V. HUMAN RIGHTS ABUSES AND THE FORCED ROUND-UPS OF REFUGEES

In late 1997, with little or no notice, the Tanzanian government ordered the army to conduct a round-up of all foreigners "unlawfully" residing in Tanzania. The government's stated reason for the round-ups was security and the desire to protect Tanzanians and refugees living close to the Burundian border. The action followed allegations by the Burundian president that Tanzania was allowing Burundian rebel activity in the Tanzanian villages along the Tanzanian-Burundi border. The Tanzanian government also put forward the argument that if these foreigners were bona fide refugees that they should be held in refugee camps funded by the international community regardless of their length of stay in Tanzania, the level of integration in the Tanzanian village communities, or humanitarian factors.29

From September 1997 through early 1998, in the midst of unusually heavy rains, refugees and migrants were systematically forced from their homes without adequate notice, separated from their families and belongings, and taken to transit centers where a cursory determination process was conducted by the Tanzanian authorities to determine their fate. The round-ups were largely targeted at Ngara, Kibondo, and Kasulu districts close to the border, although a number of foreigners elsewhere in the country were also affected. The refugees and migrants apprehended by the army were given the option of being confined to the UNHCR-run refugee camps or returned to their countries of origin regardless of when or why they came to Tanzania. Although Congolese and Rwandans were also affected, the bulk of those rounded up were Burundians. Figures on the numbers eventually rounded up varies fromgovernment estimates of 67,000 to U.N. numbers of over 35,000.30 UNHCR estimates that of the approximately 18,000 who were brought to the refugee camps, roughly half were Burundian.31

For the most part, those rounded up were sent to the refugee camps,32 although some 2,000 Rwandans were forcibly returned to Rwanda, many of whom had resided in Tanzania for decades. There were also instances of intimidation leading to spontaneous (but not entirely voluntary) return of Congolese refugees and migrants from lakeside villages south of Kigoma. According to UNHCR, Burundians were not forced back to Burundi in keeping with the Tanzanian Ministry of Home Affairs determination that allows all Burundians in Tanzania refugee status on a prima facie basis due to the unrest in Burundi.33 Tanzanian citizens who were mistakenly picked up by the army and refugees who had become naturalized citizens or who possessed documentation indicating that they had started the process to obtain citizenship were eventually allowed to return to their homes.

One U.N. agency survey of 306 families rounded-up in Ngara district found that 25 percent had lived in Tanzania for over twenty years, 60 percent had been living in Tanzania for over ten years, and 12 percent had lived in Tanzania for over seven years. Of this group, 96 percent were subsistence farmers in villages and most possessed some land, a house, and livestock. Eighty-two percent of those interviewed were between twenty to fifty years old, and 18 percent were above fifty years of age. Sixty-nine percent of the families interviewed had been separated during the round-ups and as a result were headed by women at the time of the interviews. Among the 306 families interviewed, there were 724 children in total. No birth certificates were available to prove birth dates or places, but, through interviews with the parents it was determined that 67 percent of these children were born in Tanzania and 31 percent in Burundi. Eighteen percent of the children born in Tanzania had one Tanzanian parent. Except for 1 percent who were able to sell their property before leaving the villages, 36 percent had their property destroyed due to theft or abandonment, 21 percent left their property in the custody of friends or relatives, and 28 percent did not know what had happened to their property.34

Human Rights Watch interviewed refugees in the camps who said they had been rounded up from Bitale, Bugamba, Bugarama, Busamandeki, Bubango, Gihinga, Ilagara, Kagunga, Kaparamsenga, Karago, Kaseke, Kirando, Malenga, Mkabogo, Mugaraganza, Mwakizega, Rugunga, Rusaba, and Sonoca villages. Human Rights Watch found that those most detrimentally affected both psychologically and economically by the round-ups were the old caseload Burundians.

A young refugee man who had lived in Bugamba, Tanzania since he fled Burundi in 1993 recounted his experience:

The commissioner of Kigoma, Yusuf Makamba, came and told Burundian refugees to leave or go to the camps. He said if we went on our own we would not be chased. Some refugees went immediately where they were told. But those who did not were chased from their homes by the army. The army came at 8:00 a.m. on October 27, 1997 and the sungu sungu pointed out all the Burundians to them. A boat that carried about 200 people from Kagunga was provided by Caritas, and we were brought to Kigoma. The army was using sticks to hit us while they ordered us to get on the boat quickly. I saw them beat one woman and her sick sister on the back of the legs shouting at them to walk faster. We were taken to Kigoma where we were given biscuits and water and questioned about who we were, where we came from and how we traveled to Tanzania. The next day we were brought to Nduta camp where I have been since then. As long as the Tanzanians do not return me to Burundi, I am satisfied to live in the camp.35

Another refugee man who has lived in Tanzania since 1972 stated:

The army came and told us to pack what we could carry. Some people were driven by the army to Kibirizi and others walked the nine kilometers. Families were separated. One old woman tried to say something, but they would not listen. They would only say "All Burundians must go to the camps." It took us five to six hours to reach Kibirizi where we found other people who had been rounded up as well as new refugee arrivals. We were questioned about when we arrived in Tanzania and then were told to wait. Slept on the ground and used water taps there. After one week told we were being taken to Nduta camp. I had been separated from my wife and children. After living in Nduta for two months, I asked for permission to see my relatives outside and I was refused. I don't know when I will see my family again.36

Rusaba is a settlement close to the Burundian border that houses both Tanzanians and old caseload Burundians. According to the Tanzanian government it was necessary to uproot the Burundians who had been allocated settlements in Rusaba `B' village because there had been reports of rebel activity in this settlement and if anything happened from the Burundian side, the most affected would be Tanzanians who occupy Rusaba `A.' A Burundian woman who lived in Rusaba recounted her experience:

On November 28, 1997, the army called a meeting and told us that all refugees had to leave in one week because we were too close to the border. At first we did not know what to think. We had been living here since 1972. We have always paid taxes. Some of us are married to Tanzanians. The next week the army came into our houses and told us to go to the road. We were not allowed to pack anything. I came only with the clothes I was wearing. We were forced to leave everything behind and to walk with our small children for twelve kilometers. We begged them to give us three more days. The army said no. They began to take us to the customs house at Manyovu. As we were leaving, our Tanzanian neighbors were looting our homes and taking our things. Some of the small children, pregnant women, and old people were given transport by the army. We were made to pay for the petrol for one army car and a lorry from Matiaso Hospital that were used to transport people. The rest of us were made to walk from Rusaba B to Manyovu. I was separated from my family because my children were at school when the army came. At the customs house we were given water and biscuits by the army and they took our names and information and then transported us to Nduta camp. There were about fifty to eighty people per lorry.37

Violations of Constitutional and International Law

The Authority of the State and all its instruments must direct all their activities and policies toward the task of ensuring: (a) individual and all other human rights are respected and cherished; . . . (f) that human dignity is preserved and maintained in accordance with the International [sic] Declaration on Human Rights; (g) that the Government and all its instruments of the people offer equal opportunities for all citizens, men and women, regardless of color, tribe, religion, or creed; (h) that all forms of exploitation, intimidation, discrimination, corruption, persecution and favoritism are eliminated from the country.

