Bhutan: New democracy, old problems
By Sudeshna Sarkar

April 7, 2008 – (ISN Security Watch) Though Bhutan held its first general election to phase out absolute monarchy, refugees in exile say it's a farce, writes Sudeshna Sarkar for ISN Security Watch.

On the day the reclusive Himalayan kingdom of Bhutan held its first election and the world hailed the birth of the "newest democracy," Khinamaya Thapa a Bhutanese citizen, couldn't stop crying.

"They have broken my heart," the 64-year-old sobbed, waiting in a refugee transit center in Nepal for a night flight that would take her and her 20-year-old son to yet another country after 17 hard years in exile.

"[M]y own country threw me out for my ethnic origin. Now the host country wants me to go somewhere else. Where will I get peace in my old age?"

Now that Bhutan has achieved status as a "new democracy," Bhutanese refugees living abroad want to return to their homeland. However, the Druk government is still unrelenting toward the refugees and there is every indication that nothing will change in terms of its "ethnic" policy, despite the elections.

According to a 2006 UNCHR report, pressure on the Nepal social system, along with complaints from citizens that the refugees drive down wages and "contribute to crime" are among the catalysts driving the country to find a solution to the crisis.

Thapa is among the over 108,000 Bhutanese who have been living in refugee camps in Nepal for almost two decades after being evicted by the government of Bhutan due to their ethnic origin.

Known as Lhotsampas, the forefathers of these Bhutanese came from Nepal and still adhere to the Nepalese language and Hindu religion, while Bhutan is a Buddhist kingdom where the majority speak the Dzongkha language.

The long road into exile

The Lhotsampas began to feel the sting of discrimination in 1985 when a new citizenship act came into force, stripping many of them of their status as bona fide citizens. Three years later, then-king Jigme Singye Wangchuk instituted a new policy of etiquette and manners that made it mandatory for all citizens to wear Bhutanese traditional clothing in public and use the national language in all government institutions.

Harassed and intimidated into leaving their homes and going into exile, the Lhotsampas took part in two public protests in 1990 and 1997, which triggered an even stronger retaliatory measure.

Finally, thousands of Lhotsampas were forced to flee to neighboring India and from there over 90,000 of them filtered into Nepal.

By 2008, their number has grown to over 108,000 – one-sixth of Bhutan's approximately 600,000-strong population.

On 24 March, Bhutan held its first general election, described by the government as a step by the king to modernize his kingdom and move from absolute monarchy to a parliamentary democracy.

But the refugees - who were neither allowed to vote in nor contest the election - are calling it a sham.

"The election has no meaning," said Ghanshyam Timilsinha, a farmer from Danabari in eastern Bhutan who was evicted with his five-member family 18 years ago. "I too am a citizen of Bhutan. Yet I can't vote or even set foot in my own homeland, he told ISN Security Watch.

Party head: Election a 'total farce'

Only two parties were allowed to contest the election to the 47-member National Assembly, the lower house of Bhutan's parliament. Despite predictions of a close contest, the Druk Phuensum Tshogpa (DPT, or Bhutan United Party) led by two-time prime minister Jigmi Thinley won 44 seats in a landslide victory.

With Thinley headed back to power, he is likely to continue to execute the policies initiated by Wangchuk even though, officially, the king has abdicated in favor of his Oxford-educated eldest son, Jigme Khesar Namgyel.

Though the election was monitored by more than 40 international observers, including the UN, and praised by the US as a "positive step in Bhutan's transition to a democratic, constitutional monarchy," it is not just the refugees who are protesting.

Members of parliament from the People's Democratic Party, which won just two seats, resigned on 4 March, alleging that the winning party had violated the election code of conduct by campaigning until the last moment.

"The election will not change anything," said Ganesh Rijal, another refugee in Kathmandu. "You can't criticize the royal family or government officials. If you are not a royalist, you can't register a party in Bhutan. How can it be a democracy then?" he asked in an interview with ISN Security Watch.

Balaram Paudyal, an exile living in eastern Nepal, heads the National Front for Democracy in Bhutan (NFD-Bhutan), one of the at least three parties that were not allowed to contest the election.

"The so-called first ever and much hyped newest parliamentary general election is a total farce," Paudyal told ISN Security Watch. "It was intended to hoodwink the international community and develop the regime's own absolute strength."

Last year, NFD-Bhutan tried to stage several "long marches" from the refugee camps in Nepal to Bhutan. However, while trying to cross the bridge connecting Nepal with India, Bhutan's biggest trade partner and foreign affairs advisor, the unarmed refugees, including a large number of women and teenagers, were fired on by Indian border patrol forces. Two marchers were killed.

The incident created an international outcry and the Indian authorities were forced to engage the refugees in dialogue. However, NFD-Bhutan now says it will start another movement for the repatriation of refugees.

"We urge the international community to condemn the recently held election and put pressure on the Bhutanese king to fulfil our demands," NFD-Bhutan said in a statement.

The demands include declaring the election null and dismissing the present government. The group says an interim government should hold a fresh election with the participation of all interested parties, including those in exile.

The exiled party is also demanding the unconditional release of all political prisoners, the scrapping of the Citizenship Act and the granting of permission for all genuine Bhutanese citizens to return to their homesteads.
Third-country resettlement: More harm than good?

After 15 unsuccessful rounds of repatriation talks between Bhutan and Nepal - and rising militancy in refugee camps - in 2005, a US-led core group including Norway, Canada, New Zealand, Denmark, Australia and the Netherlands persuaded Nepal to allow third country resettlement of the refugees.

In the week that Bhutan held its first parliamentary election, 120 Bhutanese left their camps for new homes abroad while almost 12,000 had completed applications for third-country resettlement.

"We expect 1,500 refugees to be resettled every month," Daisy Dell , chief of the UN High Commissioner for Refugees in Nepal, which is administering the seven refugee camps there, told ISN Security Watch. She estimated that 10,000 refugees will have been resettled by 2008 and 20,000 by 2009.

The US has expressed its willingness to absorb at least 60,000 refugees, and the other six countries are ready to take in the rest.
But those who want to return home have a fresh fear to grapple with.

"If the refugees are resettled in a third country, Bhutan will realize that it can expel its citizens and get away with it," Teknath Rizal, a former advisor of Wangchuk who was imprisoned for opposing the crackdown on ethnic communities and then forced to leave the country, told ISN Security Watch.

"In that case, there will be further expulsion of citizens and absolutely no pressure to take back those refugees who want to return home."

From:http://www.isn.ethz.ch/news/sw/details.cfm?id=18832