Debdatta Chowdhury

The report on the hearing of thousands of erosion victim’s cases in a single day, in The Telegraph (Monday 31 March 2008) was definitely assuring, of a legal system that is often accused of being ill-equipped to handle the rights of the people, specially the poor and the vulnerable. Thousands of people who lost their lands and livelihood to erosion, caused by River Ganga in the past two decades had their cases heard at Malda College acting as the venue for the Lok Adalat. This surely goes to show that dispensation of justice is, after all, not as difficult as is often made out to be by the legal system.

Not that this event comes without its share of dialogues and campaigns. Calcutta Research Group has been one of the most important dialogue bodies working towards the rights of the erosion victims. Through its numerous conferences and workshops on the causes and consequences of river erosion and ways to resettle and render justice to the erosion-victims and through the field studies of the erosion-prone river banks of Malda, CRG has been an active platform for the vulnerable lot.

Though this event of justice dispersion goes to the credit of the legal system and the ministry in-charge of land rights, organizations like CRG deserve their share of appreciation for at least keeping these neglected yet pressing issues active and ‘in discussion’.

Debdatta Chowdhury

Oishik Sarkar’s article on ‘Infantilising Refugees Amidst Manufactured Multiculturalism’ is his take on the lack of a cohesive refugee policy, regionally or nationally, that only means derogatory stereotyping of not just the refugees themselves but also their home countries. Movement from one country to another, either voluntarily or forcefully, forces a person into loss of citizenship and refugeehood. In the process of forming a nation-state, the state excludes a chunk of its population on the basis of caste, class, gender, ethnicity, language and other such features that a person cannot help identifying himself/herself with. Those who cannot fit themselves into the uniformity imposed on them by the state are forced to leave. The Chakmas in Bangladesh, Tamils in Sri Lanka, Muslims in India, Rohingyas in Burma are some examples of such forced migration. Oishik deals with the causes and consequences of these refugees in some details. Though not entirely fresh in his thought, Oishik presents a comprehensive picture of what goes to make a refugee out of a person and what are the general consequences they face once they loose their land and are forced into a completely new set-up to fend for themselves. The second part, ‘Limiting Legalities’ is also something widely discussed and debated in studying the refugee situation around the world. It deals with the laws regarding refugees, which makes a complete destitute out of those people who attain the status of a refugee. With no binding principles on the host countries, the host countries are free to deal with the refugees according to their own sweet will. Most of the countries, including India, not being signatories to 1951 Convention, are left to handle the refugees the way they find suitable. That the legalities associated with the refugee crisis are limiting by their very characteristic of not being binding or even being modifiable, form the crux of Oishik’s argument in this part. The third part, dealing with ‘Notion of Nation’ throws light on the way the refugees’ home countries are derogated as places of threat. The worser the situation in the home countries are, the better is the possibility of the migrating people to attain ‘refugee status’ in the host country. The notion or perception of a nation is decided by the host country, receiving the refugees. The last part ‘Red Herring’ deals with how in some countries, including India, Bangladesh, refugee laws have taken a backseat. Not being signatories to 1951 UN Convention on Refugees is the biggest failure of the UN. These countries interpret refugee laws according to their suits and needs, thus making the refugees mere tools of realpolitik. Things need to improve, immediately and vastly, in order not to make complete destitute out of refugees, forced to an uncertainty by the very state regime that was to take them under its shelter.

For the full article “Infantilising refugees amidst manufactured multiculturalism”
By : Oishik Sircar
click here: http://himalmag.com/2008/april/essay_refugees.htm

Elizabeth Williams

There are two main routes for a refugee to acquire citizenship in the UK. The first is to be accepted onto a resettlement programme before arriving in the UK. The second is to arrive in the UK and to be recognised as a refugee or a person requiring international protection, to then be awarded indefinite leave to remain and then to make an application for citizenship after the required time period. I examine each of these routes in turn.

1. Citizenship by Resettlement

In 2002 the UK Government announced the Gateway Protection Programme in conjunction with the UNHCR to resettle 500 refugees every year with indefinite leave to remain. Persons with indefinite leave to remain can apply for citizenship after one year. Candidates for resettlement to the UK will have been classified by UNHCR field offices as refugees and selected on the basis that they have urgent humanitarian or security needs, are not able to return to their countries of origin and cannot integrate locally. The UK Home Office then makes the decision on who to accept under the UK programme. Despite this annual target of 500 refugees, as of February 2007, only 764 refugees in total had been resettled. Attaining UK citizenship through resettlement is therefore extremely unlikely. To put it in the global context, only around 1% of the world’s refugees are resettled each year.

2. Citizenship by Grant of Asylum or Temporary Protection

In 2005, the UK Government announced the New Asylum Model which consisted of a series of largely procedural changes that fundamentally altered how the Home Office processed asylum claims. Prior to the introduction of this model, successful asylum applicants were granted permanent refugee status with indefinite leave to remain. However, the New Asylum Model stipulates that refugees are now subject to a minimum five-year residency requirement and a successful review of their case before becoming eligible for permanent settlement. Given that the first reviews are expected in 2010, there is limited understanding of the implication of this new temporary refugee status, or it’s effect on refugee access to citizenship. What is clear however, is the fact that refugees have to live through a 5 year period of uncertainty before the Government confirms that they can reside in the UK permanently. Given that applicants must have indefinite leave to remain for one year before they can apply for citizenship, the requirement of residing in the UK for 5 years as a refugee prior to receiving indefinite leave to remain greatly increases the length and insecurity of the whole process.

It must be pointed out that unsuccessful asylum applicants may still be eligible for a grant of humanitarian protection or discretionary leave. Both grants are for temporary leave to remain (for 5 years and 3 years respectively). Whilst it is possible to apply for indefinite leave to remain and citizenship under these statuses, both are subject to active review before a person is eligible to apply for consideration for settlement.

3. Current Attitude to Awarding Refugee Status

It is important at this point to recognise the current attitude towards granting refugee status in the UK. Since the ratification of the 1951 Geneva Convention relating to the Status of Refugees there has been a dramatic shift in the reception of refugees in the UK. Whilst refugees were welcomed to the UK in the aftermath of World War II, the current climate is so restrictive that the region has been termed ‘Fortress Europe.” Whilst I don’t intend analyse the reasons for this shift in any detail, suffice to say that the issue of refugee protection and awarding of citizenship status has always been predicated on a delicate balance between humanitarianism, states’ interests and political ideology.

The 1980s saw the beginning of regional European policy to establish a common regime for asylum seekers, refugees and migrants. The European harmonization process points to an emphasis on policing borders and limiting entry, rather that an attempt to establish a just and fair protection regime. Practices of deterring asylum seekers include visa restrictions, increased powers for border police, the imposition of carrier sanctions, detention, reduction in legal aid for asylum seekers, and the inability to appeal asylum decisions in the country of claiming asylum. The non-entrée measures fail to distinguish those migrants who are in need of international protection from those who are seeking economic opportunities. Moreover the measures have displaced the ‘refugee problem’ through moving activity underground. This has resulted in the proliferation of people smuggling by trafficking rings, which in turn has led to the criminalization of the asylum seeker.

Since the September 11th terrorist attacks, domestic and foreign policy has been focussed on strengthening security to prevent terrorists entering Europe though the asylum system. Despite the fact that none of the terrorists involved had used asylum entry, fear of the ‘other’ and the rhetoric of national security have led to the perception of asylum seekers as potential terror suspects. This is also been reflected in the media portrayal of asylum seekers, which has served to homogenise and criminalise all immigrants, regardless of their motivation to flee their homeland. For example in 2005 the UK daily tabloid newspaper the Daily Mail ran with the headline ‘1 in 4 Asylum Seekers are Terror Suspects.’ As one commentator points out ‘through mass media, information influences consciousness and is at the core of individual and collective identity formation.’

All these factors have succeeded in restricting asylum seekers from entering the UK, effectively barring significant numbers from the attainment of full citizenship status. Moreover, the tougher reception of refugees in the UK and the increase in border and immigration controls instil the idea that refugees are a national ‘problem’ or that asylum seekers are ‘bogus’ or ‘illegal’ and can be seen to institutionalise racism. It is not unrelated that the UK has experienced an increase in violence against ethnic minorities and immigrants in recent years.

4. The UK Citizenship Test

Indeed, for those that manage to reach the UK in order to claim asylum, the route to receiving full citizenship rights is far from straightforward. In addition to the revocation of automatic indefinite leave to remain for refugees, 2005 also saw the introduction of a new five-year plan on asylum and immigration entitled ‘Controlling our borders: Making migration work for Britain’. The strategy included the proposal to introduce English language and knowledge of British life tests, which applicants granted limited leave should be required to pass before qualifying for indefinite leave to remain. These are the same tests that must be passed in order to qualify for naturalization as a British citizen, but only need to be taken once.