-Tanzanian Constitution, Sections 2(9)(1)(a),(f),(g) and (h)

The round-ups and confinement of Burundians and other foreigners-strictly on the basis of their national origin-have occurred in violation of the Tanzanian constitution and international law. Human rights violations perpetrated against refugees by the Tanzanian government due to these round-ups include nationality-based discrimination, harsh treatment at the hands of the army, the lack of due process protections, the separation of refugee families, the loss of property, and confinement in the refugee camps.

The Tanzanian Constitution and international and regional human rights and refugee law guarantee respect of human rights, equal protection under the law, and due process rights. Tanzania has ratified several major international treaties guaranteeing these rights, including the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, the African Charter on Human and Peoples' Rights, the Convention on the Elimination of Discrimination of Women, the Convention on the Rights of the Child, the 1951 U.N. Convention relating to the Status of Refugees, and the OAU Convention Governing the Specific Aspects of Refugee Problems in Africa. As a party to these major international human rights and refugee conventions, Tanzania has an obligation to ensure that its national legislation and practices are in conformity.

Within Tanzania, the Tanzanian Constitution is the supreme law of the land and all other national laws must comply with its provisions. The relevant laws governing foreigners in Tanzania are the 1995 Immigration Act and the 1995 Citizenship Act. The Immigration Act regulates the entry into and presence within Tanzania of persons who are non-citizens, and the Citizenship Act determines citizenship eligibility and procedures for naturalization. Refugee affairs are regulated by the Ministry of Home Affairs pursuant to the 1998 Refugees Act which recently replaced the 1965 Refugee Control Act.

Since the manner in which the round-ups were carried out violated several Tanzanian Constitutional provisions and international law, they cannot therefore be justified under the Immigration or Citizenship Acts. The government's interpretation of the Citizenship and Immigration Laws that permitted the round-up and confinement of old-caseload Burundians without due process of law is over broad-both with respect to the Tanzanian Constitution and to international human rights and refugee instruments. Furthermore, Burundians in Tanzania receive refugee status on a prima facie basis, thus nullifying any argument that these people were in the country "unlawfully."

Under international human rights law, forced relocations and confinements of civilian populations on the basis of nationality are a serious violation of human rights and refugee law that may only be justified by a direct, severe and imminent threat to national security or to the health and safety of the nation, or to those to be relocated. In no eventare racial, religious or ethnic classifications permissible in selecting the population to be relocated. Any government proposing to relocate forcibly civilian populations must publicly disclose this fact and before commencing the relocation seek a hearing before an impartial judicial body. Those from affected communities should be able to participate fully in any such hearing by presenting their own evidence and examining evidence presented by the government in support of such a relocation. In carrying out any forced relocation, a government should minimize harm to those civilians who are affected by, at a minimum: providing as much notice as is reasonably possible; providing reasonable transportation to carry out the evacuation; providing assistance in moving personal possessions; providing temporary housing; and aiding families in staying together during the relocation and after. Relocated individuals are entitled to compensation for their losses. When the emergency that prompted the forced relocation has ended, those who were relocated are entitled to return to the areas from which they were removed and to receive government assistance in rebuilding their homes and communities.

While the Tanzanian government has argued that its actions were motivated by security concerns, under international and Tanzanian law, the derogation of rights can only occur under specific, limited and extra-ordinary conditions. In this case, there was no indication that all (or even most) Burundians were acting in a way to harm the nation itself or that if the government had not undertaken the round-ups that a full-scale war with Burundi would have erupted. Moreover, the government did not seek alternate means to protect national security in the border area that complied with human rights obligations.

Discrimination on the Basis of Nationality

All people are equal before the law, and have the right, without discrimination of any kind, to be protected and to be accorded equal justice before the law. It is forbidden for any law enacted by any Authority in the Union Republic to impose any condition which is of a discriminatory nature or which is obviously to one's disadvantage. . . . It is forbidden for anyone to be discriminated against by anyone or any authority which is exercising its powers under any law or in carrying out any duty or function of the Authority of the State or the Party and its instruments . . . the word `discrimination' means meeting the needs, rights or other requirements of different people based on their nationality, tribe, their origin, their political affiliation, color, religion or their lifestyles in such a way that certain people are made or considered inferior or subjected to restrictions or conditions of restrictions whereas other people are treated differently. . ." (Emphasis added.)

-Tanzanian Constitution, Sections 3(13)(1),(2),(4) and (5).

The round-ups were clearly directed at foreigners on the basis of their nationality, rather than on specific actions by foreign individuals to endanger Tanzania's security. The nationality-based round-ups of refugees are in contravention of the Tanzanian constitutional and international legal prohibition against discrimination on the basis of nationality. Acting on a suspicion that some Burundians living in Tanzania might be engaged in rebel activity, the Tanzanian government forced all Burundians on the basis of their nationality, and not on their actions, into refugee camps with no time limit and no recourse to contest their confinement. Section (3)(13)(5) of the Tanzanian Constitution specifically prohibits discrimination on the basis of nationality or origin, as does the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (Articles 2 and 26), the African Charter on Human and Peoples' Rights (Article 2), the 1951 U.N. Convention relating to the Status of Refugees (Article 3), and the OAU Convention Governing the Specific Aspects of Refugee Problems in Africa (Article 4).

Abusive Treatment

Everyone deserves the respect and protection of his life, his individual right and that of his family and household, also respect and protection of his abode and his personal communication . . . . In order to maintain human justice and equality, human dignity will be protected in all areas and matters of investigation, and matters involving crime and in all other activities where an individual is under protective custody.

