Bhutanese imbroglio purposely vexed !
By Mohan Tamang
On Sept 27, 1991, former Justice of the supreme court of India V R Krishna Iyer had aptly said: "The time has come for the people of Bhutan to liberate themselves from a tottering diadem, a tidy tyranny which is illiterate in its polity and have no rule of law".
India had made tryst with its destiny and that tryst is not confined to Indian humanity alone. Humanity is one. People are sovereign. But the disillusioned king never knows that people's upsurge can't be suppressed all the time. The glaring example is the monarch of Nepal.
The plight of the Bhutanese refugees continue to remain unheard in India, albeit international jurisprudence makes it obligatory on every state or country to treat the refugees gently for reason that their life is in jeopardy. The vexed problem of Bhutanese refugees has entered the 17th year. The desperation melting in the refugee camp, if unattended, would explode one day.
How fair the attitude of India is towards the Bhutanese refugees in comparison to other refugees of the region is clear. The refugee law is an inseparable part of human rights law. It follows from Article 14(1) - of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (1948), 'everyone has the right to seek and enjoy in other countries asylum from persecution, except persecution genuinely arising from non-political crimes or from acts contrary to the principles of the United Nations'.
Unfortunately, we see diametrical postures taken by India towards the Bhutanese vis-à-vis other refugees like Tibetan, Burmese and Pakistanis who got all possible help; some refugees from Pakistan were assimilated as Indian citizens irrespective of their religions.
The theory that India is not well-informed does not have any grain. The prominent Indian civil and political rights activists raised and are still raising concern at times; especially in the case of Rongthong Kunley Dorji, the Chairman of Druk National Congress while he was incarcerated in Tihar jail unjustifiably.
In the context, George Fernandez along with thirteen other Indian parliamentarians and civil society activists wrote to the Narashimha Rao Government, 'if he (Rongthong Kunley Dorji) is not released by the afternoon of 14th August 1997, I shall have no option but to boycott the midnight session of parliament meant to commemorate that night in 1947 when India woke to life and freedom." This emotional and historical moment and consequent refusal by Fernandez to visit Bhutan as Defense Minister should have opened the eyes of India.
However, there was resurgence of hope when former king of Bhutan acknowledged the condolence letter dated 9th Sept 2003 to the president of Indo-Bhutan Friendship Society during the sad demise of royal highness Ashi Phuntsho Choden Wangchuck; considered to be soft towards Lhotshamps.
Well, that too for unknown reason sublimated. Futile appeals after appeals from district magistrate to President were made. Satyagrah at Mechi bridge on the Indo-Nepal border for the last 87 weeks has failed to generate India's sympathy. Now there is growing anti-India sentiment among the refugees in the camps.
India has in recent time increased its financial assistance to Bhutan. This indicates India's covert act to suppress the legitimate demand of human rights and democracy in Bhutan. Now the Bhutanese refugees have no hope but to continue fighting for their rights. The international community has also failed to engage Bhutan.
The Bhutanese refugee situation is no less than human catastrophe no matter how the international community including the largest democratic country claims it. It is a serious crime committed by the Druk regime at the behest of New Delhi. Women were raped, innocent civilians were killed and leaders have been jailed before the Druk king evicted the one fifth of the population.
Bhutan is still blowing the trumpet on former monarch. During the recent SAARC summit, Khandu Wangchuck, the prime minister of Bhutan praised tin-pot dictator Jigme Singye Wangchuck and his pet project Gross National Happiness just to brush aside the one fifth of the people languishing in the refugee camps.
The regional development goals have been completely overshadowed. The much-glamorized version of Gross National Happiness contains no grain in modern day economics. The king cannot impose happiness when it is a spontaneous process.
(The writer is human rights lawyer)
democraticyouth@indiatimes.com
On Sept 27, 1991, former Justice of the supreme court of India V R Krishna Iyer had aptly said: "The time has come for the people of Bhutan to liberate themselves from a tottering diadem, a tidy tyranny which is illiterate in its polity and have no rule of law".
India had made tryst with its destiny and that tryst is not confined to Indian humanity alone. Humanity is one. People are sovereign. But the disillusioned king never knows that people's upsurge can't be suppressed all the time. The glaring example is the monarch of Nepal.
The plight of the Bhutanese refugees continue to remain unheard in India, albeit international jurisprudence makes it obligatory on every state or country to treat the refugees gently for reason that their life is in jeopardy. The vexed problem of Bhutanese refugees has entered the 17th year. The desperation melting in the refugee camp, if unattended, would explode one day.
How fair the attitude of India is towards the Bhutanese refugees in comparison to other refugees of the region is clear. The refugee law is an inseparable part of human rights law. It follows from Article 14(1) - of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (1948), 'everyone has the right to seek and enjoy in other countries asylum from persecution, except persecution genuinely arising from non-political crimes or from acts contrary to the principles of the United Nations'.
Unfortunately, we see diametrical postures taken by India towards the Bhutanese vis-à-vis other refugees like Tibetan, Burmese and Pakistanis who got all possible help; some refugees from Pakistan were assimilated as Indian citizens irrespective of their religions.
The theory that India is not well-informed does not have any grain. The prominent Indian civil and political rights activists raised and are still raising concern at times; especially in the case of Rongthong Kunley Dorji, the Chairman of Druk National Congress while he was incarcerated in Tihar jail unjustifiably.
In the context, George Fernandez along with thirteen other Indian parliamentarians and civil society activists wrote to the Narashimha Rao Government, 'if he (Rongthong Kunley Dorji) is not released by the afternoon of 14th August 1997, I shall have no option but to boycott the midnight session of parliament meant to commemorate that night in 1947 when India woke to life and freedom." This emotional and historical moment and consequent refusal by Fernandez to visit Bhutan as Defense Minister should have opened the eyes of India.
However, there was resurgence of hope when former king of Bhutan acknowledged the condolence letter dated 9th Sept 2003 to the president of Indo-Bhutan Friendship Society during the sad demise of royal highness Ashi Phuntsho Choden Wangchuck; considered to be soft towards Lhotshamps.
Well, that too for unknown reason sublimated. Futile appeals after appeals from district magistrate to President were made. Satyagrah at Mechi bridge on the Indo-Nepal border for the last 87 weeks has failed to generate India's sympathy. Now there is growing anti-India sentiment among the refugees in the camps.
India has in recent time increased its financial assistance to Bhutan. This indicates India's covert act to suppress the legitimate demand of human rights and democracy in Bhutan. Now the Bhutanese refugees have no hope but to continue fighting for their rights. The international community has also failed to engage Bhutan.
The Bhutanese refugee situation is no less than human catastrophe no matter how the international community including the largest democratic country claims it. It is a serious crime committed by the Druk regime at the behest of New Delhi. Women were raped, innocent civilians were killed and leaders have been jailed before the Druk king evicted the one fifth of the population.
Bhutan is still blowing the trumpet on former monarch. During the recent SAARC summit, Khandu Wangchuck, the prime minister of Bhutan praised tin-pot dictator Jigme Singye Wangchuck and his pet project Gross National Happiness just to brush aside the one fifth of the people languishing in the refugee camps.
The regional development goals have been completely overshadowed. The much-glamorized version of Gross National Happiness contains no grain in modern day economics. The king cannot impose happiness when it is a spontaneous process.
(The writer is human rights lawyer)
democraticyouth@indiatimes.com
posted by Oh My GOD | 5:31 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home