The introduction of ‘British Life Tests’ or ‘Citizenship Test’ has been extremely controversial and has called into question the very concept of ‘Britishness.’ Whilst advocates of the citizenship test emphasise its focus on civic nationalism over ethnic nationalism, critics have called for the debate around Britishness to move away from the abstract notions of identity and focus more on its practical application. Critics argue that there is no ‘essential Britishness’ and any attempt to define it in terms of characteristics or knowledge possessed is to resort to in the words of Benedict Anderson, an imagined community. Others have referred to Britishness as an active, participatory identity, rather than consisting of certain knowledge that must be learned and tested.

Furthermore the introduction of a citizenship test with a 75% pass mark implies that there will be people that fail. That is, the introduction of the citizenship test suggests a level of cultural knowledge that must be known, or at least learnt to pass as ‘British.’ Given that the citizenship test will only apply to new applicants, it appears that the test is not attempting to address what British people think Britishness is, least of all what immigrants feel Britishness is, but an attempt to make foreigners more like an imagined Brit, that is an attempt to culturally assimilate the ‘other.’

The glaring irony in all of this is the fact that if all British citizens were required to sit the test there would be a huge amount of people who would not pass. The handout includes some examples of questions on the test. Out of interest I only got 3 questions correct, which would suggest that despite being British born citizen, I am not quite British enough. The issue of current British citizens not being able to pass the test not only points to an issue with the types of questions asked, or to the very attempt to define Britishness, but to why only new applicants for Citizenship are required to sit the test. This points to another model of social exclusion for the refugee.

In my opinion, at best the Citizenship test is another barrier to the attainment of settlement and citizenship for refugees and other foreigners. At worst, the Citizenship test is an attempt to assert cultural superiority and is therefore imbued with racism.

Sahana Basavapatna

The US Committee for Refugees and Immigrants (USCRI) in its recent Global Refugee Survey for 2008 gave India a distinction that it would not be proud of. India, according to this survey, is one of the 10 worst violators of refugee rights in the world.

The note on India is interesting for a couple of reasons. For a country that has for long complimented itself on how generous it is in accepting and allowing refugees to live in India, this heavy criticism should bring into focus the real meaning of ad-hocism and the risks it brings to the lives of refugees. It is indeed one of the worst violators for not only the ambiguity in the refugee policy, but also for how this translates in reality. It is one thing to allow refugees to live in India, but altogether different to have the discretion to deport them at will without any explanation or information. Further, this unsavory distinction would hold true when one considers “protection” – a core function of UNHCR and the States- in reality - slum like conditions in which refugees more often find themselves in, lack of basic services such as water, electricity, space, privacy, education and health and the response of agencies such as UNHCR and its implementing partners.

However, a word of caution is also essential as the Survey’s argument that Chins are “the least favoured” among the refugees does not give a complete picture. The Survey should have taken into consideration other refugee groups such as Afghans, Somalis, and Palestinians and others, who undoubtedly have their own experiences to share about living as refugees in a democracy like India. So, while deportation and threats of deportation or lack of protection of Chins in Mizoram/New Delhi is real, it is, one can argue, worse for the Somalis and ethnic Afghans in New Delhi (and elsewhere). By that yardstick for example, the Somalis can be considered to be equally “least favoured”, evidenced by their determined struggle against suspension of registration of asylum seekers, the often long delay in decisions on applications and the deterioration of even basic standards of living in Delhi.

It can only be hoped against hope that there is some change from status quo given that the Government of India is believed to be working to table a refugee protection bill in the parliament.

Please read the full article: -

Five Asian Nations Branded 'Worst' Violators of Refugee Rights by P. Parameswaran

WASHINGTON, June 20, 2008 (AFP) - China, India, Malaysia, Thailand and Bangladesh have been identified as among the worst violators of refugees' rights in a global survey released ahead of Friday's World Refugees Day.

They joined Iraq, Kenya, Russia, Sudan and Europe as the 10 worst places for refugees last year, according to the World Refugee Survey 2008 released in Washington on Thursday.

The annual study, conducted by the US Committee for Refugees and Immigrants (USCRI), a non-governmental group, also showed the total number of refugees growing to 14 million at the end of 2007, the largest it has been since 2001.

Driving the growth again were Iraqi refugees, with more than 550,000 fleeing their country. In all, more than two million refugees from the insurgency-wracked nation are awaiting an end to violence in their homeland.

The worst places for refugees list was based on violators turning refugees away to face further persecution, violence, and possibly death, or letting them enter a country and subjecting them to deprivation and stultifying limbo, USCRI said.

"We've tried to call attention to these countries because they have been particularly egregious in their treatment of refugees," USCRI president Lavinia Limon said.

"Some of them have forced refugees back into dangerous situations, some of them have warehoused refugees in camps for decades, and some of them have done their best to make sure refugees never enter their territory. Some of them have done all of the above," she said.

The United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) has made refugee protection the theme of this year's events marking World Refugee Day.

In a report card, where countries are graded from A to F and that formed the basis for the USCRI worst violators' list, China, Malaysia and Thailand received an F grade following a study on forcibly returning refugees to their homes and physical protection of refugees.

Some of the North Korean refugees repatriated by China have reportedly been executed.

Malaysia forcibly sent refugees from Myanmar to Thailand, where "some of them were sold into slavery -- men to fishing boats and women to brothels," said Merrill Smith, USCRI director of international planning and analysis.

Thailand also forced refugees to return to Myanmar and Laos, he said.

Malaysia and Thailand also got an F grade together with Bangladesh and China in a study on conditions in which refugees were detained and provided access to courts.

In the category where freedom of movement of refugees was gauged, Thailand and Bangladesh received the worst grade. "Thailand confined about 140,000 refugees in special refugee camps where they are not allowed to leave -- mostly those from Myanmar and Laos," Smith said.

Malaysia, Bangladesh and Nepal also received the worst grade in a study on whether governments allowed refugees to earn a livelihood.

One of the reasons that India was listed as among the worst places for refugees was because of its "radically discriminatory treatment of refugees," said Smith.

"They treat refugees depending on their nationality -- at the better end of the spectrum would be the Tibetan refugees, they are treated the best. Sri Lankans not so well but worst of all would be the Chin ethnic group from Myanmar," he said.

Smith pointed out that treating refugees well did not mean that they would remain permanently in their host countries, citing Malaysia as an example.

He said that Malaysia in 2005 issued documents to refugees from neighboring Indonesia's Aceh province allowing them to work and move about freely following the tsunami disaster that devastated the province.

Of the 32,000 Acehnese who received those documents, only 6,000 remained in Malaysia as of this year while the others returned home, Smith said.

"The interesting part about that is that treating refugees well does not cause them to stay," he said.

Western nations were also criticized in the report, including the United States and the European Union which received grades of F and D, respectively, for their poor physical protection of refugees including the forced repatriation of some asylum-seekers.

Ishita Dey

In a latest finding by Human Rights Watch, which is based on four weeks on-the-ground research in Chhattisgarh and Andhra Pradesh in late 2007 and early 2008, including approximately 175 accounts from affected villagers, Salwa Judum leaders, government officials and police, and former Naxalites the group called for an end to all government support for unlawful activities by the Salwa Judum vigilantes, and urged affected state governments to take immediate measures to protect the tens of thousands of persons displaced. Human Rights Watch also called on Maoist rebels known as Naxalites to end attacks on civilians and other abuses.

The 182-page report, “‘Being Neutral is Our Biggest Crime’: Government, Vigilante, and Naxalite Abuses in India’s Chhattisgarh State,” documents human rights abuses against civilians, particularly indigenous tribal communities, caught in a deadly tug-of-war between government security forces and the vigilante Salwa Judum and Naxalites.

The report highlights the impact of this conflict on children’s lives. The Naxalites have long used children as young as 6 years old as informers and children from 12 years old in armed operations. The Chhattisgarh police have recruited and used children as special police officers to assist government security forces in the region, often deploying them in high-risk anti-Naxalite combing operations. While the Chhattisgarh police have acknowledged this as an error, the government is yet to devise a scheme for systematically identifying, demobilizing, and rehabilitating such underage special police officers.

To read the full article please click on the link given in the right column below: -

http://www.hrw.org/reports/2008/india0708/

Ishita Dey

On 26 November 2007, 11 members of the Stranded Pakistanis Youth Rehabilitation Movement (SPYRM), including its president, Sadakat Khan, filed a petition seeking High Court orders to register as voters Urdu-speaking people living in 70 camps across the country. In the ruling in July 2008, 250000 Biharis or stranded Pakistanis were declared as citizens. This judgment has drawn a mixed reaction from others in refugee camps of Dhaka and elsewhere. People who have migrated before Bangladesh was formed still feel that they had come to settle in Islamic Pakistan and not secular Bangladesh and some of them did want to go back to Pakistan after Bangladesh was formed. Unlike their parents, the younger generation of Biharis do not feel like aliens in Bangladesh. Most speak both Bangla and Urdu, go to Bangla-medium schools, have Bengalee friends and spouses. Many of them identify themselves as Bangladeshis rather than claiming to be “Biharis” or “stranded Pakistanis”, and are working for stronger integration.

