and the Court has already issued notice to the respondents Union of India and State of Assam. So it is evident that the expansion of human rights regime of stateless persons of the second category has got a positive momentum in India along with the expansion of locus standi of foreigners staying in India. Now it’s time to see whether Supreme Court comes out with a decision based on human rights consideration or on the ground of internal security and economic constraint of India. Countless number of deemed stateless or deemed nationals are looking forward to get Justice!

The Enduring ‘Problem ‘ of Refugee Protection in Hong Kong

Luke Marsh

The HKSAR stands unique in the world as a post-industrialized state which is not subject to the terms of the 1951 Convention relating to the Status of Refugees (“the Refugee Convention”) despite both its former colonial (the United Kingdom) and current (the PRC) superstructures having ratified and implemented its provisions in turn. Nonetheless, the Hong Kong government has very recently introduced a unified screening mechanism (USM) that will evaluate claims under the Torture Convention, the ICCPR and Refugee Convention. This new system arose, not from government initiative, rather the effects of government inertia with unmanageable backlogs of claimants reaching into the several thousands.

Space precludes a detailed examination of the weaknesses of the refugee protection system the USM replaced (for further, see Ramsden and Marsh). It remains to be seen whether the USM is able to improve matters for those on the ground who are subject to its revised procedures. Needless to say, the difficult personal circumstances experienced by refugees recognized under the mandate of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (“UNHCR”) in Hong Kong, and those of torture claimants screened-in by the Administration pursuant to the Convention Against Torture (“CAT”) are unlikely to improve due to the concerning low levels of welfare support on offer through the government.

Refugee protection presents a very specific set of issues to the SAR vis-à-vis the status of the socio-economic rights of these individuals. In particular, Hong Kong has a firm policy of not absorbing those who achieve refugee status or are successful torture applicants. Instead, those mandated refugees are required to wait for inordinately long periods of time, sometimes spanning half-decades in poor living conditions with further limits of food, health, education and employment.

Bearing in mind the long delays experienced in re-settling mandated refugees, the insufficiency of socio-economic provision for this marginalized group has been increasingly voiced by interested parties including NGOs set up to fill the ‘welfare gap’ left by government (state support available to these persons has been known to consist of no more than a bag of uncooked rice). The problem of insufficient provision has been exacerbated by the unwillingness of the Hong Kong government to allow successful claimants the right to work. The administration’s current policy on permitting refugees the right to work is a draconian one. The circumstances in which the Director of immigration will permit a refugee to work amounts to a de facto ban on the refugee population seeking paid employment in Hong Kong (in effect, only in cases where the restriction can induce intense mental and physical suffering or humiliation of a degree sufficient to constitute inhuman or degrading treatment under the terms of the CAT).

This governmental stance ignores that the fundamental right of refugees to work in gainful employment is not only embedded in articles 17, 18 and 19 the Convention itself, but also beyond the borders of this framework, it is now well recognized that refugees and those seeking subsidiary protection enjoy inalienable economic rights as human rights under various international instruments, such as the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (“ICESCR”), the International Covenant on Civil and Political Civil Rights (“ICCPR”), the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child, the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination, the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women, the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, and various provisions of the International Convention on the Protection of the Rights of All Migrant Workers and Members of Their Families, with seminal guidance on the subject offered by Michigan Guidelines on the Right to Work (2010).

Nevertheless, a recent decision of the Court of Final Appeal in Hong Kong (GA v Director of Immigration [2014]) shot down any remaining hope that the right to work would be extended beyond its current restriction. Instead the exclusion clause contained in article 39(1) of the Bill of Rights Ordinance (“BORO”) was relied on by the Court of Final Appeal, which isolates non-nationals from the full enjoyment of their rights under international law in order, it is said, to protect the Region’s fragile territorial boundaries. The judgment is a very disappointing outcome for genuine claimants who face years ahead with no other option but the indignity of reliance on meagre welfare provision with no real opportunity to provide for themselves and any family members they may have with them. The CFA decision has resulted in the unsustainable destitution of asylum seekers, refugees and torture claimants, who must inevitably survive on the charity of others both before and after a historically inefficient and chronically slow administrative system delivers a decision on their case.

The Rohingya Scenario: Role of Bangladesh and India in Myanmar’s Concealed Tragedy

Kruthika N.S.

In Myanmar around June 2012, a Buddhist woman was raped and killed by three Muslim men. In a revenge attack following the incident, ten Muslim men were killed, and the rest of the story has been hidden from the rest of the world. This was only the story that seemed to be the last straw of the ongoing crisis between the two ethnic groups: the Buddhist majority and the Muslim minority. It soon created a domino effect, with the Rohingya Muslims toppling over in a tragic game of life and death, which led to them getting internally displaced. Further tension caused some of the 140,000 internally displaced to attempt to flee across the border.

Who are the Rohingya?

The Rohingya are a Muslim ethnic minority of Myanmar living in northern Arakan/ Rakhine State in the western part of the country. There are approximately 1.33 million Rohingya in Myanmar, but the country's 1982 Citizenship Law denies them citizenship, despite the fact that Rohingya have lived in Myanmar for generations. The Burmese President Thein Sein blatantly has denied the existence of the Rohingya as an ethnic group of Myanmar, and instead, has called them ‘Bengali’, which in that region is a discriminatory, racist term used to imply that Rohingya are illegal immigrants from Bangladesh, which however, is false.

The Unspoken Crisis in Bangladesh:

In April 2011, the Rohingya were trapped between serious constraint in their country and ill-use in neighboring nations. Bangladesh had facilitated a huge number of Rohingya people escaping mistreatment for more than three decades, yet no less than 200,000 Rohingya refugees had any legitimate rights there. Even now, they live in griminess, get extremely constrained support and are liable to capture, blackmail and confinement. Unregistered exiled women and young girls are especially defenceless against sexual and physical strike. The global group must urge the Bangladeshi government to enrol undocumented refugees and enhance insurance for all defenceless Rohingyas. Contributor governments should likewise work to restart and expansion resettlement of displaced people to a third nation and increment help for groups facilitating these refugees.

Treatment of the Rohingya in Bangladesh:

Even after decades of the Burmese Rohingya escaping mistreatment and acquiring shelter in Bangladesh, tension was unwavering. Inter communal viciousness in Myanmar's Rakhine State, and ensuing state-supported mistreatment and focused on ambushes against Muslim populaces, have thrown a global focus on this disregarded populace, and offered an open door to resolution the status of both stateless Rohingya inside Myanmar and those Rohingya who are outcasts in neighboring nations. This could have been an open door for Bangladesh to seize the issue and create a much required refugee arrangement. However, the country is mobilizing against the Rohingya by declining entry to the refugees and confining philanthropic help. This reaction, other than speaking to a break of global law, will debilitate Bangladesh's capacity to secure universal backing as exchanges of the Rohingya's situation increase. The legislatures of Bangladesh and Myanmar ought to be participating in reciprocal - and maybe multilateral - examinations about how to ensure the privileges of the Rohingya group, which is clearly not being carried out.

India’s Role:

The role of India in the issue has been heavily debated. The 2013 blasts in Bodh Gaya triggered suspicions of terrorist linkages to the Rohingya. Responding to the incident in 2013, “Blasts like this have the dual purpose of attacking Buddhist shrines, and attacking India,” Ajai Sahni of the South Asia Terrorism Portal said.

So, caught between the Buddhist-dominated Myanmar and Muslim-dominated Bangladesh, the Rohingyas are entering India through the northeast, say officials. But this is not considered good news for the Indian Home Ministry. The refugees who have been detained under the Foreigners Act, 1946 are to be sent to the Tihar Jail, Delhi, the only place where the UNHCR has jurisdiction. After acquiring refugee status, they will be sent to the refugee camp in Jammu. However, there is a problem of plenty as India does not have the resources to house such a large number which is anticipated.

Their Plight Today:

Myanmar has about 800,000 stateless Rohingyas, without access to basic healthcare or education. About 30,000 Rohingya outcasts formally live in Bangladeshi camps today. Informally, there are more are 200,000 unregistered Rohingya there. The enrolled ones are given help and backing by The United Nations High Commission for Refugees (UNHCR) and the Bangladesh government. Unregistered refugees are entitled to nothing. Bangkok-based UNHCR agent Vivian Tan portrayed this as an extremely “dire situation.”

A Place for the Poor: Slum Dwelling in Dhaka City

Annemiek Prins

A wall between the rich and poor is being built, so that poverty does not annoy the powerful and the poor are obliged to die in the silence of history - Pablo Richard
In August 2012 I started my fieldwork Dhaka’s largest squatter settlement: Korail bosti. During my six months of research I witnessed a rather peculiar construction project evolve: a large wall was being erected to separate the shacks at the fringes of the slum from the main road. Tea-stalls that were previously directly located at roadside were now all at once separated from their customers by a blind wall. Moreover, many of the narrow goli’s that meander through Korail suddenly found themselves destined toward a dead end.

