Backgrounders

<<previous  | index  |  next>>

IV. Protection Issues for Urban Refugees

In July 2003 the Thai government announced plans to move the Burmese refugees recognized by UNHCR currently living in Bangkok and other urban areas to refugee camps at the border. The government’s tightening of restrictions on urban refugees was portrayed as a “harmonization policy,” in which all asylum seekers in Thailand would be sheltered together and treated the same. While it is now less certain that the current caseload of urban refugees will be relocated to border camps pending resettlement processing, both UNHCR and the Thai government have made it clear that any new asylum seekers from Burma will not be allowed to live outside of the refugee camps.52

In addition, Thai officials have clearly indicated that the proposal to confine all Burmese to refugee camps aims not only to remove refugees from the cities, but also to curtail some refugees’ political activities and their criticism of the Burmese government. Foreign Ministry spokesman Sihasak Phuangketkeow said in July 2003: “They are not supposed to be able to engage in political activities that would affect relations with other countries. They are here as guests.”53

Explaining the decision to contain or deport Burmese migrants and urban refugees, Prime Minister Thaksin said: “They must stay in their places. They must be controlled. … They live here and give birth to a lot of children. They shot our students. They bring diseases long gone from our country back to us, including tuberculosis and elephantiasis. They sell drugs and rob and kill our people.”54

Impacts of the Move to the Camps

Refugee relief organizations, human rights groups, as well as many Burmese refugees themselves have expressed strong concerns about the proposed move of the urban refugees to the border camps. Forced relocation of the urban refugees to the camps could raise protection and security issues for both the existing camp population as well as newly transferred refugees because of inter-ethnic tensions and longstanding conflicts between various opposition and pro-government ethnic groups and factions, who are affiliated with different political and military groups in Burma.

Burmese urban refugees interviewed by Human Rights Watch expressed anxiety about rumors of the pending relocation to the camps but lacked clear information about what is planned. Their primary concern was personal security from violent attacks from other factions on the border or from cross-border raids and abductions. The refugees also were worried about their futures, should they be moved to the camps. Would they have access to resettlement opportunities abroad? Would reunification with family members in Burma or elsewhere in Thailand be possible once in the camp? Would there be pressure on them to repatriate to Burma?

The refugees also expressed concerns about being cut off from contact with the outside world in closed camps that are under the control of different political and military organizations. “The camps are not directly protected by UNHCR,” said a Burmese refugee in Bangkok. “If we have no communication, and if the Thai military treat us very brutally, for example raping someone, how can we communicate with the outside world and get help? If the camp is near areas controlled by the military factions, it can be very dangerous. For most of the refugees—if we live near armed groups—we don’t have guns, what can we do?”55

Many of the refugees worried that the move would trap them in a detention-like environment, disqualify them for resettlement abroad, or end educational opportunities and medical care available to them in Bangkok. Some fear that it will be difficult to exercise their fundamental rights to freedom of expression and association in the camps, where it will be hard to publicly continue their campaign for democracy and reform in Burma.

Profile: Karen Former Combatant

Most of the camps are controlled by different factions of the KNU. Since I had a conflict with a KNU faction, if I enter the camp I will be killed.

—Former KNU soldier living as a refugee in Bangkok with his wife and five childrena

“M”—a heavyset man with a prosthetic leg—was a former combatant with the KNU. He fears running into former enemies from both the KNU and its splinter group, the DKBA, if forced to return to a camp in the border region. One person he fears is a former commander, who beat M severely when he resisted orders for teachers to become ammunition porters. The commander is still a high profile figure. “He’s still on the border, crossing back and forth into the camps,” said M.

In 2001 M—who lost his leg to a landmine in 1997 and suffers from diabetes and high blood pressure—was sent directly from the jungle in Burma to Bangkok by friends, after surviving a foiled assassination attempt. “A high official of the KNU was killed by a landmine planted by a DKBA guy, who had actually planned to kill me,” he said.

While he is concerned about his safety in the camps, like most urban refugees he is also very anxious living in Bangkok, where he worries about being picked up by police on the street and immediately deported.