Most of them feel while they have won the right to vote they still need to fight to reclaim their properties and want to enjoy the rights of a citizen of Bangladesh.

To read the full article please click on the link given below: -
http://www.irinnews.org/report.aspx?ReportID=79033

Ishita Dey
Jim Lewis in an article on refugee camps in New York Times Magazine analyses the possible reasons behind the basic structures of camps: tarp, tent, cluster, grid. He argues that one of the basic tenets behind this kind of camp architecture is based on an assumption that these structures are temporary and one of the ways to discourage people from settling there is to create such structures of discomfort. Though the official position is that repatriation is imminent, there are scores of instances to ponder and reflect on the fact that the refugee crisis in West Bank and Gaza, Northwestern Province of Pakistan and Kenya. It’s been sixty years of the Palestinian settlements in west Bank and Gaza. Thousands of Afghans are stranded in the Northwestern Province of Pakistan since Soviet invasion in 70s and Sudanese and Somalians have been forced to live in Kenya since 1992. To quote Jim Lewis, “In 1993, a refugee could expect to live in a camp for 9 years; by 2004, that had grown to 17 years — almost a year increase per year, which suggests that very few people are going home at all. As conflicts grow more protracted and complicated, quick and direct repatriation becomes a slimmer and slimmer thread to hang things on”. It is against this backdrop and context he feels that the humanitarian agencies should revisit the structure of the settlements along with other needs. The institutions responsible for the lives and movements of great number of people are organized along rectilinear lines like hospitals, prison and army barracks and so on. The author feels that the basic structure of the tarp is based on Western notions of family as a nuclear unit. Similarly the grid structure might not be acceptable for cultures that are organized along fluid lines. While the UN Refugee Commission does not lay down a template to follow; their basic idea is the safety of the refugees. After the basic settlement the camp dwellers are encouraged to modify these spaces. According to Lewis, Fred Cuny contributed to the practice of emergency aid in the late 60s and argued for the use of single-family tents arranged in an ersatz-village design that was more comfortable and more flexible. It was instrumental in reducing the spread of infectious diseases in camps. Cuny recommended single-family tents he assumed that most of the people were from the villages, whereas our experience of refugees in war in Iraq has led to refugees seeking urban refuge. Lewis believes that there is a new tide of urban migration and he sites the case of Manila where 80,000 people are living on a top of garbage dump. Lewis points out that there is a history of architects committed to the welfare of the people. Some of the renowned architects are “Hassan Fathy, a Cairene architect who, starting in the 1930s, trained the poor of Egypt to build homes from mud bricks; Buckminster Fuller, with his geodesic domes; and Habitat for Humanity. There are pockets of inspired practice, like Architecture for Humanity, a remarkable N.G.O. based in San Francisco that not only builds and consults but also acts as a sort of clearinghouse for open-source design. Along the Mexican-U.S. border, Teddy Cruz has fashioned fast, cheap and inventive housing out of salvaged materials. Jaime Lerner, a Brazilian architect who became mayor of Curitiba, helped transform it from a slum-infested metropolis of almost two million into a green and functioning model of urban planning”.

While most humanitarian agencies argue that the local community knowledge will play a key role in solving problems related to shelter, the urban planners need to address certain problems that the large body of UN might face. First and foremost cheap housing solutions, materials that easily available and transportable and durable to survive extreme weather conditions and easily reparable. In terms of security, water access, H.I.V./AIDS prevention, human rights issues make the problem more complex. Despite these problems, Lewis argues urban planners and humanitarian agencies should work on an alternative models of housing based on local knowledge.

To read the full article please click on the link given below: -

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/06/08/magazine/08wwlnurbanismt.html?pagewanted=1_r=2&ref=world

K.M. Parivelan
The Refugee Convention, which was formally adopted on 28 July 1951, forms the foundation of the modern international legal system designed to protect people who have to flee their countries because of persecution or conflict. It is widely credited with saving countless lives and ensuring a means of escape for people facing imprisonment, torture, execution and other human rights abuses for reasons such as their political or religious beliefs, or membership in a particular ethnic or social group. It is the key legal instrument in defining who is a refugee, their rights and legal obligations of the State Parties. The 1967 Protocol removed geographical and temporal restriction from the Convention.

The Convention provides a universal definition of who exactly qualifies as a refugee. This definition has proved sufficiently flexible to encompass new types of refugees as they have emerged over the years. The Convention also established a framework of basic refugee rights - for example, the right to identity papers, access to courts and education - without which their lives in asylum countries would be quite a predicament for asylum seekers and refugees.
What are the positive influences of 1951 Convention?
1. It provided the basic and general definition for ‘refugee’
2. It facilitated the customary international law scope for promoting the principle of ‘non- refoulement’
3. It set the minimum standard of treatment for refugees and provisions for their legal status and welfare
4. It provides legal and political scope for States to co-operate with UNHCR in the exercise of its functions.

Post Colonial Influences

The conflicts that accompanied the end of the colonial era in Asia, Africa and Latin America led to a succession of large -scale refugee movements. These population displacements prompted the drafting and adoption of not only the 1967 Refugee Protocol but also several other regional initiatives.

The 1969 OAU Convention governing the specific aspects of refugee problems in Africa, which came in to force in 1974. It went about expanding the definition of the term ‘refugee’ as well as principle of ‘non-refoulment’. The OAU Convention contextually elaborated on the 1951 Convention definition of refugee as: “any person compelled to leave his/her country because of “external aggression, occupation, foreign domination or events seriously disturbing public order in either part or the whole of his country of origin or nationality.”. This means that persons fleeing civil disturbances, widespread violence and war are entitled to claim the status of refugee in States that are parties to this Convention regardless of whether they have a well-founded fear of persecution. Similarly in Latin America the initiative was taken by government representatives and distinguished Latin American jurists in 1984 to discuss the international protection of refugees in the region. This gathering adopted what became known as the Cartagena Declaration. The Declaration recommends the definition of a refugee used throughout the Latin American region should include the 1951 Refugee Convention definition and also persons who have fled their country “because their lives, safety or freedom have been threatened by generalized violence, foreign aggression, internal conflicts, massive violation of human rights or other circumstances which have seriously disturbed public order.” Although the Declaration is not legally binding on States, most Latin American States apply the definition as a matter of practice; some have incorporated the definition into their own national legislation.

In the context of Asia, distinct attempt was not made at convention or declaration level, but the principles adopted by the Asia Africa Legal Consultative Committee (AALCC) in 1966 is quite a contributory step. Even though non-binding in character, did influence the refugee policy in the region. Similarly a Group of Arab experts met in Cairo in November 1992 and adopted a non-binding Declaration on the protection of Refugees and displaced Persons in the Arab world.

In the recent years, however, the continuing validity of the 1951 Convention has been publicly questioned in some quarters. This has alarmed refugee protection activists, UN officials and aid agencies involved with refugees who feel that politics are being played at the expense of the Convention and, therefore, of the refugees it protects. The reasons behind these attacks on the Convention appear to be linked primarily to the rising number of asylum-seekers, the increase in people-smuggling networks, the perception that the majority of asylum-seekers are "bogus," and the high costs involved in maintaining asylum systems.

These concerns are understandable, but the critique of the Convention tends to ignore some vital basic factors, "Firstly, the main reason the numbers soared was that there were three major wars in Europe during the 1990s, in addition to numerous other conflicts around the world. "Secondly, the whole point of the Convention is precisely to make the distinction between those who need the international protection that official refugee status affords, and those who do not. Therefore, one set of argument is that it doesn't mean there's anything wrong with the Convention per se. The Convention has also been wrongly blamed for a collective failure to manage the soaring numbers of would-be economic migrants. "The Convention was never intended to sort out all the world's migration problems. "The trouble is, with virtually no other migration path open from poor countries to rich ones, the Convention has been subjected to pressures which should be catered for by alternative migration management tools."

On the cost of managing asylum-systems, we need to look at some states having rigorous process of detaining every single asylum-seeker entering the country without proper documentation. "This is an extremely expensive way of dealing with asylum-seekers, as well as inhumane and, arguably, quite at odds with Article 31 of the Convention." Asylum systems in some countries are inefficient, sometimes taking years to reach a decision. "This means not only considerable extra costs in terms of social benefits, but it also makes such countries attractive to economic migrants, stimulating a “vicious circle of increased numbers, higher costs, and slower decisions”.

