publications

IX. Local Integration

In 2005 UNHCR’s Executive Committee (ExCom) adopted Conclusion 104, which called on states “to facilitate, as appropriate, the integration of refugees, including, as far as possible, through facilitating their naturalization.”171 It noted that the process of local integration comprises three distinct but inter-related dimensions: a legal dimension, an economic dimension, and a social and cultural dimension.172 If the Bhutanese refugees were allowed to locally integrate at all, there would be very few obstacles to ensuring their social and cultural integration, since they have much in common with their Nepalese hosts; not only do they speak Nepali, but they also identify closely with their hosts in terms of religion and culture. There are already a significant number of marriages between Nepalese citizens and Bhutanese refugees.173

However, Nepal government policy is firmly aimed at precluding the Bhutanese refugees from integrating in Nepal, both in legal and in economic terms. ExCom Conclusion 104 affirmed “the particular importance of the legal dimension of integration, which entails the host state granting refugees a secure legal status and a progressively wider range of rights and entitlements that are broadly commensurate with those enjoyed by its citizens and, over time, the possibility of naturalizing.”174

The situation of the Bhutanese refugees in Nepal stands in stark contrast to that envisaged by the ExCom Conclusion. Nepal is not a party to the 1951 Refugee Convention or its 1967 Protocol,175 nor has it adopted national refugee legislation. Instead, the legal status of asylum seekers and refugees in Nepal is governed by the Aliens Act supplemented by administrative directives, leaving the legal status of the Bhutanese refugees in Nepal far from secure.176 While Nepal allows the Bhutanese refugees to remain on its territory,177 it accords them few rights.

First, regardless of the fact that many Bhutanese refugees have now resided in Nepal for more than 15 years, and that a significant proportion of the Bhutanese refugee population consists of children who were born in Nepal, no provision is made for Bhutanese refugees to acquire Nepalese citizenship, leaving them politically disenfranchised.178

Second, Bhutanese refugees are denied two basic rights that are a prerequisite for economic integration: freedom of movement and the right to engage in income-generating activities. Bhutanese refugees do not enjoy freedom of movement in Nepal; instead they are confined to seven refugee camps where they face highly congested living conditions (see section IV).179 Refugees need to apply for permission from the government authorities in the camps whenever they want to leave the camps for more than a day; so-called “out passes” are issued only for a maximum of one week.180 Under article 12 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, to which Nepal is a party, everyone lawfully within the territory of a State has, within that territory, the right to liberty of movement and freedom to choose his residence.181 Exceptions to this right are allowed only on strictly necessary national security or other narrowly prescribed grounds.182 Thus the continuing use of the camps and the restrictions on the Bhutanese refugees’ freedom of movement could only be justified if it were shown to be clearly in the interest of refugee security or overall national security.183 

Not only are Bhutanese refugees denied freedom of movement, but they are also prohibited from engaging in income-generating activities, even within the confines of the refugee camps.184 By being denied the right to work, the refugees have been forced into a situation where they are entirely dependent on the support of the international community for their survival.185 With the passage of time, this support system has come under increasing strains, with budgetary constraints necessitating cuts in the provision of essential services, including food, fuel, and medical care. These cutbacks, and the heavy toll they exact on the refugees, show that a policy that denies refugees the means to achieve self-sufficiency cannot be sustained.

That Nepal has taken no meaningful steps in more than 15 years to integrate Bhutanese refugees is due, in part, to its relations with Bhutan. Nepal sees the refugees as fundamentally a Bhutanese responsibility and is unwilling to suggest by naturalizing them that Bhutan was in any way justified in denying them citizenship and expelling them in the first place. While Nepal might be willing ultimately to naturalize some residual population of refugees who are unable or unwilling to repatriate or resettle, it is unlikely to take the first step.




171 UNHCR, ExCom Conclusion 104 (LVI), “Conclusion on Local Integration,” October 7, 2005, http://www.unhcr.org/excom/EXCOM/4357a91b2.html (accessed January 30, 2007), para. (d).

172 Ibid., para. (k).

173 Conflicts between the Bhutanese refugees and their host communities do occur, but these are invariably caused by the competition for scarce resources, such as fire wood, rather than by intolerance, discrimination, or xenophobia. See also Section IV.

174 UNHCR, ExCom Conclusion 104, para. (l).

175 Convention relating to the Status of Refugees, 189 U.N.T.S. 150, entered into force April 22, 1954; Protocol Relating to the Status of Refugees, 606 U.N.T.S. 267, entered into force October 4, 1967.

176 Four different legal regimes are in place for different groups of refugees and asylum seekers, depending on their nationality and their time of arrival in Nepal: Tibetans who arrived before January 1, 1990; Tibetans who arrived after January 1, 1990; Bhutanese refugees and asylum seekers; and refugees and asylum seekers from other countries. UNHCR, “Country Operations Plan 2006 – Nepal,” September 1, 2005, http://www.unhcr.org/cgi-bin/texis/vtx/rsd/rsddocview.pdf?tbl=RSDCOI&id=4332c56e2 (accessed January 26, 2007), p. 1.

177 Not everyone who enters Nepal to seek refuge is permitted to stay in Nepal; in particular, Tibetans who arrived after January 1, 1990, are not permitted to remain in the country. For those Tibetan arrivals who are determined to be of concern to UNHCR, onward travel to third countries is arranged by UNHCR. UNHCR, “Country Operations Plan 2006 – Nepal,” p. 1.