While the wall gradually gained height, I wondered what kind of physical and symbolical division this boundary was expected to realize? Fort his rather insignificant construction project seemed to hint at a bigger question, namely: ‘What place do the urban poor have within the landscape of megacities such as Dhaka?’

Slums have existed in Dhaka for over 200 years, but became a prominent element of the city’s landscape after Bangladesh gained independence in 1971. From the early-1970s onwards landlessness, unemployment and natural disasters in rural areas instigated many people to resettle in urban areas. The continuous influx of migrants makes Dhaka currently the fastest growing city in the world. The capital of Bangladesh counts over 13.5 million inhabitants, of which one-third is estimated to livein squatter settlements.

From the city’s point of view the constant influx of (poor) urban migrants is generally perceived as a nuisance, as their arrival is adding to the already severe population pressure. In addition, many property developers are aiming for the hectares of land that are now ‘illegally’ occupied by slum dwellers. For, although the inhabitants of Korail monthly rent (approximately 2,000 Taka) to local landlords, they are paradoxically not legally entitled to their houses. Ongoing disputes over land ownership have resulted in highly informal and insecure land-tenure arrangements, which in combination with the unreliability of public services- such as drainage and water supply – underscore people’s second-class position within the city.

Slum dwellers themselves are all too aware of their precarious position within the city. When discussing the construction of the wall around Korail, a male shopkeeper expressed his fear that the wall would be a forebode of eviction and forced displacement. For rumor had it that a multiple story building would be constructed on the grounds next to the wall. The reality has proved that fear of displacement is all but unfounded. In April 2012a large part of Korail was forcibly evicted, leaving an estimated 2,000 families homeless. Many saw their houses being destroyed by bulldozers and were forced to seek shelter under pieces of plastic during the days of rainfall that succeeded the eviction.

Although eviction is probably the most violent form of displacement that slum dwellers are faced with, there are also more subtle threats that coincide with living in a squatter settlement; forms of displacement that are characterized by neglect rather than by orchestrated force. The non-durable housing structures within Korail, for example, coincide with the ever-simmering possibility of collapse. This threat is especially salient for families whose houses have been built over the nearby lake. Since land is a scarce resource, local landlords have resorted to building houses directly over the surface of the lake, using bamboo poles for support. The damp and fumes that rise up from the polluted water make the bamboo floors moist and consequently result in a constant threat of collapse.

The risk of fire outbreaks is another danger that has the capacity for drastically uprooting the community and is inherent to living in an overpopulated and largely unplanned squatter settlement. A community leader that I spoke to in Korail emphasized the need for more fire extinguishers within the locality. He explained that the improvised way in which the gas-lines have been set up results in a constant threat of fire outbreaks. Moreover, the congested roads and the walls surrounding Korail make it impossible for fire trucks to enter in case of an emergency, and similarly, obstruct people from leaving.

At the start of this article I raised the question what place the urban poor have within the landscape of Dhaka. My brief case-study portrays Korail slum as a place that is characterized by a certain frailty of structures and where the risk of displacement is simmering beneath the surface of everyday life, either in the form of eviction or in the more subtle form of institutional neglect. Hackenbroch (2012) has introduced the term ‘spatial injustice’ to make sense of the ways in which poor people are excluded from the city’s landscape and its services. This exclusion, for example, manifests itself in the deliberate construction of the wall that separates Korail slum from the rest of the city and in the institutional unwillingness to view slums as sites for proper urban planning and development. These exclusionary politics are underpinned by the idea that poor people have no rightful claim to the city, as “elite perceptions remain focused on rural areas as the rightful home of the poor, and this is exacerbated by negative images of crime and squalor” (Banks et al. 2011).

However, despite popular opinion the poor actually are an indispensable part of city’s economy and landscape. For how would Dhaka function without the many day-laborers, rickshaw pullers and garment workers that live in slums? How would dustbins be emptied and drains be unclogged? Who would build the flats and houses for Dhaka’s ever increasing population? In fact, the landscape of the city would look completely different without the labor of the poor. It therefore seems to me that they have earned the right to a more permanent place within the city. Fortunately there is hope… For in February 2013 the inhabitants of Korail, after years of advocacy from the local NGO ‘Dushtha Shasthya Kendra’, got access to legal water supply. Let us hope that this gesture will be a forebode of further infrastructural progress in slums in Dhaka.

Summary of UNHCR Protection Manual

- Shreeparna Dutta

UNHCR has recently launched its online Protection Manual. The Protection Manual is organized by theme/subject. Under each heading, the documents are arranged in reverse chronological order and are accessible through a hyperlink. At the end of each subject heading, relevant related sources are listed, containing older guidance and documents which serve as background reading. Brief structure of the manual is as follows:

A. International Protection -

1.Refugee law instruments:- It contains all International instruments as well as Regional instruments Africa, North Africa and the Middle East, America, Asia, Europe, Council of Europe, Europe and European Union) on refugee protection.
2.UNHCR mandate and supervisory responsibility
3.Executive Committee Conclusions
4.General Assembly and Economic and Social Council Resolutions
5.UNHCR and Humanitarian Reform

B. Refugee Protection –

1.Inclusion (Article 1A(2)):- It contains instruments pertaining to Inclusion – general, Persecution, Agents of Persecution, Outside country of origin, Persons fleeing armed conflict and other situations of violence, Religious-based refugee claims, Membership of a particular social group, Gender-related persecution, Victims of trafficking, Child asylum claims, Sexual orientation and gender identity, Claims related to military service – Conscientious objection / Draft evasion / Desertion, Internal flight / relocation alternative, Safe countries of origin / Safe third countries / Safe first country of asylum / 'Secondary' or 'onward' movement and Family Unity and Derivative Refugee Status.
2.Cessation (Article 1C)
3.Exclusion:- It includes instruments and documents on Article 1D – Palestinian refugees, Article 1E and Article 1F.
4.Cancellation and revocation of refugee status
5.Regional Refugee Definitions and Complementary forms of protection
6.Country-related guidance:- It encompasses documents relating to Country-of-origin information and guidance, standards and procedures, Eligibility guidelines, Protection considerations, non-return advisories and other country-specific guidance, 'Country-of-asylum' guidance and Other 'country-related' guidance.
7.Procedures relating to Procedural safeguards / Due process rights, Credibility assessment / Use of country of origin information / Use of expert advice and evidence / Burden and standard of proof and UNHCR mandate procedures.
8.Effective remedies and access to courts
9.Reception
10.Entry (article 31) / Freedom of movement (Article 26) / (alternatives to) detention
11.Obligations of refugees
12.Expulsion and non-refoulement (Articles 32 and 33) which includes instruments on Expulsion (Article 32), Non-refoulement (Article 33(1)), Exceptions (Article 33(2)) and Diplomatic assurances.
13.Extradition
14.Rights of asylum-seekers and refugees, containing documents relating to Employment / Self-reliance (Articles 17-19), Housing, Land and Property (Article 21), Education (Article 22), Social welfare / Public relief (Article 23-24), Health and Other rights / Levels of attachment.
15.Identity papers / Convention Travel Documents (Articles 27-28)

C. Asylum and Migration - It encompasses instruments and documents pertaining to Asylum – general, Access to territory and procedures, Asylum / Migration nexus, Smuggling / Trafficking, Asylum-seekers at sea / Maritime issues, Persons not in need of international protection / Return of persons who have had their asylum claim rejected / Re-admission agreements, National security / International crimes / Terrorism and Extraterritorial processing.

D. Protection in Mass Influx Situations / Emergency Response - Under this head documents related to Protection in mass influx situations / Emergency response – general, Temporary protection, Civilian character of asylum / Physical security of refugees, Armed conflict / Relations with the military, Camps and Registration are enlisted.

E. International Solidarity / Burden-sharing / Responsibility-sharing / Comprehensive Approach

F. Specific Protection Priorities - Instruments under this head are directed towards specific protection people viz-Women of Concern, Children of Concern, Older Persons and Persons with Disabilities, National, Ethnic, Religious or Linguistic Minorities and Indigenous Peoples, Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender and Intersex persons, Sexual and Gender-Based Violence, HIV/AIDS, Age, Gender and Diversity, Protection of Civilians and Refugees in Urban Settings.

G. Durable Solutions - It includes documents on Durable Solutions – General (in relation to both refugees and IDPs), Return, Voluntary Repatriation and Reintegration, Resettlement, Local Integration in the Country of Asylum and Family Reunification.