The most worrying trend is the growing number of states violating Article 33 of the Convention, which says, "No contracting state shall expel or return a refugee in any manner whatsoever to the frontiers of territories where his life or freedom would be threatened…" If refugees are sent straight back to danger - or are prevented from leaving their countries in the first place - then all the other measures designed to protect and assist them count for nothing. Under international law this should not happen, and blatantly ignoring international law is a dangerous path to tread." The 1951 Refugee Convention has come under increasing scrutiny in recent years, with some governments questioning its continuing relevance. UNHCR has been paying special attention to the problem, analysing the extent of the practice in recent years in terms of the number of countries involved and the number of people affected. This is being done in the context of the "Global Consultations on International Protection", talks between UNHCR, governments, non-governmental organisations (NGOs) and experts focusing on how States are interpreting and implementing the 1951 Refugee Convention and examining protection problems that are not fully covered by the treaty, so as to better protect refugees. Most notably the Executive Committee constituted is able to incorporate some of the non-signatory countries to voice their concerns and proactively contribute to the refugee protection regime.

Ishita Dey

Thousands of dalits from across the country reportedly reached Delhi on foot after walking for 26 days. As I pen down my reflections on the recently concluded workshops organized by CRG, one is left to ponder why so many people had to come down on the streets claiming right to land after 60 years of independence. The right to food, water, land and employment continues to haunt the dispossessed and displaced till date. Despite the policy exercises by the National and state governments and the institutionalization of the quasi-autonomous institutions like NHRC and State Human Rights Commissions it is time we reflect about the people’s movements and responsibility to protect – the onus and its dynamics?
In the recently concluded CRG workshop, we pondered on these issues with a range of civil society organizations, independent social activists, academics and lawyers. While all of us agreed on the systematic pattern of displacement and the way it has been naturalized through a rebuilding of populist consensus under the garb of the policy exercise; we tried to engage with NHRC and State Human Rights representative in the course of the three workshops. In the first workshop we had the pleasure to interact with the three NHRC representatives who were involved in various rescue operations against trafficking of women and children. There was a concern among the participants that the issues affecting the grassroots are often subtle and fails to grab attention. Dr. K. M. Parivelan from UNDP pointed out that the Chennai airport expansion will displace thousands and one of the questions raised was whether or NHRC could intervene in such cases. Even Dr. Ranabir Samaddar, Director,CRG felt that the catastrophic things grab more attention than the endemic things. He cited that humanitarian agencies in the recent past have conducted public hearings, which have been instrumental in mobilizing people and meeting the requirements of the people. He felt that NHRC should conduct public hearings and that could be an effective way to address people’s issues rather than wait for redressal of complaints. One of the main concerns raised by the activists, media persons and academics was the process of addressing the problems. Most of the people felt that mere redressal of complaints cannot be an effective way of addressing the concerns. Participants were also critical of NHRC’s role in the framing of the NRP 2006. The interaction and dialogue with NHRC participants was only restricted to the Bangalore workshop. Unfortunately the participants in the Bhubaneshwar and Kolkata dialogue could not interact with the NHRC personnel. Thorough this forum we want to draw attention to some of the problems raised in the Kolkata Workshop.
1.One of the main concerns of the Kolkata workshop was to understand the policy exercise. CRG had organized a one-day deliberation in Delhi to develop a critique of the R&R policy. The meeting was attended by a select group of academicians, lawyers and activists. In this meeting, we came to a consensus that NRP2006 should be read with the communal violence bill to understand one concern whether or not the proliferation of policy exercise actually reflects the state responsibility to protect or is it a way of copying with developmental strategies. The details of the proceedings are available in our publication. (For details of the report contact us at mcrg@mcrg.ac.in)
2.Another concern voiced by participants from Ganga Bhangan Pratirodh Action Nagorik Committee, Panchanandapur, Bangitola, Malda was the enormous displacement caused by the construction of Farakka Barrage. Prior to the construction of the Farakka Barrage the river erosion was restricted to a limited area in Malda District. Since the construction of the Barrage, the erosion has been on the eastern bank and resulted in displacing thousand of people living on the east bank in the district of Malda. Currently the residents of the Malda town, NH43 and the railway tracks will be affected due to the massive erosion. The details are available in a book written by Dr. Kalyan Rudra , Ganga Bhangan Katha.
Gangetic erosion has displaced 5 lakh people. 14 high schools and Madrasas as well as more than a hundred primary schools along with many private educational institutes and I.C.D.S. centers have been destroyed. The schools have been rebuilt at locations, which are not easily accessible to the children of the locality resulting in increase in dropout rates.
About 125 thousand people are forced to live on alluvial deposited land in the middle of the river (locally they are called “charvari”). They are not recognized as “inhabitants” of the Malda West Bengal Government.
The only ray of hope for the victims of erosion amidst all of these lay in Section II of W.B. L.R. Act which guaranteed that the land eroded by any river would belong to its previous owner if it submerged as alleviated land within 20 years from the year of its being eroded. The government of West Bengal through the amendment in 2000 abolished this section. This amendment has taken way their right to land eroded by the river. This amendment has been done without any prior notice and information or warding compensation as it reads, “ Any land gained by- gradual accession to a plot of land, within from the recess of a river or of the sea, shall vest in the state Government and the raiyat who owns the plot of land shall not be entitled to retain such land as an accretion there to”.

We, the undersigned, note with growing concern the worsening security situation of Iraqi refugees in Lebanon.
Random and targeted arrests and detention of Iraqi refugees have increased recently solely on grounds of illegal entry and/or illegal stay.
According to reports, 432 Iraqis were in detention in July, of whom 150 were arrested in the first week of July only. The majority of them had been registered with UNHCR and hold Refugee Status Certificate. The refugee certificate issued by UNHCR is not being respected by the arresting authorities, nor by the judges, prosecutors, or the Lebanese General Security Office.
Many are kept in detention after the expiry of their sentences as a coercive measure to force them to agree to be sent back to Iraq. IOM is reportedly assisting for these “voluntary return” convoys. This is contrary to UNHCR advising against returns to Iraq. By acting contrary to UNHCR guidelines and without its prior consultation, IOM seriously undermined the protection role and responsibility of the UN Refugee Agency.
The arrest and detention and threat of “deportation” under the cover of “voluntary return” is a flagrant violation of the right to seek asylum enshrined in the Preamble of the Lebanese Constitution and the international customary principle of non-refoulement which is embodied in Art 3 of the Convention Against Torture ratified by Lebanon.
We call on the Lebanese authorities to:
- Acknowledge the UNHCR guidelines regarding the refugees from Iraq and to establish a mechanism to receive and protect refugees from Iraq fleeing the generalised violence in their country.
- Grant the refugees from Iraq temporary residencies on humanitarian grounds.
- Ensure that arrest of refugees from Iraq is limited to identification of identity and for security reasons or other criminal charges.
We call on IOM to:
- Halt assistance to convoys and adhere to UNHCR guidelines and advisory concerning the non-returnability of refugees from Iraq to Iraq.
Jordan held a Conference on July 26 to look at assistance to countries hosting refugees from Iraq in the region, we call all stakeholders to:
- Remind the Lebanese government of its oligation as a member of the international community to recognize and protect the basic and fundamental human rights of refugees from Iraq during their stay in the country.
- Assist the Lebanese government and national NGOs in order to grant the refugees from Iraq refugees access to basic services such as health and education, and allow self-reliance opportunities.

Background

On 18 December 2006, UNHCR issued an advisory return for Iraqis1 in which it recommended that states and UNHCR should declare Iraqis as refugees on a prima facie basis except for those who were residing in Iraqi Kurdistan and those who fall under the exclusion clauses of the 1951 Convention. UNHCR Advisory was issued following the serious deterioration of the security situation in Iraq that was characterized by the generalized violence, massive targeted violations of human rights, and the lack of government protection. According to the advisory, “Iraqi” refers to both Iraqi nationals as well as former habitual residents of Iraq, in particular Palestinian refugees. The Advisory called the countries in the region hosting Iraqis and which do not have refugee legal framework to allow Iraqis from Southern and Central Iraq to enter and remain, “even if on a temporary basis.’

Signatures

Lebanese NGOs
Frontiers Ruwad Association
Lebanese Center for Human Rights
Nahwa Al-Muwatiniyya
Arab NGO Network for Development
Union of Democratic Youth

Arab NGO
Comité pour le Respect des Libertés et des droits de l’Homme en Tunisie, Tunisia
Fédération des Tunisiens pour une Citoyennete des deux Rives, Tunisia
Association Tunisiennes des Femmes, Tunisia

International NGOs
Médecins du Monde–France (Lebanon)
International Coalition on the Detention of Refugees and Asylum-Seekers
Italian Council for Refugees
Refugees International
The U.S. Committee for Refugees and Immigrants
Euromediterranean Human Rights New Work
Episcopal Migration Ministries
Chaldean Federation of America
American-Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee
--------------------------
1. UNHCR Return Advisory and Position on International Protection Needs of Iraqis Outside Iraq, UNHCR, 18 December.