-Tanzanian Constitution, Sections 3(16)(1) and 3(13)(6)(d)

The round-ups were conducted by the army assisted by sungu sungu (local security militia)38 and local government authorities or residents who helped the army identify and apprehend the foreigners in the villages. Those identified as foreigners were ordered to leave the villages immediately, and some were verbally threatened and intimidated into leaving if they tried to ask for some time to collect their belongings or to locate family members. The operation was led by Brig. Gen. Benjamin Msuya, who had commandeered the forced return of the Rwandan refugees in December 1996. A number of international humanitarian workers noted that Brig. Gen. Msuya and the Tanzanian army exhibited high levels of professionalism in following their orders, and that for the most part there was minimal abuse given the scale and time constraints of the operation. Accounts from the refugees and Tanzanians who were subjected to the army and sungu sungu are much less glowing and depict a more abusive exercise of military power.
Under international law, the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights guarantees that "no one shall be subjected to torture or to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment" (Article 7). Similarly, the African Charter on Human and Peoples' Rights guarantees that "every individual shall have the right to the respect of the dignity inherent in a human being" (Article 5).

During the round-ups, the army and sungu sungu were reportedly hasty and rough in most places. They shouted and ordered people to leave on threat of force, but generally did not use physical coercion. In the Kigoma area, however, refugees consistently reported that the army had used sticks and fists in order to herd them quickly on the boats used to transport them to Kigoma town. Reports of mistreatment, bribery, and theft at the hands of the sungu sungu were more common. Refugees were often shocked at how quickly their neighbors of many years turned on them, identifying them to the army and then looting the abandoned homes. However, in a few villages, the local authorities and villagers protected their Burundian neighbors by refusing to cooperate with the army who eventually left because they could not identify the refugees. In other places, the army took bribes from refugees and Tanzanians alike in order to pass them over.

Once people were rounded-up, the army transported them or ordered them to walk to the nearest transit center. At the transit centers, they were screened by Ministry of Home Affairs officials (with UNHCR observers present) in a cursory procedure that lacked fundamental due process protections, before being sent to the refugee camps.39 In some cases, the distances to the transit centers were long and refugee families with small children were forced to drag their tired children along under threat from their army escorts. Transport from the transit centers to the refugee camps was provided by UNHCR, but in protest of the round-ups, it refused to provide transport from the villages to the transit centers. Many refugees were brought to the camps with only the clothes they were wearing and nothing more.

In Ngara district, a group of refugees who had lived in Tanzania for between thirteen to fifteen years in Gihinga spoke of their experience:

The army came on a weekend with no advance notice. At first, the women were separated from the men. We were brought to Rulenge by the army and sungu sungu. The local militias pointed out the refugees. People who gave the army money were left alone. They taxed people according to what they could afford. The sungu sungu wrote down the names. They were made to leave all their property, and the army took the best things. The sungu sungu took the next best, and the rest were looted. At first we were taken to the police post, then to Mbuba transit center. We were made to walk there. We walked all day from 7:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m. Even the children. Women were dragging their children, and the army wouldn't let them stop. We were made to walk fast all the way. Children who were slow were hit by the army and pushed. Women were hit on their legs with batons to hurry them up, and children were smacked by hand. We were told by the army we should go back to our home because "[Burundian president Pierre] Buyoya is calling you." At Mbuba transit center they took our papers and threw them away. They put an identity bracelet on everyone and spent no more than five minutes a person. There were ten lorries of people a day. People stayed from three to seven days eating only biscuits and water. Then we were taken to Lukole camp. When we got here we had nothing except what we were wearing and other refugees came and gave us things.40

A refugee man who came from Burundi in 1993 and was living in Busamandeki, Tanzania recounted his experience:

I was told by the army to go to Burundi or the camps in January 1998. I was made to walk four hours to the reception center at Bukiliro. Then I was taken by vehicle to the Mtendeli camp. All the 1993 Burundian refugees who had lived at Busamandeki were not giving the Tanzanian government any trouble. We had our shambas [farms] where we farmed. The army just came and told us all to go, even the pregnant women. Some people took two days to walk to Bukiliro, where we were made to stay for one day while they interviewed us. Then we were taken to Mugunzu for two days, then brought to Kanembwa and Mtendeli camps. When they took us from our houses, the army hit us and took our things. Everything was taken. We were not allowed to go home or even take anything with us. The army had sticks. They would not even let me call my children.41

A refugee man who had been living in Bubango said:

The army came early in the morning. We had only heard an announcement once on the radio telling us to go to the camps. We thought that it just meant the new refugees not those of us who have been here for twenty-five years. In the past, new refugees have been taken to the camps. This time they did not differentiate. The army came and then asked Tanzanians to verify that we were refugees. Only three families who hid in the forest were left. We were beaten by the army to hurry us up. Then we were taken to Bubango primary school before being taken to Kibirizi to be processed. For two weeks we were there before being transferred to the camp.42

In the midst of the disarray, some local authorities exploited the opportunity to falsely point out fellow Tanzanians who were not in good standing or disliked. In their haste, the army often collared a number of Tanzanians who were eventually allowed to return to their homes after a few weeks, but not without being confined to the refugee camps for a few weeks and suffering some economic loss due to their absence. One such Tanzanian from Malenga spoke of his experience during the round-ups:

The army came in January 1998 looking for the 1993 and 1972 Burundian refugees. They told the Tanzanians in the area to seek them out. The army went from house to house asking for money. They were accompanied by the Ballosi [the local headman]. We were also asked if we were members of the ruling party and were asked to show our CCM [ruling political party Chama cha Mapenduzi] cards. The army came on a Sunday, and they wouldn't even allow people to go to church. Actually they closed all the churches. They were going to arrest me, but I paid them Tshs.2,000 [approximately U.S.$3.00]. They said it was not enough. As the army was going around they were hitting the men with sticks on the back and buttocks. I was taken to an office where about forty men, women and children were being kept. We spent the night there being guarded by the army and sungu sungu. In the office people who protested were hit. I saw the army hurt two men, an old man and a younger man, because they didn't have any money to give. I was kept six days and then transported to Kanembwa refugee camp. I kept trying to tell them that I was Tanzanian, but they would not listen to me. I stayed one week at the reception center waiting for a decision from the DC [district commissioner]. Four people interviewed me, and then I was put into a refugee camp for two and a half weeks before somebody finally listened and then I was released. When I got home I found that my wheat and maize had not been weeded and some of it had spoiled.43

One local government official who spoke to Human Rights Watch on the condition of anonymity verified corruption on the part of the army and local government officials and the fact that Tanzanians were also arrested:

The army and government officials were corrupt. On January 21, 1998, the army came and told me they wanted to meet me. They asked me to get them a list of all the Burundian refugees (both 1972 and 1993) living in our area. We collected these names from the village registry and then called all the Burundians in for interviews. Some Burundians who gave the Tshs.10,000 [approximately U.S.$15.00] were allowed to go free by the army. The army then took people to an assembly point where they had to walk to. It was a shop that was turned into a prison. The refugees slept there. They asked each one, "What year did you come from Burundi?" The recent refugees from Burundi who could not reply in Kiswahili were taken immediately to the transit centers and then the refugee camps. The army also went from house to house, even Tanzanian houses, asking for money. If you gave them money they left you alone. In Nyakayensi about twenty Tanzanians were arrested with the refugees, and some were released the following day. I know of one Tanzanian woman who was arrested because her father (a Tanzanian) had lived across the Burundi border at one point. 44

Lack of Due Process Protections

When the rights and well-being of anyone need to be ascertained . . . then that person will have the right to be given a chance to be listened to in full, also the right to appeal or to receive other legal considerations arising from the decisions of the court or any other relevant instrument. It is forbidden for anyone who has been accused of a criminal offence to be considered guilty until it has been proved that the person is guilty of the offence. (Emphasis added.)