H. Statelessness - It includes International legal instruments relating to nationality and statelessness, UNHCR's statelessness mandate, Guidance on specific aspects of UNHCR's mandate on identification, prevention, and reduction of statelessness and protection of stateless persons and Promotion of accession to the statelessness conventions

I. Internally Displaced Persons - It provides instruments on Normative framework on IDPs, Policy guidance regarding IDPs, Operational guidance regarding IDPs and Durable solutions for IDPs.

J. Global Protection Cluster - It includes documents on GPC guidance on IDPs, Protection Mainstreaming and Transformative Agenda

K. Displacement related to Climate Change or Natural Disasters

L. Human Rights

M. Other Operational Guidance - It contains instruments on Confidentiality and Data Protection, Commenting on National (Asylum) Legislation, Involvement with Courts, Relations with International Criminal Tribunals / ICC, Rule of Law, Communications and public information and Partnerships and high-level agreements

N. Miscellaneous

The Protection Manual is updated whenever a new protection policy or guidance document is published and can thus be relied upon to represent current state of UNHCR protection policies or guidance. The manual is extremely handy for being one-stop UNHCR's repository of protection policy and guidance documents.

Climate Refugee Problem: In Light of New IPCC Report

Deva Prasad M.

The Inter-governmental Panel on Climate change (IPCC) report which was finalized after the five day long conference on 30th March, 2014 deals with the impacts of climate change on human and natural systems, and possible methods of adaptation. The conference was held in Yokohama, Japan. The report says that climate change is a major threat to human security. This would disturb the ecosystem from equator to poles. It talks of “extreme weather events leading to breakdown of…critical services such as electricity, water supply and health and emergency services” and it sounds the alarm about “the breakdown of food systems, linked to warming”. The climate change also raises health concerns. Summer heat waves, sun burn, cold related deaths are all raising an alarming situation. Moreover this would in turn upset the public health and nutrition matter, distribution of access to food and water leading to a huge number of exoduses of migrants.

An important element that gets highlighted by the recent IPCC report is that there large scale human rights impact apprehended due to the climate change catastrophe. The very basic rights such as right to water, right to health, right to housing would be severely hampered. This would lead to large scale exodus of affected people from vulnerable countries. The vulnerability caused by the adverse impact of climate change is causing them to the migrate, both internally with in the country and cross-border migration. In this context, academic literature has tried to further and substantiate the terminology ‘climate refugees’. But even though there has been a persistent attempt from the academic community to highlight the necessity of separate classification of climate refugees, there is total lack of will from the policy makers side. This is reflected in the lack of any legal and policy initiative for the purpose of climate refugees.

The existing international legal framework for refugee protection is at present silent on the aspect of climate refugees. The Refugee Convention, 1951, which is drafted from the Euro-centric perspective and is a product of the post-world war times. Due to this fact the Refugee Convention, 1951 never emphasized upon the protection of refugees due to vulnerable environmental conditions. The Refugee Convention, 1951 scope was limited to that of persons who have fled their country in fear of persecution for reasons of race, religion, nationality, membership of a particular social group, or political opinion. Another major hurdle is the lack of consensus amongst states regarding the definition of climate refugee.

Conference of Parties, under the auspices of United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change is lacking focus on human rights impact and how causes vulnerability and leads to migration of the adversely affected population. The Inter-governmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) in its latest report helps us to recognize the alarming situation regarding impact of climate change. Time has come for the international community to take concrete steps in creation of an inclusive legal framework regarding the climate refugees. International community has to reach at a consensus regarding the legal instruments and institutional mechanism by which the climate refugees could be dealt with a right based approach.

Sri Lankan Tamil Refugees in India: Will they be Granted Citizenship?

Arpita Sengupta

Sri Lankan refugees came to India during the Sri Lankan Civil War which continued erratically from 1983 to 2009 and millions of them have still not found an asylum in their own country. According to a statistical report brought out by the Government of India, there are more than 100,000 ethnic Sri Lankan Tamils residing in the Indian state of Tamil Nadu, which accounts for a minimum figure of 68,000 living in 112 government-run camps and 32,000 outside the camps. For a period of almost 26 years these people have been residing in the Indian subcontinent, working as daily wage laborers with no hope of a bright peaceful future. International Organisations like the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees have tried to repatriate the refugees but the Tamil refugees have been reluctant to go back to their home country. They have cited various reasons for the same such as economic destitution, loss of habitation in their home land and gross human rights violation.

Many of the refugee children were born in India after their parents had migrated from Sri Lanka. Due to this rationale, they feel that they are more adept at the cultural, political and economic paradigms that exist in India. Inspite of having lived in India for almost half their lives these illegal migrants have not been granted citizenship and it seems that the Indian Government does not have the intention to confer such a right all together.

Advocate B Arulmozhimaran filed a PIL before the Madras High Court to declare S. 2(1)(b) of the Indian Citizenship Act as unconstitutional and accept the application for citizenship of the Tamil refugees. S. 2(1)(b) of the act disallows citizenship on the grounds that both parents are not citizens of India or that one of them is an illegal migrant. The petitioner argued that these people who had spent almost three decades of their lives in India could not be denied citizenship as it would violate their right to life as is guaranteed by Art. 21 of the Indian Constitution. They also contended that Article 11 of the Constitution does not prohibit any person from applying for citizenship and hence it was legally untenable to brand these refugees as illegal migrants and deny them Indian citizenship.

S Tamilarasan, counsel for the petitioner, contented that in the matter of Chakma refugees residing in Arunachal Pradesh, a petition was filed by the by National Human Rights commission and the Supreme Court had ruled in favour of citizenship for those 65,000 refugees, who were staying there for more than three decades. The rationale behind asking for citizenship for the Tamil refugees was the same. Nearly one lakh Sri Lankan refugees have been living in Tamil Nadu for the past three decades and denying them a social, cultural and economic identity would be inhuman to them and it would be violative of their fundamental right to live. In 2013, the first bench of the Supreme Court comprising the then acting Chief Justice R K Agrawal and Justice M. Sathyanarayanan ordered notices to central and state governments in the matter.

The Sri Lankan Tamil refugees have still not been granted with Indian citizenship and the judgement of the Supreme Court in the PIL is eagerly awaited. Former Tamil Nadu Chief Minister Mr. M. Karunanidhi supported the cause of the migrants stating that the Sri Lankan Tamil refugees would be granted Indian citizenship soon. His demand has been backed by spiritual leader Sri Sri Ravi Shankar.

It has become a matter of utmost importance to provide these refugees with citizenship of India. Although the State government has been providing them with temporary housing facilities, free medical aid, education up to secondary level, cash benefits, subsidized food materials like rice, potatoes, clothing material and utensils for their survival, employability remains a problem in the absence of social integration and they face an uncertain future without the provision of citizenship. Providing de facto asylum without an intention to provide Indian citizenship - all the while suspending civil and political rights like right to property, right to free movement, right to voting, etc is an injustice for the Tamil refugee populations which have been stateless in Tamil Nadu since the 1980s.

Compiled by- Kruthika NS

Walter G. Craddock Paper Prize:

Dr. Lopita Nath, Associate Professor of History and Chair, University of the Incarnate Word, USA was awarded the Walter G. Craddock Paper Prize for best paper in European/Asian/Middle Eastern History by the Southwest Historical Association at the Annual Conference of the Southwest Social Science Association. The title of the paper was: Legality, Accountability and Responsibility: the Case of the Lhotshampa Refugees from Bhutan. Dr. Nath was a participant for the Eleventh Annual Orientation Course on Forced Migration which was organized by the Calcutta Research Group (CRG) in 2013. The awarded paper was prepared for CRG’s Orientation Programme.

Concerns Over Rejection of Asylum Applications in Japan:

Japan has rejected 99.9% of the asylum applications it considered in 2013, which has raised major concerns regarding the legitimacy and efficacy of Japan’s domestic refugee systems. Reports show that all Syrian asylum seekers were denied protection. However, the Immigration Bureau of the country has granted special permission to stay for humanitarian reasons to 151 of the 3777 requests.

Burma's Ethnic Persecution is State Policy:

Burma’s serious rise in ethnic violence has raised quite a large number of eyebrows. There have been serious accusations against the government for meting out abusive "population control" measures against Rohingya, a sect of Muslims, which demonstrates that state and central government authorities are responsible for denying Rohingya fundamental human rights by limiting their freedom of movement, marriage and childbirth, among other aspects of daily life, in northern Rakhine State. For instance, a 2005 order from local Rakhine State authorities, requires Rohingya "who have permission to marry" to "limit the number of children, in order to control the birth rate so that there is enough food and shelter." This order is imposed as a strict two-child limit which prohibits Rohingya from having children out of wedlock. As a result, fearful Rohingya women have fled the country and undergone illegal abortions that have resulted in severe injury and even death. This shows dangerous precedents for the future.