We, the undersigned, are concerned about the “voluntary return” operations of Iraqi refugees in detention in Lebanon to Iraq. Such returns are contrary to the principle of non-refoulement and to the UN position on non-returnability to Iraq of the Iraqi refugees from Southern and Central Iraq.
The Iraqi Embassy in collaboration with the Internal Organization for Migration (IOM), and the Lebanese authorities are currently preparing the necessary arrangements for the upcoming “voluntary return” of approximately 250 Iraqis from Lebanese detention centers to Iraq.
Refugees and asylum seekers are arrested solely on grounds of illegal entry and/or illegal stay and kept in detention for long periods after the expiry of their judicial sentences. Most Iraqis, if not all, see their return to Iraq as the only way out of prison: faced with indefinite imprisonment with no or little hope to be released by the Lebanese General Security Office – despite of UNHCR’s intervention on behalf of detainees known to them. This explains why some Iraqi detainees sign on their return to Iraq with the hope to leave Iraq again.
It is our opinion that such “voluntary returns” are in fact refoulement of Iraqi refugees.
UNHCR defines “voluntary” as the absence of any physical, psychological, or material pressure and considers that choosing to return when the legal status and rights of refugees are not recognized in the country of asylum is not an act of free will.
As prolonged detention after the expiry of the sentence is considered a physical, psychological and material pressure against refugees and as most refugees lack legal status in Lebanon, the voluntariness to return to Iraq expressed by Iraqis in detention is seriously flawed.
IOM and UNHCR have repeatedly stated that today they do not promote “voluntary return” of Iraqis. Yet, IOM in collaboration with the Iraqi Embassy are organizing what they call “voluntary return” operations on an ad-hoc basis.
UNHCR’s role in these operations is limited to counselling the detainees prior to their return. Yet, it seems that in reality UNHCR is viewed as approving such returns. Upon receiving the list of Iraqi detainees from the Iraqi Embassy, UNHCR conducts a counselling session stressing that it does not support the return to Iraq, that as Iraqis, they are considered as refugee by UNHCR and that they have the right to seek international protection in Lebanon. In the course of counselling, refugees are asked whether or not they want to seek asylum or maintain their refugee status. In case of a refusal, UNHCR makes sure that the person does not wish to seek asylum and intends to return to Iraq. It is our opinion that by participating in the process of these operations, UNHCR is allowing other actors to undermine its protection role.
We are further concerned that IOM and, the Lebanese authorities are putting the lives of Iraqi refugees in danger by returning them to war-torn Iraq without providing any guarantees for their security, any assistance or rehabilitation and without monitoring the situation of returnees inside Iraq.
We call on UNHCR, IOM and the Lebanese authorities to:
- halt the up-coming and all future so called “voluntary return” of Iraqi detainees to Iraq in compliance with the UN Return Advisory on Iraq.
We call on the Lebanese authorities to:
- put an end to the practice of prolonged arbitrary detention of refugees and asylum-seekers
- respect the fundamental principle of non-refoulement of refugees and asylum-seekers
- acknowledge the serious deterioration of the security situation in Iraq and grant a temporary residency on humanitarian grounds for Iraqi refugees.

Legal Background

Lebanon is not a party to the 1951 Refugee Convention and does not have a national legislation to protect refugees. Also, Lebanese authorities do not recognize the refugee certificates issued by UNHCR. Therefore, the majority of refugees in Lebanon lack legal status and are treated as illegal immigrants.
In December 2006, UNHCR issued a Return Advisory on Iraqis in which it stated that “[n]o Iraqi from Southern or Central Iraq should be forcibly returned to Iraq until such time as there is substantial improvement in the security and human rights situation in the country”.
UNHCR Handbook on Voluntary Repatriation considers that “voluntary” refers to the “absence of any physical, psychological, or material pressure” and that [o]one of the most important elements in the verification of voluntariness is the legal status of the refugees in the country of asylum. If refugees are legally recognized as such, their rights are protected and if they are allowed to settle, their choice to repatriate is likely to be truly free and voluntary. If, however, their rights are not recognized, if they are subjected to pressures and restrictions and confined to closed camps, they may choose to return, but this is not an act of free will”.
Article 1(1)(d) of IOM Constitution also stresses on the requirement of voluntariness in order to provide its services for voluntary repatriation.

Signatories

American-Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee, Michigan
Association Justice Et Misericorde)
Dr. Barbara E. Harrell-Bond, OBE
Church World Service, Immigration and Refugee Program
Comite pour le Respect des Libertes et des Droits de l’Homme
Episcopal Migration Ministries
Ecuromediterranean Human Rights Network
Federation des Tunisiens pour une Citoyennete des deux Rives
Federation Internationale des ligues des Droits de l’Homme
French Human Rights League
Frontiers Ruwad Association
International Coalition on the Detention of Refugees, Asylum Seekers and Migrants
National Council for liberties in Tunisia
Medecins du Monde – France (Lebanon)

CRG has been instrumental in organizing three workshops in Bangalore, Bhubaneshwar and Kolkata, to generate a dialogue among activists, academics and independent researchers on the displacement situation. In Kolkata CRG hosted the Third of the series of workshops. This workshop was inaugurated by Hon’ble Justice Shyamal Kumar Sen, Chairperson, West Bengal State Human Rights Commission on 3 September 2007. On this occasion he released the report prepared by Dr. Walter Fernandes and others on “Development induced Displacement in West Bengal 1947-2000”. In an article by Subash Mohapatra, “ India: Development-induced Displacement on rise” he sums up the report findings and details of the workshop. The link is as follows:

http://www.asiantribune.com/index.php?q=node/7288

JP Rao

I had an opportunity to visit Marraiguda Salwa Judum camp on the 25thFebruary 2008,exactly one year after I visited the camp earlier when it was setup. When the camp was set up in February 2007 there were around 3000 persons in the camp. Today there are around 250 families living in the camp. More then half of the people left the camp and migrated to the villages across the border. I was informed that the Chhattisgharh Government has decided to suspend supply of free rations (Rice, Dal, oil, potatoes and onions etc) to the inmates of Salwa Judum camps in both Dantewra and Bijapur districts and boards have been put up in Konta, Vinjaram and other camps stating that people will be provided rice at Rs.3 per kg and free rations would be suspended. The supply of free rations had become erratic in Konta, Vinjaram, Errabore and Marraiguda camps since the beginning of December 2007. Reports trickling in from Bijapur state that people are deserting the camps as the supply of rations have become erratic there also. When I asked the police personal 'how many people will stay in the camp if the Government asks them to return to their villages' they said 100% of people will go back to their villages. The Salwa Judum leaders present there were shock to hear this answer from the police. In the informal chat they also told us that because of the atrocities committed by the Salwa Judum peoples support to the Maoists has increased.

The Salwa Judum leader of Marraiguda camp in a tribal of Gollapalli village works as a village assistant whose salary is Rs.1000 per month. However, he owns a Bolero Jeep, which he bought after the camp was setup last year and visits Bhadrachalm daily along with his dozen cronies. I was also informed that most of the Salwa Judum leaders of all these camps in Konta division have bought properties in Jagdalpur and other towns besides purchasing gold and jewelry worth laks of rupees. This alone is proof of rampant corruption that is prevailing in Salwa Judum camps. The camp dwellers informed us that these Salwa Judum activists sleep in different houses daily out of fear. The Salwa Judum activists in Konta sleep in the police station out of fear of being killed by the people. If the government suspends free supply of rations to the camp inmates Salwa Judum will die its natural death and its activists would become sitting ducks for the Maoists and the people who suffered at their hands. I was also informed that some time back before the Naga police was withdrawn the Naga police killed every one present in a village in Bejji forest as retaliation to the killing of 12 policemen.

Som Prasad Nirula

Out of 1300 huts over 1000 huts inhabited by Bhutanese refugees were gutted by a fire in the Goldhap refugee camp in eastern part of Nepal's Jhapa District on Saturday evening. As a result around 8000 refugees have been displaced from the camps.
The fire started at around 6:30 p.m. in the evening, and later engulfed the entire camp. As per the reports from the camps seven persons have been injured with minor burns and casualty were rushed to Mechi Zonal Hospital, Bhadrapur for treatment.
According to police, the fire had started from the godown of the UN World Food Program (WFP) inside the camp and spread out toward the residential site. As the fire engines from Bhadrapur, Mechi Municipality and Damak Municipality could not control the flames, fire engines from Biratnagar and Dharan had to be called.
Fire brigades and around 500 security personnel from Nepal Police, Armed Police Force, Nepal Army and locals were mobilized to rescue the people and put the fire out till late at night. The exact extent of the damage is yet to be assessed
After the inferno, the victims are in the terrible situation and are forced to live under the open sky near by the refugee camps
Nepal Institute of Peace (NIP) call upon all the stakeholders for immediate assistance for the Bhutanese refugees

Debdatta Chowdhury

The workshop opened on 3rd September, 2007 with the release of the report on ‘Development Induced Displacement and Deprivation in West Bengal 1947-2000: A Quantitative and Qualitative Database on its Extent and Impact’. The report prepared by Walter Fernandes, Shanti Chetry, Sherry Joseph and Satyen Lama dealt with the genesis and evolution of the development programme in West Bengal over a time frame of fifty years, from 1947 till 2000. Starting from the recent uproar in Nandigram and Singur, the 1st chapter goes back to explaining why the report came about in the first place. The glaring gap that was found to exist between the provision of Right to Live(Article 21) in the Constitution and the actual scenario, acted as the founding stone for this study and eventually the report. The finding that the development programmes undertaken in West Bengal hardly abide by this Constitutional provision in dealing with displacements and rehabilitation, prompted the researchers to go deep into the matter and eventually come up with a report that was also an eye-opener than just a mere collection of facts and figures.