-Tanzanian Constitution, Section 3(13)(6)(a), (b)

The entire operation abrogated due process protections that are guaranteed under Tanzanian and international law-from the manner in which refugees were dragged from their homes with little or no notice to the cursory questioning by Ministry of Home Affairs officials only to determine nationality before refugees were confined to the camps. References to due process rights occur throughout international law, including in the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (Articles 9 and 14), the African Charter on Human and Peoples' Rights (Article 7), andthe 1951 U.N. Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees (Article 3). These provisions ensure universal rights to be presumed innocent, to be protected from arbitrary state action and to be heard-rights that are not limited to Tanzanian citizens alone. To be consistent with these constitutional and international provisions, then, Burundians and other foreigners should have been provided with adequate notice and information, given adequate time and facilities to contest the government's action, given an opportunity to appeal any act that violates fundamental human rights, and compensated for their losses.

Given that many of these refugees had lived in Tanzanian villages for years and were settled and readily identifiable by the authorities, serious questions are raised as to the necessity of carrying out such an operation at all, and why it was conducted in such haste without any due process protections. The Tanzanian government also did not consult or notify UNHCR before embarking on the round-ups so that UNHCR could adequately prepare for the large influx of refugees into the camps nor did the government attempt more humane efforts to bring refugees to the camps. Some refugees stated that they were willing to live in the camps and would have complied with the government order willingly had they had been given adequate time and assistance to move their families and belongings. The operation was also commenced during unusually heavy rains and a food crisis, further inflicting unnecessary hardship to the refugees. Long-time refugee residents who had acquired belongings over the years lost their lifetime's belongings with no recourse for reparations.

Additionally, once at the transit centers, refugees were subjected by the government to a screening exercise of individuals, only to ensure that no lawful immigrants or Tanzanian citizens were rounded up. The authorities claimed that the procedure was consistent with the immigration and citizenship laws of the country with regard to the treatment of "unlawful immigrants." This argument is particularly weak with regard to Burundians who all receive prima facie refugee status in Tanzania. This means that the Tanzanian government has recognized that the conflict in Burundi is sufficiently acute to warrant that all Burundians in Tanzania be automatically granted refugee status unless they have contravened the conditions for receiving international refugee protection.71

The screening process was conducted by the ad hoc screening committee of the Ministry of Home Affairs composed of: the Ministry of Home Affairs camp commander/representative; the army; a district security officer; and a representative from the district commissioner's office. The screening was perfunctory, often taking no more than a few minutes, and it determined nothing more than whether a person was a national or a non-national, when they had arrived in Tanzania, and where they were living. The screening was done to determine who had documents and what type of documents pertained to their residence status in Tanzania. Most of the old caseload refugees had old UNHCR/government identity cards that had been issued by UNHCR in 1987. The screening process did not cover individual situations about when and why a family had came to Tanzania and the degree of their integration into Tanzanian villages. To their credit, the committees allowed refugees who had commenced the citizenship application process to return to their homes. However, no attempt was made to determine which refugees posed a risk to security and which did not: the stated goal of the whole endeavor.

UNHCR unsuccessfully attempted to persuade the Tanzanian authorities to treat the old caseload refugees differently and to allow them to return to the settlements. One refugee woman who had been living in Mugaraganza with her children since 1972 described the process she witnessed:

In October 1997, they announced once on the radio that people would have to go the camps. Some people began to move to Kibirizi. When I heard the radio, I couldn't move. I had small children. Some of my relatives went. I waited there wondering what the government would do to us. On October 21, 1997, I sawthe soldiers come to Mugaraganza. I had packed some things. We were ordered to walk to the marketplace. They assembled us all at the marketplace, and we were kept there without any water or food all day. Five lorries came, and some were put into the lorries. Others had to wait and were held until the following day. We were all taken to Kibirizi. I got there at about 7:00 p.m. and was given some food to cook by the U.N. I slept there. It was chaos. There were many people there: some were old 1972 refugees, others were Congolese who were being repatriated, and others were new arrivals from Burundi. We were asked where we come from. All the refugees who had arrived recently in Tanzania were taken to the camps immediately. Those of us who were 1972 refugees were told to wait for a government decision. A U.N. person told the Tanzanians that the U.N. would not accept the 1972 refugees. The immigration people were checking to see if people had registered. They also asked us who had applied to be a citizen. Some of us had forms, others didn't. We asked if we could go home to get the forms and were told that we could sort it out in the camp. In some cases, the children who were born in Tanzania were left by the army, but their parents were taken to the camps. One woman left two children at home and one in school.72

Another old caseload refugee said:

About seventy army men came to Rusaba on the morning of November 25, 1998 and commanded everyone to go to the road. There were two cars: an army lorry and a Matiaso Anglican Hospital lorry. One lorry was loaded with belongings and the other carried people. The army made people contribute for the fuel. People paid because they were scared. Others did not have any money. Those who could not pay were forced to walk to the receiving center. If they tried to refuse they were threatened by the army, but no force was used. We were taken to Manyovu center. People were exhausted, because some had walked under army escort for twelve hours. At Manyovu there was a shed with plastic sheeting, and we were given biscuits and water but no other food. They asked us if we were 1972 refugees and pulled us aside. We stayed there overnight under guard of the army. The newer refugees were taken immediately to the camps. We thought that maybe a mistake had been made and that we would be allowed to go back to our homes. But after two days they took us to the camps as well.73

The work of the screening committee was made all the more difficult by the fact that few refugees and Tanzanian citizens in that part of the country have identity documents and that many refugees who were born or lived in Tanzania for many years were well-integrated into the community and speak fluent Kiswahili. The lack of any required national identity documentation for Tanzanian citizens means that most rural Tanzanians do not possess any written means of proving their nationality. As a result, the army and the screening committee had no way to determine nationality other than the word of the local authorities or residents. In some places the army demanded that people show membership cards to Chama cha Mapenduzi, the ruling party, as a sign of citizenship. This demand belies a fundamental lack of understanding of the political liberalization process by members of the national army given that Tanzania is now a multiparty state and that a Tanzanian may still be a citizen without being a member of the ruling political party.