Proof of Registration Card Renewals held in Pakistan:

The most number of cards renewed has been in Lahore, which is a whopping 3494 out of 12409. The UNHCR has however, suggested a number of techniques for Pakistan to up its game. A suggestion to increase processing speed has been put forth, and the UNHCR review this on February 25, 2014. Similarly, a suggestion has been made to install more active Queue management, such as physical barriers.

20,000 Civilians in Danger of Starving to Death in Yarmouk Refugee Camp:

The United Nations has cautioned that more than 20,000 people are in unavoidable risk of starving to death in a Palestinian exile camp that has turned into a key battleground in the Syrian civil war. The approaching humane emergency in Yarmouk, on the edge of the Syrian capital, Damascus, was depicted as "beyond desperate" by the UN Relief and Works Agency for Palestine refugees. A delicate understanding between the warring factions to permit sustenance into the camp has broken down, and for 10 days no food parcel has been permitted through an administration barricade of the range, the scene of furious battling between the Syrian Army and dissidents. Chris Gunness, of UNRWA, has confirmed that there will be no further UN food assistance in the camp.

Until the flare-up of war in Syria, Yarmouk was a flourishing sanctuary for upwards of 250,000 Palestinian outcasts living nearby many Syrians. Anyway in December 2012 the range was invaded by radical gatherings, who were marked "terrorists" by President Bashar al-Assad's administration. People who couldn't escape ended up trapped as a Syrian armed force barrage lessened most structures to rubble. In July 2013, administration powers succeeded in forcing a tight bar around the locale. It wasn't until January not long from now that a delicate agreement was facilitated between all warring factions to permit food to be given as aid.

Mr. Gunness said even before the arrangement's breakdown, the circumstances had been basic for exactly 18,000 Palestinians and more than 2,000 Syrian citizens trapped in Yarmouk. He said: “Just about 100 food parcels allocates day were traversing; 700 were required.”

Social Media and Humanitarian Disasters

Ishita Dey

It is important to highlight at the outset that social media is personal and public in nature. The personal status messages range from what one had for breakfast, to voicing opinions. The range is vast and it is this vastness that creates an ambiguity regarding social media as a platform. The ambiguity and shifting roles that one can adopt with little or no responsibility has been termed as “slacktivism” in social media. Though the term was originally coined by Dwight Ozard and Fred Clark at the Cornerstone Festival 1995 series it has come to represent the activism on social media particularly after Evgeny Morozove (2009) argued, “"Slacktivism" is an apt term to describe feel-good online activism that has zero political or social impact. It gives those who participate in "slacktivist" campaigns an illusion of having a meaningful impact on the world without demanding anything more than joining a Facebook group. Remember that online petition that you signed and forwarded to your entire contacts list? That was probably an act of slacktivism...” (http://neteffect.foreignpolicy.com/posts/2009/05/19/the_brave_new_world_of_slacktivism)

“Slactivism” becomes a tool for analysing social media activism and it is against this backdrop that statements like “We are not people of comment and like” from Egyptian revolution needs to be understood. In one of the provocative articles, Shazia Islam (2013) mentions that such acts of slactivism do nothing beyond raising awareness. She writes, “There is absolutely nothing wrong in the advocacy of a worthy cause and standing up for what you believe in. But the effectiveness of doing so only behind the glow of a laptop monitor or cell phone screen is up for debate. History has always had its share of band-wagon fist-pumpers who stand in the background claiming, “Oh yeah. I’m in,” with cheeks stuffed with free food, and slacktivism is no different. There is little evidence that taking a couple of quick minutes to tweet, update a Facebook status, or fall in line with millions of others’ profile pictures will do anything more than satisfy the ego”(http://humberetc.com/2013/04/12/social-media-breeds-slactivism/).The personal nature of the social media platforms on one hand, and the ability with which a rather active facebook user, twitteratti can choose to remain silent or participate in the real life makes the role of social media arbitrary. The arbitrariness arises from the ambiguity that lies in “virtual action” of likes, comments and statuses and action on the field. Virtual discussions practices can be used to generate interest, increase awareness and act as a pressure group through online petitions, but the task of translating virtual action and interest through collective action in real world requires an understanding of how collective action is organised through change of roles. Post flash – floods in Uttarakhand, there were several “community pages” were created, particularly facebook. Three kinds of information were shared across facebook and twitter: available information on missing people, available information on rescued people and appeal to relief and rehabilitation. In some cases the social media pages also resorted to pressure making tactics regarding rescue efforts and creating pressures through online petitions. What remains to be seen is how “social” is the social media, the political rootedness of the social media social media and its actors, and access and reach of social media. While social media’s roots remain in the personal, the collective use of the social media platforms has increasingly been under surveillance and anonymous tweeps, bloggers have used the platforms to generate awareness campaigns. At this crossroad, lies the ways in which Information and Communication Technology intersects through Google Person Finder – a specially designed service which was used during Uttarakhand Relief work. Google Person Finder – web based application helped to track missing persons. Such applications were used widely post Katrina by IT professionals who worked on available maps, divided them into zones and developed web based application to track missing persons. Multiple websites were created instead of single integrated one and Google Person Finder is an open source application specifically used in disasters to track missing persons where any interested party can look up for information or update information about missing persons. The information is later deleted according to Google’s web portal. For instance, the person finder page in case of Uttarakhand is not available any more. Social media, and its uses are to be understood within the contexts in which it emerges, and the use of technology to address those issues.

IDPs from Swat Province in Uncertainty as Peace Talks Fail between

Compiled by Ishita Dey

On 15 February 2014, a news report in TOI carried a report of how families were looking forward to the peace talks between Government of Pakistan and the Taliban. This instilled a hope in Bibi and many others like her, who were forced to live in temporary shelters, IDP camps because of the conflict torn tribal areas in Pakistan. According to this report, ZarmataBibi lost her son, grand-daughter to conflict and was forced to flee in 2012 from her home. Another resident from Khyber district (one of the worst hit areas due to an army operation against Khyber and where there have been clashes last year as well) wished that this dialogue will lead to some solution. He has been living in a camp since 2009. The conflict in SWAT province left people homeless and the Government’s attempts to take control in the semi-autonomous tribal zone has been met with multi-layered challenges of home grown insurgency, and revenge killings. As the talks were on, 23 paramilitary soldiers were reportedly executed as a revenge for army operations in the volatile tribal regions (See Reuters). This has led to a deadlock and the peace talks have collapsed leaving the displaced in camps, or temporary shelters in perpetual uncertainty.
For details visit:
“Pakistan’s displaced families put faith in peace talks” The Times of India, 15 February 2014.http://articles.timesofindia.indiatimes.com/2014-02-15/pakistan/47358291_1_peace-talks-jalozai-camp-swat-valley; Accessed on 16 February 2014

“Peace talks between Pakistan and Taliban collapse after killings” 17 February 2014; http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/02/17/us-pakistan-taliban-idUSBREA1G0G520140217; Accessed on 17 February 2014.

Afghan Refugees in India Fear Return

Compiled by Ishita Dey

As of 2011, there were more than 18000 refugees in India (External Affairs Ministry) and out of them 10,000 reportedly were registered with UNHCR. Though international statistics of UNHCR show voluntary repatriation of 5.7 million people in the last ten years, some 2.7 million people continue live in exile in neighbouring countries. According to the report “Afghan Refugees in India refuse to return fearing violence” (The Outlook), most of the refugees were forced to flee Afghanistan and struggled to make a living in Delhi. One of the refugees point out that though people are retuning back, they continue to live life in conflict torn Afghanistan with no jobs or money. Fearing an uncertain future most people do not want to go back. Some also point out that they fear that once the NATO troops are withdrawn, the Taliban might take over. The fear of the past looms large as refugees continue to struggle and negotiate with the changing rules and modalities of documentation in India, as India is a non-signatory to 1951 convention. The Government of India, as the report suggests has started issuing long term visas and according to a UNHCR official, some of the Chin refugees from Myanmar have obtained them. Initially, there was a provision for giving visas for six months which had to be renewed and failure to do so mean hefty sums of fine. Under the given circumstances, Afghan refugees in Delhi prefer not to return to their homeland and live a life in transit.

For details see:-Saini, G.“Afghan Refugees in India refuse to return fearing violence” 22 December 2013 http://news.outlookindia.com/items.aspx?artid=821927; Accessed on 13 February 2014.