Beginning with a brief introduction to the various types of displacements, as conflict-induced, natural-disaster induced and development-induced displacements, the chapter moves on to trace the beginning of development programmes and land acquisition system in the state right from colonial times. With its genesis in the Permanent Settlement (1793), the land acquisition programme moved through the draconian Land Acquisition Act(1894), the Welfare State Programme of the 1947 era and finally the Mixed Economy policy of the post independence profit-making economic set-up. Post independence saw the gradual rise of private and public sectors and human utility programmes as Dams.

The report clearly states that the absence of reliable database on the actual number of displaced people made the work difficult for the researchers. Government Gazettes, District land records, archives of various institutions and individual studies of researchers were the main sources of this report. Interviews with the displaced people also helped in the process, though there was dearth of proper representation among the interviewees.

The report gives an insight into the state of West Bengal in terms of its population, area, sex ratio,land holding and land acquisition over a period of 50 years. With details of figures, the report states that though West Bengal has seen prosperous days of land reforms and agricultural advancements during the early years of left rule, the present situation is clearly in a mess. The fact that WB does not have a proper rehabilitation policy makes the already awful condition of rehabilitation all the more painful.

Chapter 2 of the report deals with the ‘Extent and Type of Land Used 1947-2000’, whereby it attempts to specify the amount of land acquired for various purposes in WB within the given timeframe. Land acquiring started with the influx of refugees after the 1947 Partition of Bengal followed by more influx during the Sino-India War (1962) and Bangladesh War (1971). Land was fast acquired for resettling these refugees. Coupled with this was the call for liberalization of economy that included acquiring land for industries and foreign investments.

Water resources including Dams as the DVC, Maithan, Farakka saw a steady growth from 1970s. Agricultural advancements of the 1990s meant better irrigation facilities with more number of dams. In the process of building dams, the tribal areas of Bankura, Bardhaman, Purulia and Midnapore were the worst hit.

Public and private sectors as pharmaceuticals, engineering units, automobiles, chemical units, jute and textile mills, tea factories, printing presses, rice, paper and other large and medium units took up a considerable amount of land from 1950s till 1990s.

Underground coal mining and later open-cast mining together with dolomite, clay and sand mining also took up a fair share of lands, mostly in Bardhaman, Malda and Purulia.Thermal plants, transmission and distribution systems also contributes to the land use.

Land used for environment preservation in the form of Afforestation drives, flood prevention and embankments also take up a huge amount of land, mostly private lands. People are displaced without being properly resettled for the sake of conservation of nature.

West Bengal witnessed the interesting phenomenon of ‘displacement for resettlement’, whereby private lands were taken away by the Refugee Rehabilitation Act of 1948 to resettle the incoming refugees, thus displacing thousands of others. Government organized refugee camps and colonies were mostly built on private lands, displacing a huge number of people.

Human resource development as educational and research institutions, sports facilities also account for large shares of the acquired land.Health sector like hospitals, hygienic facilities, waste disposal facilities also displace a lot of people in order to create good facilities for a few others. The irony being that thousands are denied basic health facilities, like clean drinking water to make way for others.

Transport facilities like bus roads, highways, railway lines, airports, border roads are mostly built by acquiring private lands.’ Defense purpose’ is another easy way of acquiring land by the government. Apart from the land used for police and paramilitary use like training camps, outfits, cantonments and airbases, another huge lot of land is acquired under the very vague term of ‘defense purpose’, the meaning of which mostly remains ambiguous.

Increasing number of districts, expanding offices of the zilla parishads and new staff quarters are also built on private lands.
Social welfare projects like homes for the physically/mentally challenged or land distribution among the landless also use up mostly private lands.

Tourism forms an important factor as far as land acquisition is concerned. Huge plots of private lands are often acquired for building tourist destinations. But often the projects for which land is acquired remains unfinished. Other miscellaneous projects like building temples go unnoticed in land acquisition figures. Absence of a proper definition for the term ‘public purpose’ often makes land acquisition easy for the government and unclear for the displaced ones. Almost 10% of the total acquired land fall under the ‘public purpose’ scheme. People loose their land for ‘purposes’they do not know.official records show that the total land acquired in WB for the above mentioned purposes between 1947 and 1990 is about 36,56,326 hectares.

The 3rd chapter deals with the ‘type and extent of the deprivation’ that the development projects in WB have brought about. This chapter too points to the dearth of proper database. The chapter separately deals with the loss of livelihood that each of the projects bring about, as water resources, non-hydro projects, industry, mining, refugee rehabilitation, human resourse development, health, transport, government administration, farms, fisheries, urban development and social welfare.official records put the total number of displaced people over the given timeframe to 69,44,492. detailed figures of the amount of compensation received by these displaced families have also been provided, detailed analysis of which points to the variation in compensation from ‘advanced’ to ‘backward’ states. The partiality is glaring.

Chapter 4 mainly deals with the impact of the displacements. The researchers tried to get responses from a varied background from tribals, dalits to OBCs and women. Women had the least representation among the respondents due to various reasons. Interaction with the displaced people showed that only the medium-yield farmers could make a profit out of the compensation that they received. Otherwise, compensation in the form of cash hardly helped the displaced lot. Access to education was denied to those displaced, resulting in increasing illiteracy. The development projects naturally brought a change in the occupation of the people displaced. In most cases, they lost their main source of income, lost their land and assets, that led to complete impoverishment. The nature of work also changed, with a shift from agricultural work to that of a daily wage earner as a semi-skilled worker, for example as a bicycle mechanic or agricultural tools mechanic etc. most of these works were of a temporary nature. Loss of land also meant fewer livestock, though in some places, substituting land with livestock, in fact, increased the number of livestock.

The study of the process of land acquisition also brings forth the fact that most of the people who loose their land remain unaware of the acquisition policies and purposes of the government. This is because of lack of government initiative as well as due to illiteracy.

One of the major impacts of land acquisition is seen to be a last minute attempt on the part of the land loosers to grab as much asset as possible, often stealing each other’s assets. Finally, agony and fear results in a feeling of betrayal and complete disillusionment among the displaced lot.

Compensation could have been of use if it was properly and timely paid. Most compensation packages remain mere pen-and-paper contracts that never see the light of the day. Even if they are discharged, they often fail to reach the actual people and get lost somewhere in between. Those that finally reach the people are often so late in coming that by then the people are impoverished to the extent, never to be able to start life afresh. The ones displaced are often unskilled agriculturalists, who can hardly make use of the job prospects that the development projects create, since the industries mostly want skilled people.

Women are the worst victims, who bear the brunt of sexual assault. Lack of proper sanitation is a regular feature in the resettlement camps. Children’s education is hampered.
Chapter 5 ends with a question as to whether it is possible to have development with a humanitarian touch. This chapter suggests alternatives that can be taken into consideration while putting the development projects into force. It suggests that mere cash compensation is not enough. Rehabilitation is necessary. The socio-cultural identity of the displaced people, mostly tribals, should not be allowed to be hampered as that would mean a loss of national integrity. Not just creating jobs but building training centres for the jobs should also form an integral part of the rehabilitation package. Finally, it ends with a demand for new and better rehabilitation schemes and least-displacing projects.

Tarangini Sriraman

The UK government (Tony Blair’s government) has for the last few years been working on a project that will record the detailed identities of residents…the project involves storing such delicate information in a national database. This will be backed by the distribution of identity cards to all residents. The overwhelming concern of the UK government is to check the entry of illegal migrants and to keep a check on possible terrorist movement. Successive Indian governments have similarly been preoccupied with a national identity card that captures the identities of residents, both citizens and non-citizens: the preoccupation again being the need to weed out migrants and crack down on terrorists. The US government is planning through the Real ID Act to upgrade existing identity cards with biometric technology as a means to secure identities from terrorists and make it difficult for migrants to stay without these cards. Israel has issued identity cards marking out card-holders to be Arab, Jew or other. Those who do not possess these cards are either migrants or terrorists.