The truly ad hoc nature of the screening process was underscored by the fact that some Tanzanian citizens who were unwittingly swept up in the round-ups were determined by their fellow Tanzanians on the screening committee to be foreigners and thus were consigned to the refugee camps. One Tanzanian interviewed by Human Rights Watch was rounded up and accused of being Burundian. He was taken to Kinongo (the assembly point) and held there for five days. Despite his protests, the screening committee found him to be Burundian and he was sent to Kanembwa refugee camp where he remained for several weeks before being allowed to leave. He noted that he saw thirty-nine other Tanzanians at Kinongo who had also been mistakenly found to be foreigners.74

Another weakness of the screening committees was the lack of an appeals process, a fundamental due process protection. Even in cases of ambiguity, people were sent to the camps and told to sort out their problem in the camp without being allowed to return to their homes to obtain documentation or other verification. The camps' inaccessibility to legal counsel only compounds the injury to Burundians' due process rights, since they may not know or be able to access what legal recourses are available to them. The right to counsel even for those not accused of any crime is fundamental, and it applies regardless of one's immigration status.

Separation of Families

Everyone deserves the respect and protection of his life, his individual right and that of his family and household, also respect and protection of his abode and his personal communication.

-Tanzanian Constitution, Section 3(16)(1)

One of the most damaging effects of the round-ups was the separation of refugee families. The Tanzanian authorities conducted the operation without any regard to keeping couples together or with their children. International human rights law emphasizes the sanctity of the home and family. The International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights recognizes that "[t]he family is the natural and fundamental group unit of society and is entitled to protection by society and the State" (Article 23) and that "no one shall be subjected to arbitrary or unlawful interference with his . . . family" (Article 17). Article 10 of the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights and Article 18 of the African Charter on Human and Peoples' Rights contain similar provisions.

While many of the families divided during the round-ups have been reunited, some continue to remain apart with no knowledge of, when, or if, they will see each other again. An informal survey conducted by Human Rights Watch in June 1998 among the refugees interviewed found that about one-third had been separated from immediate family members. Human Rights Watch interviewed countless refugees who remain divided from one or another family member since the round-ups. One fifty-six-year-old refugee woman who is married with three children ages seventeen, twenty, and twenty-one years had lived at Rusaba since 1972. She has been separated from her family since November 1997. She said:

When the army came, my husband was away. We were ordered to go the camps. The children were told to walk, and the older people told that they would be taken by vehicle to Manyovu. I was told to wait for the vehicles. But then the vehicle never came, so eventually I decided to walk to Manyovu because I was so worried about the children. For two weeks I could not locate our children. I was getting desperate worrying about them. Finally I was reunited in Nduta camp with my children who are now here with me. My husband is still out there. I have cancer and am being treated. I worry what is going to happen to my children and if I will ever see my husband again.75

Another thirty-one-year-old refugee woman from Rusaba has also been separated from her husband and two of her seven children, ages eleven and sixteen years old, since the round-ups:

I came to Tanzania in 1972 when I was five years old and lived at Rusaba on the land that we were given by the Tanzanian government. I have never done anything against the government. I am now living in the refugee camp with five of my children, ages fourteen, nine, five and three years, and four months. The army came on November 28, 1997 and told people to stand by the road because we were going to be taken to the camps. At the time I was pregnant, and my youngest child was sick. We had packed some of our belongings, but I could not carry a lot because I was pregnant and holding my youngest child. I was given a lift to Manyovu with two of my children by a nurse who was helping people. My husband was left withthe other four children, and we thought he would be arriving shortly. The next day, two more of my children were brought to Manyovu. My child was extremely sick by then after spending the night outside. The next day twelve vehicles took people to Nduta camp. I tried to protest that I was waiting for my husband and two children and that I did not have my family together. The army told me that they did not care if the family was complete or missing one or two people and that they did not want people staying here any more. I arrived at Nduta camp on November 29, 1997. I got a letter from my husband, who is still outside with two of our children. He has no means to come here, and even if I got permission I cannot leave because I cannot manage with all my children, who are too small.76

Refugee families who have been separated are still trying to find ways to get back together again. At Mbuba transit center, Human Rights Watch interviewed a fourteen-year-old Burundian girl from Bugarama who had come with her father and sister in search of her mother and another sibling who had been rounded up:

My family came to Tanzania five years ago from Burundi. I lived with my family in Bugarama. In April 1998, my mother and sister were taken while my father was working on the farm and we were at school. When we came home that day we found the house had been robbed by our neighbors and then burned down. In June 1998, my father decided that we would walk to Mbuba transit center to find my mother. We walked for twelve hours. Now we are waiting here until they can find my mother and send us to her in the refugee camps.77

Most of the refugees interviewed are extremely distraught at being divided from their loved ones, particularly since the break-up may be permanent depending on how long the Tanzanian government confines them to the camps. The round-ups have had a detrimental impact on the well-being of children. Many children were separated from one parent. Some of these children were born and brought up in Tanzania, and some are half Tanzanian. In many families, some of the children accompanied one parent to the camps while other siblings stayed in the village with their other parent. Some children with a Tanzanian father were living in the camp with their Burundian mother because they were infants or their fathers were not able to take care of them. Parents separated from their children were particularly worried about how their children were faring on their own. Most children affected by the round-ups did not understand fully why they were reduced to rationed meals, semi-permanent housing structures, and scarce fuel in the camps. Additionally, some of the children who used to be in school were kept at home by the parents in the camps in order to collect firewood a distance from the camp area.

Mixed Marriages: Tanzanian Citizens Living in Refugee Camps

Spouses and children of mixed marriages to Tanzanian nationals were also affected in the round-ups. Human Rights Watch found that in cases where Burundian women were married to Tanzanian men, they were generally allowed to return home. However, Tanzanian women married to Burundian men did not receive equal consideration. In violation of international law, the Tanzanian 1995 Citizenship Act discriminates on the basis of sex.78 Under Tanzanian law, Tanzanian men can apply for their foreign wives to become citizens, but Tanzanian women married to foreign men cannot obtain citizenship for their husbands.79 As a result, several Tanzanian women married to Burundian men were forced to the refugee camps in order to keep their families together.