Australia to Shut Down for Mainland Immigration Centres

Compiled by Ishita Dey

Australia has been under the scanner for its immigration policies and in its latest attempt to securitise borders the Government has announced to shut down the mainland immigration centres. These detention centres are run by British outsourcing firm Serco Group Plc and this closure will save A$88.8 million. According to the article “Australia hardens refugee policy, to close mainland centres”( see link below), this move comes at a time when Australian Navy has been reportedly been returning asylum seeker vessels to Indonesia. Indonesia has been a transit route for boat people trying to migrate to Australia. Despite the recent shift of asylum seeking processing facilities to Nauru and Papua New Guinea, the closure of the immigration centres clearly shows the ways in which much criticised off-shore immigration arrangements are newer ways of controlling “boat people”.

For details visit: http://www.dnaindia.com/world/report-australia-hardens-refugee-policy-to-close-mainland-centres-1950754; Accessed on 23 January 2014; 2014

Q&A Session with Meghna Guhathakurta

This report is prepared by Shreya Ghosh. She was a participant of the Eleventh Annual Orientation Course on Forced Migration, 2013

[Meghna Guhathakurta is the Executive Director of Research Initiatives, Bangladesh, a research organization working with marginalized communities. Formerly she was Professor of International Relations at the University of Dhaka, Bangladesh. She was the speaker of an interactive sessionat Eleventh Annual Orientation Course on Forced Migration, organized by Mahanirban Calcutta Research Group on December 8, 2013]

Meghna Guhathakurta initiated the discussion through sharing her work on family histories and how family can be a crucial site of investigation to understand the ways in which decisions related to migration are taken and to unravel the different gender roles in negotiating migration. She further spoke on the idea of 'violence', 'fear' and migration. She spoke of instances where violence does not necessarily demonstrate itself explicitly, but results in a sense of (psychological) fear. The idea of perceived 'fear' is important in understanding forced migration and, according to her, family is again an institution that negotiates with such fear and looking at family narratives can become critical in understanding fear driven migration.

Q.Can you speak on the experience of environment driven migration in Bangladesh and whether looking at 'family' can be used as a 'method' of investigation in such cases.

A.Bangladesh is among the countries that are prone to environmental disasters and related migration. This is especially so in case of south-west Bangladesh, which is also where the Sunderbans are located. Here, drastic changes take place in the environment due to siltation and erosion of soil which leads to large migration of mostly agricultural laborers. Another cause of forced migration remains the frequent change of river course in Bangladesh.

One has not used family narratives as a method for looking at environmental migrations. But there remains a possibility. Such environment driven migration often leads to men in the effected villages migrating for work, while women are left behind. There are villages now that only consists of women. Abandoned women become vulnerable. There are instances were seasonal laborers, who come into new areas, marry women who have once been abandoned and then they too leave after a while, at the end of the season.

An important aspect about cross border migration is that successive migrations take place through same border passes and areas, using the networks that are established. There is also a continuous negotiation with border guards and state institutions.

Q.Has there been any significant migration, specially of any minority community, due to recent political crisis in Bangladesh (Shahbag movement)?

A.One specific instance is that of migration among the Buddhist community in Bangladesh. There were some rumors and panic related to mob violence which led to migratory trends among the aforementioned group to other Buddhist majority states. Such migration can be momentary or cyclical.

Also there are other deeper issues that need to be highlighted here. In Bangladesh, there is a tendency towards land grabbing within the influential political and elite classes. Minorities and the land belonging to the migrants are especially susceptible. There is a systematic structure of laws and norms that has been devised to effect such land grabbing. The Enemy Property Act was a legislation of such kind. In more recent times, this has been followed by legislation to try and control temple land or property held by communities for religious purposes (devatya property).

Also there are times when the state encourages migration for remittances. Equally, it is true that migration happens because people want to live a better life. For instance people go out on dangerous and uncertain ventures, traveling long distances, in anticipation of better livelihood and living conditions. Some such travels even become fatal for few migrants.

Q.Is there any change in perception of self-identity among new generation of Rohingya refugees in Bangladesh? Does the new generation recognize a change from being refugees to being stateless?

A.Protracted refugee-hood can become a condition of statelessness. UNHCR has introduced the category of statelessness but the Bangladesh state does not consider Rohingyas as stateless. They consider Myanmar as responsible for them.

On part of the Rohingya refugees, the older generation is very conscious of their Myanmarese belonging and cultural and linguistic roots. They are also very conscious of ensuring a certain continuation of the same among their next generation. While teaching them language skills and education in camps, the mothers of the Rohingya refugee children often complained about the teaching medium not being the Burmese language and the fear of losing the language among the new generation. Hence while teaching at the camps, one had to develop teaching programmes in the Burmese language.

Q.Has there been any case of displacement due to the Rampal power plant project?

A.This again is a project in the south-western part of Bangladesh. The construction of the said project was stopped due to protests. But the rate of displacement due to large construction projects in Bangladesh is high. The displaced also receive very less or often no compensation. The displaced from the Jamuna bridge project have not received due compensation. Also there are gas explosion related disasters. The displaced and victims of Magurchara gas explosion have not yet received compensation. The Kaptai dam in Bangladesh has been the source of one of the largest refugee population group.

Q.On the nature of work by Research Initiative Bangladesh (RIB) in the Rohingya refugee camps?

A.RIB does not follow the top down developmental model of forcing change from above. In its efforts it negotiates with existing community conventions in order to make change participatory. Over the time, we have seen the relevance of working with and breaking the cultural codes.

Q.Is it not that working through existing cultural norms of communities re-enforces prevailing patriarchal norms. How does it foresee change?

A.Yes, but it is important to work with existing cultural norms in order to make change acceptable. It is like walking on a thin line. Negotiating with community conventions is also important for legitimizing change and in guise work towards women empowerment. Another important aspect is of protection. In case of negotiating through community conventions it helps to gain the confidence of the community and hence one is better placed to protect them. Losing the confidence of the community leadership might lead to loosing access to the community all-together. It is important to remember here that one is dealing with multiple stake-holders – the Bangladesh government on the one hand and the UNHCR on the other – who might not like very much interference. In such a scenario one always has to retain the confidence of the community. The question one always has to keep in mind, over and above everything else, is the responsibility to protect the community. Hence the perspective of refugees is crucial, it is important to understand what people want.

“Shaping Technology” for the Protection of Refugees

Marko Szilveszter MACSKOVICH

The incorporation of innovation into the humanitarian workflow, striving to find new solutions, especially from outside of the sector and to express willingness to embrace novelty is an emerging tendency in the behavior of humanitarian agencies. Solutionsthat enter through the humanitarian gateway can have minor, complementary as well as major paradigm shift causing attributes.

The innovation culture wherein the decision is being made on novel solutions has the rigorous task to ensure that the choice will serve the intended output. For technology-based solutions, especially the ones that are affecting and even defining identity, the threshold of acceptance must be set proportionally to the strictness of privacy safeguards and the purpose envisaged. Further, the understanding of the technology behind the solution to grasp its potential, its risks, limitations and life span is pivotal.

The rationale for reaching out to technology is that it has an inherent potential to expand protection space against contracting tendencies. To discover the spaces where it can deliver these outputs, refugee protection is being placed in the notion of social shaping processes where innovative ideas may enter and materialize in technological artifacts.

Only being aware of the capability of a technology to produce an output is not enough to capture its full potential. Technology needs to be understood from the outside, as much as from the inside: what are the shaping forces, how they are interconnected, how control can be employed, what are the limits, the risks and through what modalities can they be resolved and mitigated in the short- as well as in the long term. While the decision is being negotiated on the use of a particular solution, the knowledge-base and methodology of the organizational innovation culture should take note of the solution’s inherent attributes. Not just its impact but also the shaping forces of the solution,from the inside and from the outside.

These considerations are even more focal in the humanitarian context where funding, and thus room to maneuver in choices, is limited and the target population is highly sensitive to risks. Humanitarian organizations ought to endeavor for a thorough understanding of the envisaged technology’s holistic posture, especially in reference to the expected output as it rests at the core of the decision-making process. The “black-box” of technology needs to be opened and its composing elements need to be looked at with the requirement of transparency.

Space is present within the refugee protection realm to employ novel ways to positively impact the life of this particular social group. In this article I focus on how this space can be cultivated and consciously developed. It remains conscious of positive expectations generally connected to the employment of technologies, and although acknowledging the potential of benefits, it simultaneously endorses a cautious approach. Technology cannot be expected as the ultimate solution, rather a tool of complementarity. The solution it delivers – especially in the refugee context – is highly time sensitive and susceptible to all environmental variables. Technology’s deployment should be accompanied with the tool’s thorough understanding, including its potential benefits balanced with cautious expectations in light of realities in the field.