I live in constant fear in Bangkok. We always worry about arrest and lock ourselves in the room. When the children go out I don’t let them talk to other people. Once two police came to our room and checked our documents—they left after they saw our documents. Our neighbors, local Thais, often threaten to turn us in.

M is adamant, however, that his life would be put in danger if sent to the camps. “I’m handicapped—I can’t go to the border. I’ll run into conflict with the DKBA faction’s troops.” In addition, he says that KNU soldiers are scornful of former combatants who have applied for asylum as “political refugees.” He is part of an association in Bangkok of Karen refugees working to convince other groups that Karen who have become refugees have not abandoned the political struggle, and also to advocate for third-country resettlement. “KNU members think if you become a refugee you are a ‘deserter refugee,’” he said. “I want to convince people we are political refugees.”

Asked about his thoughts about going to the camps, he said:

We couldn’t stay in Burma or along the border so we came to Bangkok. If we are sent to the camp, we have many questions. What kind of security will they provide; what provisions will be made for my family. My children were born in the jungle. Is there any plan for our future, especially education, and for our security? We are unwilling to go unless we know exactly where we’re going, and how security is going to be provided.

Aside from general concerns about his family’s safety and livelihood, M feels he will be personally targeted again for assassination if he returns to the border.

Most of the camps are controlled by different factions of the KNU. Since I had a conflict with a KNU faction, if I enter the camp I will be killed. I had personal and ideological conflicts with the KNU…. I have a different opinion about what a “refugee” is than the KNU group. So I’ll have a problem with KNU if go to the camp. When the Karen revolution started the main leaders were from the Delta region [south of Rangoon]. When we got to the border, there was a split: those who wanted to struggle to the end and never surrender, and the present KNU, which wants negotiations with the SPDC government. The two groups can’t live together—we will be in danger.



a Human Rights Watch interview with disabled Karen man, 44, Bangkok, November 8, 2003. A former KNU combatant, he and his family have lived in Bangkok since 2001, where they have been recognized as refugees by UNHCR.


In addition, refugees in the camps have severely restricted access to information and the international press corps. The Thaksin administration has restricted access for foreign journalists to the refugee camps, concerned that “negative” media reports damage relations with Rangoon. In July 2002, the National Security Council declared: “From now on, foreign journalists will be banned from visiting camps or controlled areas as they are likely to report only on negative aspects of official work or inaccurate and unconfirmed reports.”56 The situation in Tham Hin refugee camp is a case in point, a Thai refugee lawyer said:

One person got in trouble because he had a mobile phone. It’s difficult to send out letters. They keep a close eye on all activity. Right now if you visit Tham Hin camp you need special permission to go to Section 4 [where many of the activists are]. Media aren’t allowed in.57

At the same time, living as a “displaced person” in Thailand, which does not officially recognize refugees, is an extremely perilous situation, whether in Bangkok or the refugee camps. UNHCR has stated that it believes that “protection against refoulement provided in the camps is more substantial than the precarious protection situation in urban areas, where … all Burmese are considered to be illegal migrants under Thai immigration law and therefore face the threat of arrest and deportation, irrespective of whether or not they have been recognized as refugees/ POCs by UNHCR.”58

Suspension of Refugee Status Determination

The proposed move of urban refugees to camps is taking place in the context of Thailand’s departure from its longstanding humanitarian stance towards Burmese refugees. Over the years there has been a push and pull between the government, UNHCR, and human rights organizations over Thai policy towards Burmese refugees, in particular over who is a refugee, where persons in need of protection should be sheltered, and who provides services. The Thai government and its factionalized security services have periodically launched efforts to confine the increasingly vocal and visible Burmese refugee population in Bangkok to designated camps and “safe areas,” often engaging in high publicity “push-backs” and then quietly allowing Burmese refugees and migrants to return.59

The Thai government did not allow UNHCR to have an official role in registering Burmese exiles living outside of the refugee camps until 1989, when the forced return of hundreds of Burmese students caused an international outcry. But it wasn’t until 1998 that the government authorized UNHCR to establish three permanent field offices along the border at Mae Sot, Mae Hong Son, and Kanchanaburi to provide international protection to the refugees. UNHCR has no role in determining admission to the camps or administering or providing humanitarian assistance.