While some mixed Burundian-Tanzanian couples have opted to live apart since the round-ups, Human Rights Watch interviewed three Tanzanian women who had decided to live in the refugee camps with their Burundian husbands because they did not want to divide their families. They were saddened and bitter about the manner in which the government has treated Burundians. One Tanzanian woman said "I begged the army not to take my family to the camps, asking what would happen to me alone. The army told me that I could go back to my parents."80 A twenty-nine-year-old Tanzanian woman born in Mwanza had lived with her Burundian husband in Rusaba B since 1985. She was rounded up on November 25, 1997, with her husband and three children ages twelve, ten, and five years old. She said:

The army told us to pack their things and wait by the roadside. They told us that we had to walk to Manyovu unless they contributed to the fuel for the vehicle. We did not want to give the army our money, so we started walking, each carrying as much as we could and with a bundle of their belongings on our bicycle. At Manyovu we were given flour and beans and bought some firewood to cook dinner. Two days later we were taken to Nduta. We were never questioned by anyone because we had arrived a bit late. Those who arrived late were not interviewed by anyone. We were just brought to the camps.81

Another Tanzanian woman in the camp was interviewed by the screening committee at the transit center:

I told them I was a Tanzanian. They asked me if I had relatives I could go to. I said yes, a brother. They did not say anything. Then when people were put on the lorry to go to the camps I got in with my husband. I am not happy here, but what can I do? It has been difficult, and now I am pregnant. My husband applied for citizenship, but we have not heard anything. We also made this request to [U.N. High Commissioner for Refugees] Mrs. Ogata when she visited.82

Another Tanzanian woman born in Manyovu, twenty-six years old, and with a one-year-old child is living in Nduta camp. Her parents born in Muninira and she grew up there. In 1994, she married a Burundian (who had come to Tanzania when he was eight years old) and has lived in Rusaba settlement since her marriage. She said:

When the army came I tried to tell them that this was a Tanzanian family. But they told me that if you are married to a Burundian he must go to the camps. Again at Manyovu I told them, "I am a Tanzanian." But they would not let my husband go. What is our choice? You can only follow your husband even if you don't want to go to the camps. Or you can go to your parents' house. But what woman wants to break her marriage like that?83

Loss of Property

Everyone deserves the respect and protection of his life, his individual right and that of his family and household, also respect and protection of his abode and his personal communication.

-Tanzanian Constitution, Section 3(16)(1)

Most uprooted Burundians, particularly the old caseload refugees, have suffered significant losses of their belongings with no reparations. Whether a person is a legal or illegal resident, a foreigner or a national, his immigration status does not warrant the arbitrary deprivation of his property. The 1951 U.N. Convention relating to the Status of Refugees (Article 13) states that refugees should be accorded the same treatment as nationals "as regardsthe acquisition of movable and immovable property and other rights pertaining thereto, and to leases and other contracts relating to movable and immovable property. The African Charter on Human and Peoples' Rights (Article 14) reiterates the same position and stresses that the right to property " . . . may only be encroached upon in the interest of public need or in the general interest of the community and in accordance with the provisions of the law."

Some refugees know that their property was destroyed or stolen by local residents. Others were able to leave their property in the hands of relatives or friends. Yet others have no idea what has happened to their belongings. In some villages, houses belonging to Burundians were demolished by villagers for firewood. Most banana and cassava crops cultivated by the Burundians were stolen, abandoned, or overrun by weeds. One old caseload refugee said:

The army came on November 15, 1998 at 9:00 a.m. They told us to go and wait at the road. We were told: you are all refugees. You are required to be in the refugees camps by November 22. We showed them all our receipts contributing to development funds and the ruling party, and old refugee identity cards. They just said that we should go to the camp where we would be dealt with. The army allowed us to take whatever we could carry. But it is hard to carry more than one or two bundles of things. We begged for more time to sell some things and organize ourselves. They gave us three more days. Even then, we were not able to sell everything. We had cows and goats. Others were businessmen who had shops. They lost a lot of money. People started selling things at one-fifth the price of their value. People had good homes. Even our crops of beans, maize, nuts, bananas, and coffee were worth a lot of money. Everyone was wondering what to do. We lost everything. Now we are sleeping under plastic sheeting in semi-permanent houses. Look at our children. Since coming to the refugee camps they are suffering from anaemia, malaria, and scabies.84

Another Burundian couple who had lived in Tanzania since 1972 and who were separated from three of their six children (ages fifteen, seventeen, and twenty years old) in November 1997 know from their children remaining in Rusaba that they have lost everything. The fifty-year-old wife explained:

I had left the village to visit people when the army found me. I tried to explain to the soldiers that the family was not together, but they would not listen. They took half my family, and the rest remain in the house. But there is nothing there anymore. When the children came back, they found the house ransacked and everything, including the doors of the house, looted. The children have sent word to say they are suffering and asked for help.85

A UNICEF officer who witnessed the round-ups noted:

It was sad to see these people. Many of them had spent some twenty years here and had amassed a substantial number of belongings. It was sad to see them trying to save what little they could and carry it with them to the refugee camps before their things were taken by their neighbors.86

In some villages, the abandoned property has been protected by the local authorities. Some villages have placed the plots under the village authority. Others have left them abandoned but untouched, unsure what to do until they receive some direction from the government.

Confinement in the Refugee Camps

Everyone has the right to be free and to live as a free person.

-Tanzanian Constitution, Section 3(15)(1)

When the Burundian refugees who were rounded up first came to the camps, they were forbidden from leaving the camp area. They were denied even the standard temporary permission granted to other refugees to leave the camp site to meet relatives or to travel to the local market. In June 1998, refugees who had been rounded up, particularly the old caseload refugees, said that their requests to leave the camp in order to locate their spouses or children or to return to their home areas to sell their possessions were repeatedly been denied by camp commanders.