The “social shaping of technology” (SST) approach (Williams & Edge, 1996)argues that a technology to be perceived and looked at with the impetus purely on its impact and outcomes does not allow for a deep understanding of the “technology artifact”, and does not broaden the corresponding technology policy agenda. Instead of the linear, traditional approach the SST argues for the opening of the black-box of technology to make visible the socio-economic patterns embedded in the content of technology and the process of innovation(Bijker & Law, 1994; Ruth Schwartz Cowan, 1985). It implies that there is a particular process behind the shaping, design and implementation of technology, impacted by organizational, political, economic and cultural factors and not only an inner technical logic. Understanding these factors and their role and impact has a positive effect on the apprehension of the relationship between scientific excellence, technological innovation and economic and social well-being.

The argument of social shaping also implies the existence of shaping forces with the existence of a set of choices made at every stage in the generation and implementation of technology-based solutions, not just resting on purely technology attribute focused considerations but in pair with technology content influencing social factors. Choices can be made on various levels including design, systems, and trajectory of innovation processes leading to potentially different technological outcomes, ultimately impacting the implication towards society and towards a particular social group. The choices that can be made over technology and with consideration of the position of those who make these choices and their relationships with other actors, agents in the same or adjoining issue areas, create the setting for the politics of technology. Such a setting renders technology as non-neutral, subjecting it to the interest of particular actor(s) or (social) group(s) to preserve or alter social relations. Ultimately technology therewith becomes a platform for/of politics (Bruno Latour, 1988; Hård, 1993; Winner, 1978,1980).


In thecontext of forced migration, and zooming-in further on refugee protection, the agents that are exercising protection mandates are the ones who make the ultimate choices on technology. These choices are envisaged to be democratic to allow for a constructive technology assessment, involving therewith primarily the refugees – as the ultimate beneficiaries – to participate. Yet due to their“exposed” beneficiary position, the shaping and the control of the process what leads to the final choice on technology remains incomplete. (Rip, Misa, & Schot, 1995; Schot, 1992)

In this article’s scope, the technological artifact forming social processes are clustered into three categories: (1) general social processes, (2) refugee initiated processes, and (3) refugee targeted, through UNHCR, and other humanitarian agents. The interpretative sequence in each case differs. This classification takes note of the linkage between user and consumer and implies the use of the SST model. In the wave of economic dynamics and profit-oriented entrepreneurism the greater bulk of the population, across all social groups, are subject to a general socialization process through which they are able to access technological artifacts designed for the general population. These artifacts are stipulated to be accessible by its envisaged target groups.

The particular attributes of the refugee domain, such as the area covering the ultra-vulnerable refugee population, have its own dedicated social interpretative and shaping dynamics. Refugees, through the general social processes, are able to access and take advantage of the global market produced technological artifacts, such as mobile phones and the internet. To a minuscule degree they also contribute to the shaping of these products. Owing to the particularities of this – ultra-vulnerable – social group they can genuinely perceive and can also become suppliers of technological artifact to their own need. These solutions are not to be understood here as high-end products; rather solutions adapted or compiled from the general market but with the insider’s advantage to market its sub-version.


The category centre to this article is the social process that manifests between the suppliers and the refugees, with the inclusion of the humanitarian agents. The linkage that then impacts the development and control of the technological artifact creation and deployment rests on the humanitarian agents’ interpretation of the refugees’ needs, expectations. The thereby silhouetted humanitarian goals will formulate the baseline information that will define the choice and employment of the solution. The attention of this article is directed on the segment where the humanitarian agent interacts with the technology-based solution and its supplier; to what extent the SST model’s attributes are being manifested – in policy development (a technology-aware innovation policy and innovation cycle) and the understanding and choice of solution (based on an technology-aware assessment scheme).

Defining the needs of the population of concern is an initial step to embark on finding corresponding technology-based solutions. Most of the applied solutions are building on already invented formulas and being adapted to particular needs. Yet to ensure that the right mainstreamed solution is being employed or a new potential solution is being endeavored, an out-and-out apprehension is innate in reference to the interpreted value-needs/gaps of the displaced persons.

This social shaping discourse intends to direct attention to the social processes that the refugee protection domain similarly witnesses. Refugee protection practices also employ technology. Moreover, technology is even being used not just through the deployment of humanitarian actors, but by way of the general social processes the refugees are subject to. Practices of agencies and entities within the refugee domain can be also interpreted within the linear and the SST models.

This article emphasizes the need that technology-based solutions should be looked at beyond the linear perception. Proper technology-aware policies need to be developed that capture the need to understand what shapes technology, and the potential ways of how envisaged impacts can be achieved and their processes controlled. Policies are stipulated to include a scheme or mechanism that ensures such insights.

Dalit Camera: Through Untouchable Eyes

Samata Biswas

Human Rights violations and its media coverage have been under a scanner for its inconsistence reporting, and choosing to report based on market interests and interests of target audience. These interests often clash, and collide with majoritarian views and wave of the masses leaving little space for generating content regarding issues that affect the marginalised. It is at this juncture, and with this realisation, that Dalit Camera: Through Untouchable Eyesself-consciously formed itself as a platform that would enable marginalised voices to tell their own stories.

In their own words:
Dalit Camera (DC) is a YouTube Channel, through which we (largely students) cover the perspectives on/voices of Dalits, Adivasis, Bahujans and Minorities (DABM). DC has been active for the past one year. The first incident covered by DC was the desecration of an Ambedkar statue in Hyderabad. Though we did upload some videos before, this was the first time that we started taking the perspectives of different voices on an issue. Basically we were fed up with mainstream English channels that were outdoing each other on accusing DABM people. As a response to the cartelised-hegemony of the English news channels, we started taking different views, including that of Dalit activists and making it available to the public. The first issue that we dealt with at length and gave us some fame was the Osmania University beef issue. Our standpoint found resonances in many campuses across India like the English and Foreign Languages University, Osmania University, Hyderabad Central University, Jamia Millia Islamia and Jawaharlal Nehru University, where Dalit-Bahujan and Minority students rubbed shoulders for conducting beef festivals for gaining basic food rights in their respective campuses. The next issue we took up was the Ambedkar Cartoon controversy. This was soon followed by a critical discussion on Onam. The videos taken by DC in this regard played a vital role in examining the history of Onam from different DABM perspectives and forced several campuses across India to relook the way Onam was being celebrated and a hegemonically 'neutral' but violent Kerala identity was being constructed through that.

The platform of social media is extremely useful in this regard. Youtube allows one to upload any video one chooses (provided one has a camera and an internet connection. Platforms such as facebook and blogs, mailing lists related to similar concerns can then share the link on their pages and threads, whereby concerned individuals and groups can access the video. Since, there is minimal mediation and supervision, the content, no matter what, can be circulated widely and in very little time, across virtual and geographical boundaries. In contexts of forced migration, the narratives of forced migrants are hardly ever present. A case in point is Nonadanga, a displaced colony right next to Kolkata, where the conditions of living are abysmal, law and order situation deplorable. While interviewing the residents, Dalit Camera came across reports of gross misdemeanour by the police in the case of a domestic violence complaint filed by a Dalit woman against her husband. The subsequent suicide of the man led to protests in the area, which were termed “mob fury” by the mainstream media. Only through the interviews published uploaded by Dalit Camera could one truly understand the conditions of living, enabling various forms of violence and disabling the scope of protest. This is what one of the activists had to say:
After the setting up of the police camp here, there has been an increase in the number of arrack shops in the area. There were only two arrack shops before the camp was set up, but the number has risen to five now. Moreover, any organizational move made by us is squashed by the police. We do not want the police camp here.

Other incidents of caste atrocities, gender and communal atrocities also often face similar administrative and media apathy- more so when the atrocities are perpetrated by the organs of the state. At such a juncture, given the recent technological developments and the relative affordability/ availability of social media, Dalit Camera emerges as such a platform where marginalised people present their own stories, multiple points of views can speak to each other and different social movements and activists can communicate with one another.

Visit the following links for more details
http://roundtableindia.co.in/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=6999:suicide-of-uttam-mondal-and-arrest-of-shuma-mondal-the-dalit-protest-in nonadanga&catid=119&Itemid=132
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p3BLyt6z4TM

Urban Profiling of Refugee Situations in Delhi. Refugees from Myanmar, Afghanistan and Somalia and their Indian Neighbours: A Comparative Study

Ishita Dey

In 2013, Joint IDP Profiling Service, the Feinstein International Centre (Tufts University) and UNHCRconducted a study on urban refugees in Delhi. The profiling study was based on a combination of methods and was limited to refugees that concern UNHCR – refugees from Myanmar, Afghan refugees ( Hindu Sikh Afghan refugees were excluded and Somalian refugees. The profiling work was carried out to identify specific areas that needed attention to design futures programmes and advocacy work- particularly to work towards self-reliance of the refugees. Hence, the study not only focussed on the refugee groups but their Indian neighbours as well.