178 A new Citizenship Act, which came into force on November 26, 2006, has relaxed the requirements for Nepali citizenship in some respects. The Act’s main aim is to grant citizenship to the estimated 3-4 million people belonging to the communities of the Terai, Nepal’s southern belt, in time for the elections for a new constituent assembly scheduled for June 2007. These people, also known as Madhesis, have traditionally been marginalized and have in the past been denied Nepali citizenship.  Under the Act, anyone who has permanently resided in Nepal since April 13, 1990, and is eligible for Nepalese citizenship, provided three Nepali citizens who reside in the applicant’s area supply statements on the applicant’s behalf. “Country Gets New Citizenship Act,” Himalayan Times (Kathmandu), November 26, 2006.The cut-off date of April 13, 1990, excludes the Bhutanese refugees, the first of whom arrived in Nepal in late 1990.

Bhutanese refugees also cannot satisfy the requirements for acquiring citizenship through naturalization under the 2006 Act. These include residence in Nepal for at least 15 years, employment in Nepal, and citizenship of a country that has a legal arrangement or practice for granting citizenship of that country to a national of Nepal (see UN Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights in Nepal, “OHCHR Comments on Citizenship Bill,” November 23, 2006, p. 2). Bhutanese refugees are unable to meet the Citizenship Act’s employment requirement, since they are in fact prohibited from working in Nepal (see below).

The only Bhutanese refugees who are eligible for Nepalese citizenship under the 2006 Act are Bhutanese women who are married to a Nepali husband (Citizenship Act 2006, s. 5(1)), and children born to a Nepalese father and a Bhutanese mother (Citizenship Act 2006, s. 4(1)). A child born to a Nepalese mother and a foreign father is entitled to Nepalese citizenship only if the child has permanent residence in Nepal, and has not acquired the citizenship of a foreign country on the basis of his father’s citizenship (Citizenship Act 2006, s. 4(1)).

179 The restrictions on refugees’ freedom of movement are contained in the “Camp Rules,” an administrative directive of the government of Nepal. See UNHCR Country Operations Plan 2006 – Nepal (September 1, 2005), http://www.unhcr.org/cgi-bin/texis/vtx/rsd/rsddocview.pdf?tbl=RSDCOI&id=4332c56e2 (accessed January 26, 2007), p. 1.

180 Each camp has a camp supervisor appointed by the government who is authorized to issue out passes to refugees, allowing refugees to leave the camps for a specific purpose and for a specific period of time. In practice, the authorities often turn a blind eye to refugees leaving the camps without first applying for permission. At times, however, the provision is strictly enforced, most recently after refugee protests had been organized outside the camps. “Bhutanese Refugees Virtually Imprisoned In Camps,” Himalayan Times Online (Kathmandu), August 2, 2006, http://www.thehimalayantimes.com (accessed January 31, 2007).

181 International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), adopted December 16, 1966, G.A. Res. 2200A (XXI), 21 U.N. GAOR Supp. (No. 16) at 52, U.N. Doc. A/6316 (1966), 999 U.N.T.S. 171, entered into force March 23, 1976, art 12(1). Nepal acceded to the ICCPR on May 14, 1991.

182 Under ICCPR, art. 12(3), restrictions on the right to freedom of movement are allowed if they are necessary to protect national security, public order, public health or morals, or the rights and freedoms of others, and only to the extent that any such restrictions are consistent with the other rights recognized in the ICCPR.

183 UNHCR Executive Committee, Note on International Protection, ExCom 52nd Session, A/AC.96/951, September 13, 2001, A/AC.96/951, http://www.unhcr.org/excom/EXCOM/3bb1c6cc4.pdf (accessed January 31, 2007), para. 44. At the time of a large refugee influx, refugees’ confinement to camps may be necessary as a compromise solution between refugee needs and host state concerns. However, any such compromise should be temporary. More than 16 years after the first Bhutanese refugees arrived in Nepal, the restrictions on their freedom of movement can clearly no longer be justified on these grounds. UNHCR, Operational Protection in Camps and Settlements (Geneva: UNHCR, Division of International Protection Services, 2006), http://www.unhcr.org/publ/PUBL/448d6c122.pdf (accessed January 31, 2007), p. 51.

184 The prohibition on engagement in gainful activities is also contained in the “Camp Rules.” See UNHCR Country Operations Plan 2006 – Nepal (September 1, 2005), http://www.unhcr.org/cgi-bin/texis/vtx/rsd/rsddocview.pdf?tbl=RSDCOI&id=4332c56e2 (accessed January 26, 2007), p. 1. A number of small income-generating projects are operated in the camps, where refugees produce goods that are then bought by one of the relief agencies for redistribution in the camps. For example, the Bhutanese Refugee Women Forum (BRWF) runs a small program for the production of jute mats, which are bought by Caritas for use in the camp schools. The BRWF also has projects for the production of chalk for use in the schools in the camps, and for the production of sanitary cloth that is bought by the Association of Medical Doctors of Asia (AMDA) and then distributed to all women of reproductive age in the camps. However, other projects have had to be shut down after the district authorities received complaints from Nepalese traders who found they could no longer sell their products to the relief agencies, as happened for example with a soap-making project run by the BRWF. Human Rights Watch interview with UNHCR staff (Field Officer – Protection, Community Services Officer, Assistant Protection Officer), UNHCR sub-office, Damak, November 10, 2006; and Human Rights Watch interview (B5/K14), Beldangi II-extension refugee camp, November 11, 2006.

185 Under article 6 of the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR), everyone has the right to the opportunity to gain his living by work which he freely chooses or accepts. Under article 6 state parties are bound to take appropriate steps to safeguard this right to work. International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR), adopted December 16, 1966, G.A. Res. 2200A (XXI), 21 U.N. GAOR Supp. (No. 16) at 49, U.N. Doc. A/6316 (1966), 993 U.N.T.S. 3, entered into force January 3, 1976, art 6(1). Under article 2(3) of the ICESCR, developing countries, with due regard to human rights and their national economy, may determine to what extent they would guarantee the economic rights recognized in the present Covenant to non-nationals.