International refugee and human rights law guarantees freedom of movement to refugees without discrimination. Article 26 of the 1951 U.N. Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees states that host governments "shall accord to refugees lawfully in its territory the right to choose their place of residence and to move freely within its territory, subject to any regulations applicable to aliens generally in the same circumstances." Article 12 of both the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and the African Charter on Human and Peoples' Rights guarantees the same right.87 Refugees need not be housed in camps to be accorded full recognition of their rights as refugees. The U.N. General Assembly has reiterated that as a priority, states should seek durable solutions for refugees including through assimilation and local integration.88

Human Rights Watch found generally that more recently arrived Burundian refugees who had come to Tanzania since 1993 had not made requests to leave the camp and were more accepting of their fate in the refugee camps. Most of the recently arrived refugees had not acquired nor lost many possessions since the round-ups. The old caseload refugees, however, were a different matter. Without fail, these long-time residents of Tanzania remain traumatized by the round-ups and extremely troubled by the loss of their family members and a lifetime's worth of belongings, expressing resignation, despair, depression, frustration, indignation, and anger at the way they have been mistreated by the Tanzanian government. Refugees interviewed by Human Rights Watch spoke about the fact that they have now become idle dependants of inadequate food rations, prohibited from leaving the camps to find family members or settle their affairs. Due to the crowded conditions in the refugee camps, many have fallen sick since arriving there and their children have contracted anemia, malaria, or scabies. Refugees made comments to Human Rights Watch such as: "What pains me most is to go from a place where I could feed myself and my family to become a beggar." "I have gone from being productive to a life of waiting." "My children outside the camp are sending messages to say that they are living like orphans." "When we ask to seek our children, we are told to wait by the camp commander." Refugees also expressed shock at the Tanzanian government's assumption that they were all involved in rebel activity and posed a security threat to Tanzania: "No guns were found when we were rounded up" said one refugee. "We built a good life, we never did anything to our Tanzanian brothers, and now look how we live under one piece of plastic sheeting. What have we done to deserve this?" Another said: "When I left Burundi I was a small child of seven or eight years old. I have grown up here and now have seven children of my own, all born in Tanzania. If I went to Burundi, I would not even know where to go. We do not support the rebels. There are many of us like this."89

By early 1999, the Tanzanian authorities became less strict, and many of the refugees rounded up left the camps without permission and returned to their homes. However, law-abiding refugees who are following the government's instructions remain confined in the camps. However, those refugees who slipped out the camps and returned home live with the fear and uncertainty that they may be rounded up again in the future. Additionally, the round-ups destroyed communities. For instance, in Rusaba, where some old caseload refugees have returned to their settlement, they find that their land is now occupied by their Tanzanian neighbors, their lifetime's belongings have been stolen, and community institutions such as the local school remain closed. Some former Rusaba residents opt to live elsewhere because they believe that living on a refugee settlement makes them a visible and potential target for future government action against refugees.

The Response of UNHCR

When the forced round-ups began, UNHCR had not been notified and was initially unprepared to assist and receive the refugees being sent to the camps. At first, UNHCR played an active role in protesting the Tanzanian government's policy. According to one UNHCR document:

UNHCR conveyed to the Tanzanian government its regret that refugees who had been integrated for so many years and settled by the authorities in villages were affected by the operation. UNHCR also requested a clear distinction should be made between illegal immigrants and refugees who had already been integrated. UNHCR also expressed concern about the conduct of the operation with regard to family separation and the loss of property for many refugees.90

In an attempt to dissuade the Tanzanian government from forcibly moving the old caseload refugees, UNHCR initially took the position that it was not responsible for providing humanitarian relief for these self-sufficient refugees. UNHCR argued that only newcomers should be put in the UNHCR-run camps and advocated for the old caseload refugees to be restored to their settlements. Both UNHCR staff and refugees who witnessed the interactions at the transit centers attest to the vigorous advocacy role that UNHCR played in attempting to overturn the decision with regard to the old caseload. For two weeks, UNHCR argued that the old caseload should not be subjected to the round-ups. Ultimately, however, the Tanzanian government prevailed.

Recalling its unfortunate cooperative role with the forced return of the Rwandan refugees in 1996, UNHCR found itself in a difficult position. It was faced with the dilemma of either taking a principled stand by not cooperating with the Tanzanian operation in any way, which would result in the refugees enduring extra hardship, or providing humanitarian assistance (particularly with regard to shelter, food, and transport) to the refugees and risk accusations of collaboration with an operation that violated human rights. UNHCR also did not want to oppose the flow to the camps too categorically, because it was better than the alternative of deportation. Ultimately, it took the middle road. UNHCR refused to provide vehicles or fuel to transport refugees during the round-ups but did provide food and shelter and took part in the screening process with the authorities on cases of refugees with long stays or links to Tanzanian citizens. In order not to be seen to be affiliated with the army round-ups in any way, UNHCR refused to provide transport to bring the refugees to the transit centers, but it did transport refugees to the camps after they were interviewed in the transit centers. But as one UNHCR staff member wryly noted: "I wonder in fact if the refugees noticed that they were brought in one type of vehicle to the transit center and taken by another vehicle to the camps."91 UNHCR also attempted to reunify families. Given the difficult choices, UNHCR played as constructive a role as they could have under the circumstances and struck the fine balance between protesting the injustice while doing something to alleviate the hardship. A few months later when High Commissioner Sadako Ogata visited the Tanzanian camps in February 1998, this issue was raised and she even met with refugees who had been rounded up.

Since the round-ups, UNHCR's action on this issue has been slow and intermittent. By the time Human Rights Watch visited the refugee camps in June 1998, UNHCR attention to this issue had notably waned.92 This appeared to be due to a number of factors, not least that there are too few protection officers assigned in the camps and a number of pressing issues. More disturbingly, Human Rights Watch also found a general attitude of passivity and inaction to human rights concerns prevalent among some of the UNHCR staff in Tanzania. A frequent response to our concerns about the forced round-ups and other human rights issues was: "At least they are not being refouled (forcibly returned)." At the prompting of the U.N. Children's Fund (UNICEF), UNHCR has sought to reunite separated families in the camps. UNHCR has also, with some success, been calling on the government to restore the old caseload refugees from Rusaba settlement to their homes.

UNHCR has commissioned two internal reports on the subject. The first of these, prompted again by UNICEF, was a joint UNICEF/UNHCR study commissioned from a Tanzanian lawyer in 1997, analyzed the legality of the round-ups. The findings of this report were submitted to the Tanzanian government in late 1998 and as of June 1999 had received no response.93 The legal analysis of this report, however, is narrow and stops short of examining the government's actions under the Tanzanian constitution, mistakenly concluding that the government's actions were legal under national law because they did not contravene the Immigration and Citizenship Acts of the country. The Tanzanian government's actions in fact contravene provisions of the constitution and cannot therefore be justified under national legislation. The second report, completed in early 1999, focused on the status of the round-up refugees in the camps in 1999. In February and March 1999, UNHCR retained two law students from the University of Dar-es-Salaam as legal interns to visit the camps and identify the refugees who had been rounded up in order to interview them about their situation, to determine what they wanted, and to initiate the process for those eligible for citizenship. Continued follow-up work is necessary to ensure that the recommendations of both reports are implemented as much as possible.