In June 2003, after a number of Burmese recognized by UNHCR were arrested while demonstrating in Bangkok,60 relations between the Thai government and UNHCR reached the lowest point in years. The government charged that UNHCR had infringed on Thai sovereignty by granting refugee status to Burmese exiles without informing the government about the decisions or the names and addresses of the POCs.61 “It turns out that now the UNHCR has sovereignty over Thailand because by issuing a piece of paper these people can live in Thailand legally wherever they want. Where is our sovereignty?” Thaksin asked at the time.62 Thaksin also expressed irritation that recognized refugees were allowed to travel freely within Thailand.63 In an interview on Thai radio on June 30, Thaksin said:

The UNHCR is required to work together with Thai authorities in issuing cards permitting people who flee war or fighting in their homeland to take refuge in Thailand. Secondly, such refugees must be confined to a specific area. They must not be allowed to roam freely without any control.64

UNHCR initially responded to the charges by the government by saying that it was mandated to screen asylum seekers and grant refugee status because Thailand was not a signatory to the 1951 Convention. In the absence of national legislation or a state procedure in Thailand, UNHCR asserted that it had been empowered by the international community for decades to carry out Refugee Status Determinations in Thailand.65 But under pressure from the Thai government, which at least implicitly threatened to cease all cooperation with UNHCR, UNHCR changed its position, pledging its full cooperation with the new policy to move the urban refugees to the camps, except for exceptional cases of individuals with special protection needs.66

In July 2003, UNHCR entered into negotiations with Thai government to facilitate the relocation of the urban refugees and the handover of refugee admissions procedures to the Thai government once the move was completed. UNHCR agreed to financially support the government in moving the refugees to the border and provided the government with the names, addresses, and copies of the protection certificates of the urban refugees.67 As of July 2003, this consisted of approximately 1,500 recognized refugees and 1,600 asylum seekers with protection letters from UNHCR. By December, UNHCR had registered roughly 2,000 refugees and 2,000 asylum seekers.

As the numbers continued to rise, at the end of 2003 the Thai government insisted that UNHCR stop accepting new claims for asylum by Burmese. On January 6, 2004, UNHCR announced that it had suspended its RSD activities for new asylum seekers from Burma, effective January 1. While the Thai government authorized UNHCR in February 2004 to begin to “register” new applicants for asylum, there continues to be no impartial and proper screening and admission mechanisms in place to determine the claims of new asylum seekers.

With the closure of the Provincial Admissions Boards, there is also no procedure for admission into the camps. As a result, there is currently no way in which a Burmese asylum seeker can have his or her claim determined in Thailand and receive international protection.

Moreover, in light of the new migration policies and increased deportations, there is a real risk that Burmese asylum seekers, as well as recognized refugees, will be forcibly returned to Burma and face arrest, interrogation, imprisonment, and other forms of persecution for their political activities or former affiliation with opposition factions.

Security Issues for Refugees in Bangkok

There are compelling reasons for refugees and asylum seekers to choose to live in Bangkok or other urban centers. Some gravitate towards Bangkok because there are more jobs in the city. Others come for access to education, medical care, and the anonymity that a city can provide to those with protection concerns. Still others, including some ethnic minority people, are drawn to Bangkok because of security threats from across the border or human rights abuses in the camps from within their own communities or Thai security officials.

Yet life is usually difficult for Burmese refugees in Bangkok and other urban areas. Most find it difficult to make ends meet on monthly stipends of 2,000 baht ($50) per adult. A disabled former Karen National Union (KNU) combatant living in Bangkok with his wife and five young children said:

I can’t think about the future because in the present we have many problems—the security of my family; plus I have health problems—diabetes. We receive 5,000 baht (U.S.$125) a month for all seven of us. 3,000 goes to rent. My family feels depression. They never say they are happy. I cant see anything for the future.68

Many urban refugees say they fear not only the police, but even their Thai neighbors, as expressed by a former student activist from Rangoon:

My Thai neighbors look down on us and we worry they will turn us in. I don’t know who is the police. I feel depression. I don’t dare to speak [Burmese]. I don’t want to talk with my friends. I don’t dare to look people in the eye on the bus. I’m afraid all the time.69