The study focussed on five areas :
1)Demographic and household characteristics in terms of age, ethnicity, sex, ethnicity and household consumption
2)Migration patterns
3)Livelihood opportunities
4)Human and social capital including education and other skills required
5)Access to education among refugee children

The report highlighted that though Government of India has recently allowed UNHCR registered refugees to apply for long term visas which will allow them to seek employment in formal sector, the report brings to the forefront the harassment and discrimination faced by refugee children in Government schools. The report highlights that though access to government schools is not a problem the discrimination reported by Myanmarese and Somali children in these schools need special attention. There is a need to generate awareness campaigns in neighbourhoods with refugee population and to identify schools to improve the educational environment. The report feels that the intra-community networks and cultural exchanges between refugees and Indians is one of the ways to ensure cordial relationship with local communities. Refugees from Myanmar and Somalia reported harassment from all quarters (school, landlords and locals) in their neighbourhoods and the report feels such the ties between the local and refugee community should be strengthened. The profiling report could be a useful tool for institutions working on programmes regarding strengthening livelihoods and also calls for strengthening dialogue between the local population and refugee communities.

For detailed report:-
http://www.jips.org/system/cms/attachments/605/original_Urban_Profiling_of_Refugees_Situations_in_Delhi.pdf; Accessed on 10 January 2014

Voting Rights for Tibetans in India

Shuvro Prosun Sarker

According to some newspaper reports and UNHCR India’s news update, the children of Tibetan refugees who were born in India between 1950 to 1987 will now be able to vote. The decision of the Election Commission of India came after the verdict of a Karnataka High Court Judgment in August 2013.

The petitioner of the writ petition, Tenzin C. L. Rinpochae, was born in India on 1985 and got identity certificate from the concerned Indian authority as the child of a Tibetan refugee parents. He filed an application for Indian Passport to the Regional Passport Officer at Bangalore and the application was rejected on ground that he is not an Indian Citizen. On 19.02.2013 he received an official communication regarding the denial of Indian passport to him and that decision has been taken in consultation with the Foreigners Division, Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA), Government of India. The reason behind the denial of the passport per the MHA’s opinion was that the children of Tibetan refugees cannot be automatically treated as Indian citizens unless they are granted a certificate upon application under Section 9(2) of the Indian Citizenship Act, 1955. This denial resulted as the present writ petition before the High Court of Karnataka.

The counsel for the petitioner submitted before the court that children of Tibetans who were born in India between the period of 26.01.1950 to 01.07.1987 would automatically be Indian citizens as per the Section 3(1)a of the Indian Citizenship Act, 1955. Section 3 reads as follows:

“3. Citizenship by birth:
(1) Except as provided in sub- section (2), every person born in India,-
  (a) on or after the 26th day of January, 1950 , but before the commencement of the Citizenship (Amendment) Act, 1986 (51 of 1986 );
  (b) on or after such commencement and either of whose parents is a citizen of India at the time of his birth, shall be a citizen of India by birth.]
(2) A person shall not be such a citizen by virtue of this section if at the time of his birth-
  (a) his father possesses such immunity from suits and legal process as is accorded to an envoy of a foreign sovereign power accredited to the President of India and is not a citizen of India; or
  (b) his father is an enemy alien and the birth occurs in a place then under occupation by the enemy.”

The counsel for the petitioner also placed reliance of an identical matter decided by the Delhi High Court in re Namgyal Dolkar vs. Government of India, Ministry of External Affairs. While delivering the judgment, Hon’ble Justice Bopanna observed that:
“Having noticed that decision rendered by the High Court of New Delhi, I am of the opinion that if a similar circumstance arises, certainly the petitioner would be entitled to the benefit of the conclusion reached therein inasmuch as I see no reason whatsoever to take a different view from what has been stated by the Delhi High Court.”

These two judgments and the decision of the Election Commission of India can be seen as an attempt to reconcile the issue of citizenship demand of various refugee groups present in India. However, if identical matter has risen from the Chakmas of Arunachal Pradesh and in that case no one knows what would be the executive decision, given that judicial decision would be in favor of the Chakmas. There might be another reason behind this executive decision in favor of the Tibetans that the assimilation of the Tibetans with the Indian society with full citizenship rights in the near 25 years will diminish the Free Tibet movement and thus the Indo-China relationship will get a new blossom.

Forced Migration and Images of State Failure

Priyanca Mathur Velath and Aparajita Das

While the world is reeling under the increasing burden of the Syrian refugees, there is need to draw attention to the fact that regions outside Europe also continue to face uncertainty and the fear of displacement in a recurring manner, due to reasons like civil war, genocide, ethnic conflict, riots and forced eviction. In this issue of Refugee Watch Online, weattempt to highlight incidents of forced migration that trigger flows of refugees and internally displaced persons (IDPs) in West Asia, South Asia, South East Asia and within India.

One cannot ignore Syria, which has exploded into the biggest humanitarian crisis in recent times. More than 2.2 million Syrians have fled their homeland and have taken refuge in five neighbouring countries viz., Turkey, Lebanon, Egypt, Iraq and Jordan. So the first article by Aparajita Dastalks about the Syrian crisis which remains a continuing challenge for not just aid providers but also the international community on burden sharing.From Syria we move to Pakistan in South Asia, where Portia B. Conrad seeks to address the challenges of settlement and safety of thousands of people who have been displaced due to low intensity conflict caused by government crackdown on terror groups.Then, Ashwathy Vijayan, in her article on Sri Lankan Tamils revisits the myriad unresolved issues confronting those displaced in the civil war, which continues to attract sharply polarised reactions from across the globe.

Following this Kriti Chopra recounts the perilous journeys undertaken by the statelessRohingyasto resettle in countries such as Australia, and Thailand.Closer home in India in the state of Uttar Pradesh Umakantha V. draws attention to the incidents of communal riots in Muzzafarnagar which rendered the members of a minority community homeless and left them with an uncertain future without adequate state assistance in camps.Next Priyanca Mathur Velath deliberates on the outcomes of the sudden forced eviction in the Ejipura housing colony for the economically weaker sections of the society, in the IT hub of Bangalore.

We finally conclude with a note by Paula Banerjee on A Response from the Global South: On “Negotiations of Engaged Scholarship and Equity through a Global Network of Refugee Scholars”. We look forward to your valuable comments and feedback.

The Crisis in Regime and Refugee Exodus in Syria

Aparajita Das

The United States of America (USA) andEuropean Union (EU), among other countries, have agreed to grant asylum to a fixed number of Syrian refugees. (1) This is a commendable step towards burden sharing of refugees, by countries which do not share common boundaries with Syria. The flight of more than 2.2 million people from Syria is stands marked today as one of the worst humanitarian crisis. It is estimated that this count might touch 3 million by end of 2013. The Syrian refugees face an uncertain future and their consistent outflow is causing a severe strain on host countries. As the winter sets in, well-off countries should provide more material help and safe passage to their soils.

The Regime: The civil unrest began in March 2011 with hundreds of Syrians staging protests demanding the resignation of President Basher Al Assad. The street protests soon degenerated into an internecine armed conflict, with pro-Assad and anti-Assad activists using indiscriminate force, killing and committing other human rights violations, resulting in huge flow of refugees. More than 100, 000 Syrians have been killed so far. (2)

Syria, a Sunni majority nation, was ruled by Basher’s father Hafez al Assad, an Alawite (a Shia sect), since 1970. Basher came to occupy the office of the president following the death of Hafez in 2000. Initially, Basher, unlike his father, did introduce some political reforms but that did not last long. Political arrests resumed, social gathering, media and internet began to be monitored again. (3)

The Protests: Popular protests first began in Daraa and soon spread to other parts of the country. According to a UN Human Rights Council (UNHRC) report, the strife degenerated into an “overtly sectarian” conflict, with Sunni rebel groups fighting against the Assad government. The report adds that while minorities such as Alawites, Christians, Armenians, Druze support the government, often the Sunni opposition groups have attacked these minorities. (4)

The 28 month old internal conflict got messier day by day with both government and rebels getting assistance and diplomatic support from other countries and non-state actors. Assad is using the Syrian army, Shahiba, an unofficial pro-government militia group to crush the movement. Lebanon-based Shia militant group Hezbollah is fighting for Assad. (5, 6) The main anti - Assad group is the National Coalition for Opposition and Revolutionary Forces, a coalition of different opposition parties, including Muslim Brotherhood. (7) The al-Nusrah Front, an affiliate of al-Qaeda, is the main militant group against Assad. (8)

While Iran and Russia back Assad, the US, the EU and Arab League have been pressurising Assad to step down. (9) In August 2013 Assad had allegedly used chemical weapons against the opposition, killing more than 1000 people. There were similar allegations against the rebels. (10) The UN investigators, next month confirmed the use of Sarin gas against the rebels. Following which the UN Security Council passed a resolution asking the Syrian government to dismantle all chemical weapons and Assad agreed to abide by this resolution. (11) The government has used cluster bombs, scud missiles against opposition whereas rebels have staged suicide bombings against civilians and government officials.