UNHCR has been more proactive in trying to ensure the civilian character of the camps. The agency has assisted the Tanzanian government with a security package to enhance security in and around camps with vehicles, communications equipment, incentives for police, and meetings with refugee leaders on need to respect the camps' civilian nature. UNHCR does not have a twenty-four hour presence in the Tanzanian camps and relies on the Tanzanian police, which it funds to maintain posts on site. These police, in turn, are kept informed by refugees who are paid a small stipend to serve as security guardians. For the most part, the Tanzanian police are professional. UNHCR conducted two joint security missions with the Tanzanian government in May and December 1997. Both missions concluded that there was no military activity within the camp but that voluntary recruitment did occur. Both missions recommended a greater police presence in and around the camps.

In addressing the need for a greater police presence in the camps, UNHCR has provided funding and is working to strengthen communication between the police and UNHCR. When U.N. High Commissioner for Refugees Sadako Ogata visited the camps in February 1998, she pledged that UNHCR would deploy some 500 additional police to ensure a twenty-four-hour police presence in the camps, to monitor unauthorized movements, patrol roads, and maintain order.94 By the end of 1998, only 278 police (including ten women) had been deployed to the camps, making an average of twenty police per camp. Some police had also been deployed to Mwisa, a prison-type facilitythat holds some forty combatants. UNHCR also provided funding for police facilities to be built at Lugufu camp and Kasulu.95

Since the round-ups were ostensibly conducted in order to address security concerns, information and action to augment security in the border area are critical to refugee protection work in Tanzania. Yet, Human Rights Watch found that some UNHCR staff members in Tanzania are not aware of and do not follow current events in Burundi or security developments in Tanzania that could impact detrimentally on their refugee protection work. Furthermore, according to one senior UNHCR staff member, security information between UNHCR offices in the Great Lakes region is currently not collected consistently or shared among UNHCR country offices.96 In 1999, the Swedish government pledged to second staff to UNHCR for two police liaison officers, in order to improve information sharing and communication between UNHCR and the police, a development that should address the above stated concern.97

38 The sungu sungu are neighborhood civil defense forces organized at the village level to assist the police and combat crime. They are selected by the community and represent them at local government meetings. They receive no formal training from the police or army and are not officially armed, although some possess home-made weapons. Human Rights Watch interview, Tanzanian relief worker, Kasulu, May 27, 1998.

39 For example, in the Kigoma area, people were sent to the National Milling Corporation (a warehouse that had previously been prepared to receive new refugees) and Manyovu customs house. In Kibondo, people were sent to Kibirizi. In Ngara, people were sent to Mbuba transit center (a center that regularly processes new refugee arrivals).

40 Human Rights Watch interview with refugees, Lukole camp, July 5, 1998.

41 Human Rights Watch interview with refugee, Mtendeli camp, June 2, 1998.

42 Human Rights Watch interview, refugee, Mtendeli camp, June 2, 1998.

43 Human Rights Watch interview, Tanzanian rounded-up (name and location withheld on request), July 2, 1998.

44 Human Rights Watch interview with local ruling party official (name and location withheld on request), June 1, 1998.

71 For example, Article 1(f) of the 1951 U.N. Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees states that refugee status cannot be claimed by anyone who has:(a) committed a crime against peace, a war crime, or a crime against humanity, as defined in the international instruments; (b) committed a serious non-political crime outside the country of refuge prior to his admission to that country as a refugee; ( c) been guilty of acts contrary to the purposes and principles of the U.N.

72 Human Rights Watch interview, refugee, Nduta camp, May 31, 1998.

73 Human Rights Watch interview, refugee, Nduta camp, June 1, 1998.

74 Human Rights Watch interview, Tanzanian citizen (name and location withheld on request), June 1, 1998.

75 Human Rights Watch interview, refugee, Nduta camp, June 1, 1998.

76 Human Rights Watch interview, refugee, Nduta camp, June 1, 1998.

77 Human Rights Watch interview, refugee child, Mbuba transit center, June 6, 1998.

78 Discrimination on the basis of sex is prohibited by the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (Article 2), the African Charter on Human and Peoples' Rights (Articles 2 and 18), and the Convention for the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW).

79 Under section 11(1) of the 1995 Citizenship Act, only "a woman who is married to a citizen of the United Republic [of Tanzania] shall at any time during the lifetime of the husband be entitled, upon making an application in the prescribed form, to be naturalized as a citizen of the United Republic" on condition that she officially renounces her previous citizenship.

80 Human Rights Watch interview, refugee, Nduta camp, June 1, 1998.

81 Human Rights Watch interview, refugee, Nduta camp, May 31, 1998.

82 Human Rights Watch interview, refugee, Nduta camp, May 31, 1998.

83 Human Rights Watch interview, refugee, Nduta camp, May 31, 1998.

84 Human Rights Watch interview, refugee, Nduta camp, June 1, 1998.

85 Human Rights Watch interview, refugee, Nduta camp, June 1, 1998.

86 Human Rights Watch interview, UNICEF staff member, Kigoma, May 25, 1998.

87 The right to freedom of movement is only derogable when necessary to protect national security or public order and, as noted, can only occur under very specific, limited and extraordinary conditions. The fact that other Burundian refugees not subjected to the round-ups are allowed temporary permission to leave the camp site is strong proof that national security is not at stake.

88 U.N. General Assembly Res. 1166 (XII), November 26, 1957, para. 2, reaffirming the basic approach set out in para. 1 of the UNHCR Statute.

89 Human Rights Watch interviews, old caseload refugees, Nduta camp, May 31, 1998.

90 UNHCR, "Update on UNHCR's Refugee Programme in Tanzania," 4^th Quarter of 1997, p.3.

91 Human Rights Watch interview, UNHCR staff member, Kibondo, July 3, 1998.

92 See also, Women's Commission for Refugee Women and Children, "A Child's Nightmare: Burundian Children at Risk," New York, May 1998, p. 13 which stated in its report: "The views privately shared by officials from other humanitarian agencies were generally critical of UNHCR's handling of the situation. `UNHCR backed down on this round-up,' one commented. `They didn't raise a stink,' another remarked, adding that the Tanzanian government `got UNHCR to do a lot of their work' by transporting and caring for the tens of thousands of rounded up Burundians."

93 U.N. Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA), "U.N. Consolidated Inter-Agency Appeal for the United Republic of Tanzania: January-December 1999," December 7, 1998, p. 6 available at http://wwwnotes.reliefweb.int.

94 John Nyaga, "UNHCR to Train Tanzanian Police to Patrol Refugee Camps," Agence France Press, February 17, 1998.

95 Human Rights Watch telephone interview, UNHCR staff member, Dar-es-Salaam, April 22, 1999.

96 Human Rights Watch interview, UNHCR staff member, Geneva, May 12, 1998.

97 Human Rights Watch interview, UNHCR Tanzania staff member, Nairobi, May 5, 1999.