Lack of Protection Plagues Burma's Rohingya Refugees in Bangladesh

The Muslim Rohingya people of Burma’s Arakan state are in an impossible situation. They are wanted neither in Burma nor in neighboring Bangladesh.

The flight of the Rohingya from Burma is the direct result of Burmese government policies, which deny them citizenship under the 1982 Citizenship Law, limit their religious practice, facilitate land confiscations for army camps or settlement by Buddhist settlers and prohibit them from leaving their villages to access markets, employment, education and medical care. Unlike the Buddhist Rakhine who also live in Arakan state, or the ethnically dominant Burmans, the Rohingya must pay a large fee in order for their daughters to be married and to register their newborns. Such discrimination has contributed to a continuing influx of Rohingya into Bangladesh, estimated at more than 10,000 in 2002.Despite this clear record of discrimination by the Government of Burma, the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) has stepped up repatriation efforts in an attempt to phase out its responsibilities to the 21,000 refugees residing in camps in Bangladesh.

This group remains from the mass exodus of 250,000 Rohingya who sought refuge in Bangladesh in the early 90s. These refugees received "prima facie" refugee status, obliging UNHCR to protect and assist them. Refugees fleeing similar conditions following the mass repatriations in 1994 and 1995, however, were less fortunate, having been labeled economic migrants who have no legal right to UNHCR’s protection and assistance. While conditions for Rohingya inside Burma have hardly changed in the last decade, what appears to have changed is UNHCR’s policy towards Rohingya concerning rights to UNHCR protection and support. By stepping up repatriation efforts and reducing assistance to refugees (See RI Bulletin: Burma’s Rohingya Refugees Face an Uncertain Future in Bangladesh), UNHCR has created an environment in which protection for the Rohingya is virtually untenable.

In the course of an assessment mission to Cox’s Bazaar district, where Rohingya refugees live in camps and illegally among the local population, Refugees International found clear evidence of attempts by camp officials to coerce refugees to return to Burma. Methods of coercion which refugees reported to RI include a reduction in certain basic entitlements, including food, withholding of medical services or pharmaceuticals, forced relocation within the camps to poorer housing, beatings, and, most commonly, threats of and actual jail sentences. Mohammad, a father of six in his thirties, was asked to agree to repatriate by camp officials in the presence of UNHCR. When he dared to tell UNHCR he did not want to return, he alleges that the camp authorities later beat and tortured him until he fell unconscious. He was then sent to jail on false charges for more than two years. UNHCR, aware of his situation, was unable to help him. Now that Mohammad is out of jail, he faces the same predicament.

Already the camp leader has threatened him with another jail sentence if he does not agree to repatriate. “I have only two choices: I go to jail, or I go back to Burma. Going to jail is better than going to Burma,” he stated. Cases of forced repatriation are difficult to substantiate. It is not a question of people being beaten onto the boats, but a question of people being harassed constantly until refugees finally comply. A local Government representative, concerned over UNHCR’s premature withdrawal from its repatriation role, has admitted that, “UNHCR’s decision to withdraw from the camps has caused us to try to speed up repatriations. The refugees who do not want to return cannot stay here.

The Government will send them back even if they do not want to go. Bangladesh is a poor country and cannot take care of this situation.” In addition to refugees refusing to go back, there is also the issue of the 16,000 refugees whom the Government of Burma has not yet approved for repatriation. Fear that this group will never be cleared for repatriation raises concerns about their future status and ability to survive in Bangladesh.

There is no official policy of what will happen to this group, while those who have been accepted by the Burmese Government face enormous pressure to return from camp officials and the refugee leaders working with them.UNHCR has been unable to ensure that returns are voluntary. Despite efforts to build in checks to give refugees the opportunity to refuse, refugees rarely have a chance to speak privately with UNHCR staff. Rather, they must express their refusal in the presence of the very officials and camp leaders who are coercing them. UNHCR has received dozens of reports of coercion from refugees and other concerned sources, but the involvement of Government and camp officials in investigating claims simply adds further punishment to refugees who dare to speak out.

Some refugees have chosen to leave the camps and live illegally in hiding in surrounding towns. UNHCR claims that once it disengages from the repatriations, it still plans to perform its protection duties. UNHCR’s poor record monitoring repatriations to date and the fact that by its own admission it is under-staffed give cause for concern about the future of protection for the Rohingya. And with responsibility for the camps being handed over to the Government of Bangladesh, it is unclear how UNHCR will be able to uphold its protection mandate.UNHCR insists that refugees have the option of integrating into the community once it disengages. As a challenge to this assumption, however, one has only to look as far as the slum settlement of 4,000 in Teknaf. Government authorities evicted this group of illegal Rohingya from their homes in late 2002.

They now live in horrendous conditions with mortality rates near emergency levels and no means of obtaining basic services and protection. Further “disengagement” of UNHCR from the Rohingya caseload amounts to disengagement from their legal obligation to provide assistance and protection to these refugees. The proposed phase out plan is likely to leave the Rohingya with limited redress for assistance or protection from refoulement or abuse by local authorities.

Refugees International, therefore, recommends that:

• The Government of Bangladesh honor the principle of non-refoulement.
• UNHCR continue its camp-based assistance and protection role.
• UNHCR cease all repatriation activities until an independent investigation has been conducted into the voluntary nature of repatriations.
• UNHCR strengthen its protection activities by increasing its presence in the camps and hiring more expatriate staff.
• UNHCR investigate claims of coercion and give refugees the opportunity to communicate with UNHCR privately.
• UNHCR resume provision of full entitlements to refugees residing in camps.
  Donor governments continue to fund humanitarian and protection programs for the Rohingya.
• The Office of the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights and independent human rights monitors conduct an investigation into the discriminatory policies and human rights abuses of the Government of Burma against the Rohingya.