In all these cases, governments though they officially drive a wedge between the categories of migrant and terrorist, there is a tendency in bureaucratic thinking and policy-making above all to confuse these two, to associate migrant with terrorist and vice-versa. I intend to provide illustrations of this in this paper through select examples taken from countries like India, Israel and Russia.

Indian experience of equating migration with terrorism: The National Identification System Home Affairs Network (NISHAN) project in India can be traced to the successive governments’ need to check illegal migration which is described often in officialese as infiltration. The Congress government led by Narasimha Rao sought to do something about the unmanageable numbers of Bangladeshi migrants pouring into the states of Assam, Bengal, Delhi and Maharashtra. No less a site than Wikipedia reports that there has been a tendency to link the rise of terrorism with the presence of illegal Bangladeshi migrants. Both intelligence sources and media reports (both print and web media) corroborate these claims. The strategy employed by these reports is like this…they carry out surveys and interview residents to establish the number of illegal migrants who have been able to procure voters ID cards and other identity cards. And every time a terrorist attack happens, they lose no time publicizing these statistics, thereby indirectly suggesting to the government that a crackdown on migrants is imperative for the fight against terrorism. Sometimes state governments carry out these studies by themselves: the Assam government spent Rs.1.7 billion between January 2001 and September 2006, which resulted in identification of 9,149 foreigners, most of whom were Bangladeshis. S.P.Sinha, a scholar on the North-East writes that most of the insurgencies taking place there were owing entirely to the influx of illegal migrants into India’s borders. The Chittagong Hill Tracts of erstwhile East Pakistan and current-day Bangladesh account for nearly all the insurgent groups of India's northeast. In Tripura, the large influx of refugees from East Pakistan and the unlawful transfer of tribal lands incited anti-Bengali militancy, S.P.Sinha claims. Sinha concludes his many claims by suggesting that for India to breathe easier in the North-East, it must have efficient administrators and curb illegal migration. Other reports suggest that the increasing numbers of Bangladeshis in the North-East is to the effect of changing the demographic profile. Even if such claims about Bangladeshis being involved in terrorist activities may be true, there is little debate about how much of it is in response to ethnic nationalism, regional genocide resorted to by Bodo rebels, ULFA activists so on.

Examples from the Russian Federation: Russia has regarded Chechnya as a rogue state ever since the disintegration of the USSR. When the Chechen National Congress broke away from Soviet Russia, the new Russian Federation denounced the new Chechen government. Successive Russian governments have wanted Chechnya to be part of the Russian Federation, they have done everything to alienate Chechen IDPs. Russian authorities, namely the Kremlin, immigration authorities and Russian policemen have used the rhetoric of terrorism to deny human rights of housing, employment and the right to travel to Chechen IDPs. Where camps for IDPs were set up, Russian migration authorities compelled approximately 20,000 displaced people to leave the tent camps and return to Chechnya. Kate Desormeau who writes on Chechen IDPs records that Chechen IDPs were denied many rights by bureaucratic coercion, having officially prejudiced residents against these IDPs as potential terrorists. This is justified by the Russians’ policy of ‘securitization of migration’, where migrants are bureaucratically made out to be security risks.Human Rights Watch specifies that officials have constantly harassed displaced persons by threatening them with arrest on false charges and withdrawal of food allowances. They have predominantly threatened IDPs with cutting of gas and electricity supplies during winter months. What is more, Russian authorities have barred international agencies from distributing relief to Chechen IDPs who lacked documentation. Such threats are to effect of forcing Chechens to return to their homes: in all this Russia has blatantly violated obligations under international law. Constantly, it has taken refuge under the claim that its crackdown on Chechen IDPs contributes to the international campaign against terrorism.

Israeli treatment of migrants: Much of the politics surrounding Isreal’s terror campaign against Palestine in occupied territories like West Bank and Gaza is far too well-documented to be cited in detail here. However, less well-known is the drive to clean its own mainland of Palestinian workers. Though Israel used to rely excessively on Palestinian workers to work on farms and construction sites, after an uprising in West Bank in 2000, it brought in foreign workers to replace such migrants, regarding the Palestinians in Israel as a security risk. Owing to such drives, illegal migrants have lost whatever minimal housing and employment rights, seeking sanctuary in makeshift churches. Israel instead of being accountable to international law for all the deportations it is carrying out, is conducting voluntary repatriation programmes for Palestinians.

The fallouts of equating migrants with terrorists, laying down policies and releasing statistics that amounts to doing so has been largely in the nature of human rights violations. States have had a variety of agendas to fulfill by such association of migration with terrorism: be it protectionism, ethnic nationalism, security so on. Parties in countries like Israel and Russia are impelled by local prejudices to contest elections by promising tough action against such migration (not simply immigration). By fuelling the opinion that migrants apart from being a drain on states’ resources, a threat to the local labour forces and the cause of increased incidence of terrorism, such an association (of illegal migration with terrorism), vitiates politics and takes away human rights of migrants. What Kate Desormeau terms securitization of migration is something that turns the discourse of illegal migration into a discourse of security and terrorism and this is common across countries.

Ishita Dey

Slavoj Zivek in the Article ‘Who are the good guys?” in International Herald Tribune ( May 31-1 June 2008 ) reflects on the relations between China and Tibet. As China gears up for the Olympic Games 2008 the traditional torch relay in various parts of the world was subject to much protest because of the various human rights violation in Tibet by the People’s Republic of China. While the protesters against the Beijing Olympics feel that one world can have many dreams as opposed to “one world one dream” but Zivek raises a question about what definition of Tibetan dream are the protesters manufacturing. While much has been said and written about the plight of the Tibetans and we have raised our voices against the atrocities in Tibet; we cannot ignore certain facts that we need to ponder on as Zivek (ibid) points out. Some of the questions he raises are: Firstly, the history between China acting as the “protective overlord” to Tibet goes back as long as the “anti communist Kuomintang” who also “insisted on Chinese Sovereignty over Tibet”. Secondly, since the early 1950s there has been systematic and substantial involvement in stirring up anti-Chinese troubles in Tibet. Thirdly, the recent TV footages of angry Tibetan protesters burning, looting and killing Chinese immigrants and their stores should be treated on the same lines as we measure other violent protests. The protest movement is no more peaceful protest. Thirdly, we need to acknowledge that the Chinese have invested heavily in the region. Some parts of Tibet are better off than China’s own underdeveloped Western rural provinces. Lastly over the last years there has been a change in the Chinese strategy towards Tibet. “The Chinese rely more on ethnic and economic colonization, rapidly transforming Lhasa into a Chinese capitalist Wild West with karaoke bars and Disney like Buddhist theme park’ for Western tourists. Besides all these aspects; the brutal image of the Chinese soldiers and policemen terrorizing has another tale yet to be told. These images speak of a much more American style effective socioeconomic transformation that has gone beyond mcdonaldisation. Mcdonaldisation was one way to create an image of the global world. And post Den Xiaoping China has learnt the lesson and employing so that the Tibetans will be reduced to the status of Native Americans in the United States. Does this inherently imply that political democracy is the natural political accompaniment of capitalism?

To read the full article click on the link in the news section ->
http://www.iht.com/articles/2008/05/30/opinion/edzizek.php

Debdatta Chowdhury

The news piece ‘Drowning By Numbers, Or The Non-Reproduction Of New Orleans’ by Benedict Seymour (February, 2006) is an on-your-face report on the re-construction of New Orleans sans the black working class. Victimising the black working class through destruction of their housing and social networks, transfer of public assets into private ownership and gentrification of the already gentrified USA, had already set the ground for such blatant violation of human rights and dignity. What is witnessed in the wake of reconstruction post-Katrina, is only a newer version of ‘primitive accumulation’, with the state backing the transfer of property into private hands, creating a new class of proletariat workers divorced from their means of social reproduction. This is accompanied by an attack on the price of the labour-power, thus depriving the workers of their former means of subsistence and raising the real cost of living. Legal obstacles like petty but effective restriction (not allowing them to vote if one has lost his/her ID during the hurricane) or technical omissions, have been put to use to prevent the blacks from reconstructing their lives, post-Katrina. Every effort is being made on the part of the state to prevent the return of the black working class neighbourhoods to their society. Lowering of wages followed the eviction of the black working class from New Orleans that ensured the minimum return of these evicted people to their older settlements. Even if they did, they returned to a much worse situation of low wages, racism and hyper-exploitation. These returnees are used as low wage immigrant labours. Using low-or-no wage immigrant labour ensures absolute surplus value for their capitalist employers. This trend is the latest to be seen in the capitalist modus operandi, but in no way an exceptional scenario. Devalorisation of labour is not a new phenomenon. But earlier it was accompanied by improved standard of living, shorter workday, new infrastructure and institutions for the reproduction of labour-power like housing, hospitals, schools. The devalorisation process in New Orleans in the wake of the disaster was followed by depreciation of labour-power and the non-replacement of the means of social production. This version of primitive accumulation is the bitter culmination of US capital’s long-term strategy of devalorisation. The devastation of New Orleans is clearly a nail in the coffin of the myth of America’s post-industrial renaissance. Truly then, the relief process in New Orleans is being called the ‘second hurricane’