In November 2003, Human Rights Watch interviewed a cross section of urban refugees in Bangkok. Particularly after the Thai government’s crackdown in 2003, none felt safe in Bangkok, and in fact Thai police arrested five recognized refugees the very day of some of the interviews. An elderly Karen refugee living in Bangkok with his wife and children told Human Rights Watch:

Today the police arrested people. I called my wife when I heard about the arrests and told her to put all the shoes inside the house, lock the door, don’t go out. It is not safe for me to stay in Bangkok. We have to be careful all the time. We are very afraid of the police.70

A Burman refugee described the difficulties in Bangkok:

I was recognized as a refugee by UNHCR, but I’m still an illegal immigrant under Thai law. I carry a UNHCR protection document but the police don’t honor it. When I’m arrested I have to pay 1,000 baht—half my monthly stipend—to get out of jail. As an illegal immigrant, even after I got U.N. refugee status, I cannot work freely. My refugee status does not guarantee my safety. The government has no clear policy for us.71




52 “New UNHCR registration process for applications from Myanmar asylum-seekers as of 1 February 2004,” UNHCR Regional Office for Thailand, Cambodia, Laos and Vietnam, January 31, 2004.

53 Amy Kazmin, “Exiles from Burma face clampdown in Thailand,” Financial Times, July 3, 2003.

54 Yuwadee Tunyasiri, “PM takes a whack at UNHCR,” Bangkok Post, June 28, 2003. “Thaksin Lashes Out at UNHCR,” The Nation (Bangkok, Thailand), June 28, 2003. Traditionally negative attitudes towards Burmese in Thailand were exacerbated by the siege of the Burmese Embassy in Bangkok in October 1999 and that of the Ratchaburi Provincial hospital in January 2000. The embassy and hospital sieges were the work of small, radical organizations, but the Thai government has used the incidents to justify wider crackdowns that affect the entire population of urban Burmese.

55 Human Rights Watch interview with Burman former student activist, 49, Bangkok, November 12, 2003.

56 “Thailand Bans Foreign Journalists from Myanmar Refugee Camps,” Agence-France Presse, July 15, 2003.

57 Human Rights Watch interview with a Thai refugee lawyer, Bangkok, November 12, 2003.

58 Letter to Human Rights Watch from Jean-Marie Fakhouri, Director, Bureau for Asia and the Pacific, UNHCR, Geneva, January 15, 2004.

59 In 1992, for example, the government ordered all Burmese students and dissidents to relocate to a “safe area” outside of Bangkok or face deportation. See Human Rights Watch, “Unwanted and Unprotected: Burmese Refugees in Thailand,” A Human Rights Watch Report, vol. 10, no. 6, September 1998.

60 See footnote 28, above.

61 “Gov’t Wants U.N. to alter label policy,” The Nation.

62 “Thai PM lashes U.N. refugee agency over Myanmar exiles,” Agence-France Presse, June 27, 2003.

63 “Thai border camps to take in 1,500 Myanmar refugees,” Agence-France Presse, July 2, 2003.

64 Radio Thailand, Bangkok, June 30, 2003, translated by BBC Monitoring Asia Pacific.

65 “Thai PM lashes U.N. refugee agency,” Agence-France Presse.

66 Achara Ashayagachat, “U.N. agency pledges full cooperation: Assadi commits to relocation policy,” Bangkok Post, July 3, 2003.

67 “Burma Refugees—UNHCR says it discloses all exiles,” The Nation (Bangkok, Thailand), July 2, 2003.

68 Human Rights Watch interview with Karen man, 44, who was recognized as a refugee by UNHCR in 2001, Bangkok, November 8, 2003.

69 Human Rights Watch interview with Burman former student activist, 49, recognized as a refugee by UNHCR in 2001, Bangkok, November 12, 2003.

70 Human Rights Watch interview with Karen church elder, 73, who was recognized by UNHCR in 2001, Bangkok, November 12, 2003.

71 Human Rights Watch interview with Burman former student activist, 49, Bangkok November 12, 2003.


<<previous  |  index  |  next>>

February 2004