SOUTH ASIA - House Foreign Affairs Committee Democrats

2240Since 1990 more than 235,000 Bangladeshis have been deported, many fromMaharashtra and West Bengal. The occasional deportation of Bangladeshis judgedto have entered the country illegally continued during the year, but there was norepetition of the systematic roundup of Bangladeshis for mass deportation that wasconducted by the Maharashtra government in 1998. The Government estimates thatthere are 10 million Bangladeshis living illegally in the country. On August 28, theSupreme Court gave the central Government until January 2001 to repeal the IllegalMigrants Determination by Tribunal (IMDT) Act of 1985. The court ruled thatthe law, which is largely aimed at illegal Bangladeshi immigrants, is being appliedonly in Assam, and therefore is discriminatory. Bodo-Santhal ethnic clashes, whichbegan in April 1998, continued throughout the year. More than 87,000 persons liveunder poor conditions in relief camps in Assam’s Kokrajhar, Gosaigaon, and adjoiningdistricts as a result of the ongoing violence between Bodos and Santhals.The spring and summer 1999 incursion of Pakistan-backed armed forces into territoryon the Indian side of the line of control around Kargil in the state of Jammuand Kashmir and the Indian military campaign to repel the intrusion forced asmany 50,000 residents of Jammu and Kashmir from their homes, a number ofwhom took refuge on the Paskistani side of the line of control. Many had theirhomes destroyed. Since that conflict, artillery shelling of the region by Pakistan haskept many of the internally displaced persons from returning and driven othersfrom their homes. On October 12, Jammu and Kashmir home minister MustaqAhmad Lone told the State Assembly that 43,510 persons remained displaced (seeSections 1.a., 1.c., and 1.g.).In a number of northern states, most notably Orissa, Bihar, and West Bengal,hundreds of thousands of persons were displaced temporarily due to severe floodingand cyclonic storms during the monsoon season.The law does not contain provisions for processing refugees or asylum seekers inaccordance with the 1951 U.N. Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees andits 1967 Protocol, nor is there a clear national policy for the treatment of refugees.The Office of the U.N. High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) has no formal status,but the Government permits the UNHCR to assist certain groups of refugees(notably Afghans, Iranians, Somalis, Burmese, and Sudanese). The U.N. High Commissionerfor Refugees, Sadako Ogata, visited the country in May (see Section 4).The Government has not permitted the UNHCR to assist other refugee groups,including Sri Lankan Tamils, to whose camps in Tamil Nadu the Government continuedto bar access by the UNHCR and NGO’s (see Section 4). The Governmentprovides first asylum to some refugees, most notably in recent years to Tibetan andSri Lankan Tamil refugees. However, this policy is applied inconsistently. For example,the insistence of some border authorities on the presentation of passport andvisas by those claiming refugee status occasionally has resulted in individuals orgroups being refused admittance. This has occurred in recent years in cases involvingChin and Rakhine refugees from Burma, and Afghans who entered the countrythrough Pakistan. Refugees are not required to make claims in other countries.Cramped and unhygienic conditions reportedly exist in some of the camps for SriLankan Tamils in Tamil Nadu.The Government recognizes certain groups, including Chakmas from Bangladesh,Tamils from Sri Lanka, and Tibetans as refugees and provides them with assistancein refugee camps or in resettlement areas. According to UNHCR and governmentstatistics, there were approximately 98,000 Tibetans, approximately 64,989 SriLankan Tamils in 131 camps, and perhaps as many as 80,000 Sri Lankan Tamilsoutside of the camps living in the country at year’s end. The refugees in the campsare permitted to work, and the state and central governments pay to educate refugeechildren and provide limited welfare benefits. Many Chakmas from Bangladeshhave been repatriated voluntarily, including all of the estimated 56,000 personswho had been residing in Tripura. Some 80,000 Chakma permanent residentsremain in Arunachal Pradesh and Mizoram; the Supreme Court has upheld theirright to citizenship. However, the Supreme Court’s order to extend citizenship tothis group still had not been enforced by year’s end. The UNHCR reported that13,390 Afghans, 747 Burmese, 139 Iranians, 105 Somalis, 50 Sudanese, and 56 others,including Iraqis and Ethiopians, were receiving assistance from the UNHCR inthe country as of August 31. Although the Government formally does not recognizethese persons as refugees, it does not deport them. Instead, they received renewableresidence permits or their status was ignored. Increasingly during the year, someof these groupsAfghans, Iraqis, and Iranians in particular—were not granted renewalof their residence permits by the authorities on the grounds that they werenot in possession of valid national passports. Due to financial and other reasons,many refugees were unable or unwilling to obtain or renew their national passports,and therefore were unable to regularize their status in the country.VerDate 11-MAY-2000 13:46 Sep 20, 2001 Jkt 071555 PO 00000 Frm 00084 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6621 F:\WORK\COUNTRYR\S71555\71555.035 HINTREL1 PsN: HINTREL1