For the detailed report, click on the url to the right:-
http://thelondonparticular.org/items/drowning.html

Ishita Dey

Right to return has been one of the pertinent questions raised by refugee activists for decades. The recent resettlement programme of Bhutanese refugees to countries such as USA, Canada, Netherlands, Norway, Denmark, Australia and New Zealand was the topic of much discussion with some activists arguing that this resettlement programme cannot be the durable solution. The explosion of two crude bombs in the office compounds of the IOM office, Damak, is seen by the Nepalse Police as an act of those who were opposed to the resettlement programme and have termed it as “human trafficking” in the past. Such attacks while reveal that despite 38,500 Bhutanese refugees registering for the resettlement programme there are concerns within the camps that need to be addressed. The Human Rights Organisation of Bhutan has considered this an unfortunate incident. It has urged every Bhutanese to restrain from any such violent activity. Meanwhile HUROB has also appealed that there should be proper dissemination of information, which still lacks and there should not be psychological compulsion or family and relatives follow up and binding. No one has objection to voluntary resettlement as is the individual rights. In its update HUROB appealed to the international community and Bhutan Government and Bhutanese parties to work on a peaceful and responsible path. It has specially urged the Bhutanese Parties, organizations and individual to refrain from all anti-social activities and respect individual rights and maintain refugee camps a peaceful place.

UPDATE: BOMBS HURLED ON IOM OFFICE


As reported some unidentified group of people hurled two improvised explosive device (IED) socket bombs in the premises of the International Office of the Migration at Damak yesterday at around 7.30pm(IOM) set up in October 2007 to resettle the Bhutanese refugees to USA. Since the US announced to resettle about 60000 Bhutanese refugees and few thousands by other core group countries for Bhutanese refugees as an effort to find comprehensive solution to 17 years old protracted problem, the IOM has been actively working on the process and till date about 1200 Bhutanese refugees have reached to the country of their destination in America, Australia, Norway, Netherlands, Canada and New Zealand. However, there has been from the very beginning, conflict, confusion and controversy over the only resettlement process as majority of the refugees would still like to go back to own home land in Bhutan and have been urging the International community particularly the Core Group for Bhutanese refugees to expedite all three options, repatriation, resettlement and local assimilation as principle of amicable and comprehensive solution justifiable to all the refugees. Despite the incessant concern of the refugees on all options of durable solutions, the core group has so far given importance only on resettlement which in actual repatriation should have been the priority and thus the apathetic stand on repatriation giving respite on the perpetrator, the Bhutan regime has angered most of the Bhutanese refugees, especially the youths. The youths who belong to revolutionary organizations have been vehemently opposing the resettlement process which preceded the repatriation, the first option of the refugees.

The undesirable activities of the revolutionary organizations are becoming gradually nuance in the camps disturbing peace and tranquility. Exactly no one is certain of their motive of action but the trend is unpleasant and there is violation of individual rights and insecurity persists. The attack on IOM yesterday evening is the third time. Before this, twice the IOM vehicle ferrying the refugees were attacked. The incidents are unfortunate and Human Rights Organization of Bhutan (HUROB) is very much concern and wish that every Bhutanese restrain from carrying out such activities.

While denouncing the action of whosoever and whatsoever the motive, HUROB would like to appeal all the concerns to delve deeply into the sentiments of the refugees and try to work out a congenial situation appreciable even by such revolutionary groups and avoid all untoward happenings. Mean while HUROB would like to take the opportunity to express its concern and also not liked by the revolutionary organizations as reported by the camp people and own feeling in the modus operandi of UNHCR and IOM particularly on the motivation of the refugees for resettlement. There should be proper dissemination of information which still lacks and there should not be psychological compulsion or family and relatives follow up and binding. No one has objection to voluntary resettlement as is the individual rights. At the same time the core country for Bhutanese refugees should in equal interest take up the repatriation issue and urge Bhutan government to accept back its people without delay in order to establish permanent peace and stability in the country. Lastly, appeal all the Bhutanese Parties, organizations and individual to refrain from all anti-social activities and respect individual rights and maintain refugee camps a peaceful place.
S.B.Subba

To read the news article click on the link in the news section ->

http://www.earthtimes.org/articles/show/216038,international-migration-office-bombed-in-eastern-nepal.html

Ishita Dey

The book explores as its title suggests some of the myths and realities of the economic prospect of SEZs in India. SEZs as we all know are an improved version of the existing EPZ to generate more export. The authors do not question the “export oriented” development but addresses whether the proposed SEZs would generate export and FDI flows with the existing infrastructure. The book begins with the argument that the creation of new economic spaces is not a new phenomenon. The geographically delimited “enclaves” has existed since the medieval ages. One of the first modern zones came up in Shanon International Airport at Ireland in 1956. Two types of zones dominate the modern economic spaces: - i) Export Processing zones (EPZ)/Free Trade Zones (FTZ) ii) SEZ. In most of the regions across the world there is a preference for EPZ/ FTZ. There are relatively more EPZs/ FTZs in North America (i.e., the U.S.) and Asia (South, East and South East). The authors argue that the developing countries across the world have adopted the policy of creating special economic enclaves. Drawing reference from the World Bank study, the book suggests that till 2007, approximately 3000 zone projects taking place in 120 countries across the world. Most of the developing countries have taken to these economic enclaves which carries the potential of creating more employment opportunities because of the of the fiscal incentives “in the form of low or zero taxes on income and export profits and duty-free imports” are essential to create more job opportunities and improving the quality of existing jobs”. One of the ways to increase the employment opportunity is to utilize the low skilled workforce. There is also a hint that the growth of SEZ will increase more work opportunities in the construction sector.

The book in a nutshell is an overview of the SEZ scenario in India- the trends and prospects. The reality it offers us is based on a comparative understanding of the existing enclaves across the World and with special reference to the Chinese model of SEZ. The study suggests that vision of SEZ as hinted by Late Murasoli Maran, the Union Minister in 2002 was supposed to have a minimum area of 10000 ha. “A Lot has changed since this”. The book precisely documents this shifts and changes in the SEZ policy since 2002 to 2005 when the SEZ act was constituted. This is evident in the chapterisation. The book introduces the backdrop against which the SEZ in India came into existence through an account of the existing economic enclaves across the world, the exports generated in these regions, the viability of the already existing Export Processing Zones in India and the increase in exports in the already functional SEZs in India. The following chapter on “The New SEZs: Where, What and Why?” is particularly interesting because it challenges a general perception that the states are trying to outdo each other to woo developers to invest in their states. Drawing from the total number of approvals granted till 18 June 2008 on the Govt of India’s website on SEZ; it shows that out of the 464 approved SEZs; the majority of SEZ are spread across five states; Maharashtra, Andhra Pradesh, Haryana, Karnataka and Tamil Nadu followed by West Bengal and Gujarat. 353 SEZs belong to these seven states. The book raises a significant question “Will this distinctly unbalanced spatial distribution of SEZs influence the outlook for India’s future regional development?” The study predicts that in the case of China though on one hand, the coastal bias of the SEZ policy proved to be beneficial in terms of accessibility and other benefits there grew an economic chasm between the hinterland and coastal areas. Owing to our already existing regional disparities in other sectors due to disparities in per capita income between the states especially when the five states sharing the highest SEZ fall under higher per capita income category. This in a sense would be “circulation of capital and goods” rather than “distribution of goods and services”.

IT and IT related services dominate the number of industries that are going to come up in the approved areas. The study also predicts that the real estate developers are going to have a high stake in real estate business with all the country’s leading real estate developers filing in SEZ applications. Another viable issue that faces SEZ is whether the industrial units will be the answer to the rising unemployment figures. How effective are the training centres that are being set up in various zones to impart training to landless people ? Will this training be sufficient to create skilled labour force that these industries will require?

The issue of landless and the “right to life” are explored through a critique of the present Land Acquisition Act 1894. The regulatory and unchallenging characteristic of this act has been the subject of criticism and continues to remain even in 21 st century when tracts of land whatever the size may be are being acquired in the name of “public purpose”. The authors highlight that the amendment in 1984 to expand the definition of “public purpose” to acquire land by private developers or any other party. Secondly the seller cannot challenge in a court of law on why the government needed that piece of land, except to the level of compensation which immediately turns our attention to the Rehabilitation and Resettlement policy we have in place.

It is against this backdrop that the study suggests that the SEZs indeed have quite a bumpy road ahead considering the domestic banks are not keen on financing SEZ for fear of building up Non-performing assets. Apart from finding financial guarantors for the projects, the SEZ developers in certain places will have to develop linkage routes. The connectivity factor is going to be crucial in the success story of SEZ. Thus SEZs definitely will not aid industrially backward areas.