The Refugees: Most refuges have taken shelter in neighbouring Egypt, Lebanon, Jordan, Iraq and Turkey. Majority of them are women and children. These refugees, until they return to Syria, would compete for every basic needs, like jobs, education with the host people. Lack of basic amenities might trigger riots, which has been reported from camps in Jordan. What is alarming is that since 2013, there has been a steep spike in refugee outflow. Majority of them depend on aid for their daily survival. The presence of such high number of displaced people is causing financial drain for host countries. People in crowded camps are also vulnerable to contagious diseases. Jordan’s Zaatari city has more than 100,000 Syrian refugees. Reports from these camps indicate incidents outbreak of polio and organised crime. (12)

Some of the refugee camps, according to Amnesty International, USA, are being used to recruit militants. Such a situation poses a risk to the host nation. Zaatari camps are being used by Nusrah Front to recruit soldiers. Even among refugees there is discrimination. For instance Jordan has refused the entry of the displaced Iraqi and Palestinian refugees, who were residing in Syria.Turkey, which is backing the rebels, is housing about 516, 383 refugees. But reports suggest that there are many unregistered refugees in Istanbul and other south-eastern cities. (13)

Recently some refugees from Turkey were caught while illegally attempting to cross over to Greece. They weredetained by security forces and deported back. Such forceful return is against international and EU laws. Since March 2011, more than 20,000 people have tried to enter Greece and about 8,000 were detained on their arrival. Uninhabitable conditions in camps are likely to encourage illegal migration to better-off countries like Greece, but they might not be welcome due to different factors such as economic slowdown as in case of Greece. (14)

While Egypt has opened its borders to Syrians, it has refused the entry of Syrian refugees of Palestinian origin to seek protection under the office of the UNHCR. There are about 300,000 Syrians in Egypt now. In the beginning no visa was required to enter Egypt but when President Mohammad Morsi was ousted, restrictions on entry was imposed. The Egyptian authorities were reacting to reports that refugees were participating in pro-Morsi rallies. There are also reports that the interim government had unlawfully detained and forcefully returning some refugees, which is again violation of principle of non-refoulement. (15, 16)

Lebanon is the smallest host country with about 800,000 registered and unregistered refugees. Hosting such large size of refugees is likely to cost Lebanon about $2.6 billion, according to a World Bank estimate. (17) Hosting such high number of refugees is unsustainable unless the international community provides financial aid and shares some burden. Iraq has witnessed consistent flow of refugees from northern Syria, where rebels are trying to establish their rule. There are about 202,040 Syrians in Iraq. (18)

IDPs: As the conflict enters its third year, there are about 6.5 million internally displaced people (IDP), waiting for safe homes and other humanitarian assistance. The UNHCR on August 2013 shipped relief material to camps in Damascus and Idlib. The UNHCR and other aid agencies might not be able to provide timely help due to security reasons, making the IDPs more vulnerable to disease and other security threats. (19)

Other than the UNHCR, WHO, Caritas Lebanon, People in Need, International Medical Corps, CARE Jordan, Arab Women Organization are some of the non-governmental organisations which have been providing aid to these refugees. Western countries and some of the well-off West Asian countries should step in to rescue of these helpless Syrians. Italy has already allowed more than 4,500 Syrians, Canada has agreed to take in 1,300 Syrians, and US 2,000. Germany and Sweden have offered similar help. (20)

The UN has appealed for US $2.9 billion for helping the refugees and another US$1.4 billion would be required for IDPs. In addition to this the Lebanese and Jordanian governments have appealed for US $ 449 million and US$ 380 million, respectively. (21)

Conclusion: The western, better-off West Asian countries should be more forthcoming in aiding refugees, and also grant them permanent residencies. At present the neighbouring countries are too strained or unstable to provide safety to these helpless Syrians.

The refugee crisis is unlikely to be resolved immediately as there are no signs of Assad stepping down. The opposition might require to fight for long and sustained campaign unless international community intervenes in a decisive way. Even opposition groups are faction ridden and do not have one voice. If Assad resigns, security situation is likely to remain fragile and might not be encouraging for refugees to return.

Notes

1.Nick Cumming-Bruce, “Countries Agree to Special Quotas for Syrian Refugees” The New York Times, 1 October 2013, URL: http://www.nytimes.com/2013/10/02/world/europe/special-quotas-for-syrian-refugees.html

2.UNHCR, “Discovering the Human Faces of a Tragedy” (accessed on 12 November 2013), URL: http://data.unhcr.org/syrianrefugees/syria.php

3.Syria’s Civil War: Key Facts, Important Players, CBC News, 31 October 2013, URL: http://www.cbc.ca/news2/interactives/syria-dashboard/

4.Joe Sterling, SaadAbedine and Salma Abdelaziz, “Syrian Fight Now ‘Overtly Sectarian’, UN Says” CNN, 20 December 2012, URL: http://edition.cnn.com/2012/12/20/world/meast/syria-civil-war/

5.Asher Berman, “Criminalization of the Syrian Conflict”, Institute of War, 16 May 2012,URL: http://www.understandingwar.org/article/criminalization-syrian-conflict

6.Hezbollah’s Elite Leading the Battle in Qusayr region of Syria, YaLiban, 22 April 2013,URL: http://www.yalibnan.com/2013/04/22/hezbollahs-elite-leading-the-battle-in-qusayr-region-of-syria/

7.Syrian Opposition Groups Reach Unity Deal, USA TODAY, 11 November 2012,URL: http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/world/2012/11/11/syrian-opposition-deal/1697693/

8.Bill Roggio, “Al Nusrah Front Claims 3 More in Suicide Attacks”, Long War Journal,27 November 2012,URL:http://www.longwarjournal.org/threat-matrix/archives/2012/11/al_nusrah_front_claims_3_more.php

9.Holly Yan, “Syria Allies: Why Russia, Iran and China are Standing by the Regime”, CNN, 30 August 2013,URL: http://edition.cnn.com/2013/08/29/world/meast/syria-iran-china-russia-supporters/

10.RajiniVaidyanathan, “Obama: US cannot Ignore Syria Chemical Weapons”, BBC News, 7 September 2013,URL: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-23999066

11.Syria Civil War Facts, CNN, 31 October 2013,URL: http://edition.cnn.com/2013/08/27/world/meast/syria-civil-war-fast-facts/

12.Ashish Kumar Sen, “Syrian War Refugees Find Crowds, Crime and Contagion at Camps”, The Washington Post, 5 November 2013,URL: http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/nov/5/syrian-war-refugees-find-crowds-crime-contagion-at/?page=1

13.Stephen Sarr, “Greek Border Police Illegally Deporting Syrian Refugees”, The Irish Times, 12 November 2013, URL: http://www.irishtimes.com/news/world/europe/greek-border-police-illegally-deporting-syrian-refugees-1.1591361?page=2

14.BehzadYaghmaian, “Syrian Refugees: A Need for Global Burden Sharing”, The Globalist, 31 October 2013,URL: http://www.theglobalist.com/syrian-refugees-need-global-burden-sharing/

15.Mariam Rizk, “HRW report: Egypt detains Syrian refugees and coerces them out of the country”, Ahram Online, Monday 11 Nov 2013, URL: http://english.ahram.org.eg/NewsContent/1/64/86159/Egypt/Politics-/HRW-report-Egypt-detains-Syrian-refugees-and-coerc.aspx

16.1500 Syrian Refugees detained in Egypt, IOL News, 11 November 2013,URL: http://www.iol.co.za/news/africa/1-500-syrian-refugees-detained-in-egypt-1.1605477#.UoHESvlgdX8

17.Dominic Evans, “World Must Help Lebanon Handle Syrian Refugee Flood,” Reuters, 3 November 2013
URL: http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/11/03/us-syria-crisis-lebanon-idUSBRE9A205K20131103

18.UNHCR, “Discovering the Human Faces of a Tragedy” (accessed on 12 November 2013), URL: http://data.unhcr.org/syrianrefugees/syria.php

19.Peter Kessler, “UNHCR’s Largest Shipment of Supplies for Syrian IDPs Leaves from Dubai,” UNHCR News,15 August 2013,URL: http://www.unhcr.org/520ce47b9.html

20.Daniel Pipes, “Syria’s Refugee Problem and the West,” National Review Online, 25 September 2013,
URL: http://www.nationalreview.com/article/359411/syrias-refugee-problem-and-west-daniel-pipes

21.UNHCR, “Discovering the Human Faces of a Tragedy” (accessed on 12 November 2013),URL: http://data.unhcr.org/syrianrefugees/syria.php