ROHINGYA ACTION UPDATE

[cfob@xxxxxxxxxxx]

ACTION UPDATE: JUSTICE FOR THE ROHINGYAS

Burma-Tibet Group 
OPIRG-Carleton, Ottawa, Canada

18 April 1995

We are continuing our pressure to stop the coerced repatriation
of the Rohingyas. We encourage other activists to get to know
your government officials!

1.   See report by Burma Issues, March 95 on E-mail (excerpt
     below). Get a copy of the 25-page report by the US Committee
     for Refugees: _The Return of the the Rohingya Refugees to
     Burma_ (address 1717 Massachusettes Ave., Washington DC
     20036, USA; tel. 202 347-3507; fax 202 347-3418. Especially
     useful is the analysis of the pressure by the Bangladesh
     government on the UNHCR, resulting in its failure to observe
     even basic international standards for "voluntary
     repatriation." 

2.   Contact both refugee relief NGOs and other Burma action
     groups for updates on the Rohingya situation. Ask for help
     in coordinating pressure on the authorities.

3.   Ask your government if it still funds UNHCR's repatriation
     program. If so, alert your elected representatives. Their
     inquiries have more clout. Target especially the USA, JAPAN,
     CANADA, UK and AUSTRALIA, the largest funders for this
     program to date. Ask them to urge that further funding be
     suspended. AT THE SAME TIME, support continued funding to
     UNHCR for "Care and Maintenance" of refugees remaining in
     the camps. In Canada, ALL MPs are getting a copy of the 
    USCR report, plus a letter (also on reg.burma).

4.   Call your foreign aid agency, foreign affairs ministry and
     any other agency that shares responsibility for refugees.
     Ask their position on whether the repatriation is voluntary.
     Suggest a meeting to "share information off-the-record."
     Give them the report as well, but don't expect them to
     understand it without discussion.

5.   During the meeting, ask for their understanding of
     "voluntary repatriation." Cite examples from the report.
     Stress that the mere absence of physical force does not make
     it voluntary. The refugees remember both the abuses last
     August, and UNHCR's failure to respond. Rather than being
     informed of their rights, they are told simplistic
     statements like "it's time to go back."

6.   Respect the limitations of government officials. Let them
     explain how they make decisions. But keep coming back to the
     question: "does this program meet international standards
     for voluntary repatriation?" Finally, maintain that UNHCR
     never had a basis for voluntary repatriation. They offer no
     evidence of improvement in SLORC's human rights record. All
     they have is SLORC's permission to visit returnees - with
     SLORC interpretors! There can be no effective monitoring or
     enforcement of human rights while the brutal SLORC remains
     in power. Express your concern that, every day, hundreds
     more refugees are being repatriated. 

  You can offer the following quote by the Center for
  Constitutional Rights (New York). It comes from a letter dated
  22 Mar 1995 to Unocal, whose pipeline infrastructure is being
  built by slave labour:
     "Any investigation done under the auspices of the military
     government, with government escorts or translators, is, of
     course, worthless. No human rights investigation can obtain
     truthful testimony if people are asked to speak in front of
     the very forces who are responsible for unspeakable abuses.
     Even to engage in such an irresponsible farce is unfair to
     the people interviewed and demeaning to all those involved."

  Argue that if corporations like Unocal are being taken to
  task, UNHCR will definitely face similar questions.

The main culprit, however, is the Bangladesh government's
pressure on UNHCR (see below). Pursue face-to-face meetings with
your MPs, and staff at your country's Bangladesh High Commission.

Always know your bottom line position. Your government must
suspend funding to the repatriation until it is proven voluntary,
but continue funding "care and maintenance." It should apply
pressure to both Bangladesh and UNHCR to uphold the basic rights
of refugees: the right to flee, the right to safe haven, AND the
right to return.


QUESTIONS YOUR GOVERNMENT CAN ASK UNHCR:

Present these questions to both MPs and government employees:

1.   Will UNHCR to release its monthly "situation reports" from 
     Burma and Bangladesh since last August? They will have 
    information on the Rohingya program and thus should be made
     available, given concerns about whether repatriation has
     been voluntary.

2.   What are UNHCR's standards of voluntary repatriation? ASK
     FOR THEM IN WRITING. 
  A.   Why did UNHCR switch from individual interviews in the
       camps? Note the flawed "poll" upon which they claimed the
       refugees' sudden eagerness to return (USCR report). Note
       also that refugees previously said "no" when they saw that
       UNHCR was ready to pull out of the repatriation program in
       protest of abuses, and insisted upon the interview process
       (see USCR report). Why should the interviews not be
       reinstated IMMEDIATELY? 
  B.   If repatriation is "promoted," how can it be voluntary?
       Are refugees still advised "it's time to go back" and if
       so, on what basis? Shouldn't the initiative come from the
       refugee? 
  C.   How and when are refugees informed of their RIGHT TO
       REMAIN IN BANGLADESH, as well as the right to return? Does
       UNHCR acknowledge both rights? Does the Bangladesh
       government? If not, why not?

3.   WHY IS IT SAFE TO GO BACK? This a prerequisite for any
     repatriation. Why does UNHCR think it can monitor returnees
     under SLORC? UNHCR has no means of enforcement. UNHCR failed
     to demand such discipline even in Bangladesh, when the
     abusing authorities in the camps were rewarded with lateral
     transfers to other government jobs. How will UNHCR account
     for the 200,000 refugees already returned? What are SLORC's
     assurances to UNHCR that the Rohingyas will be safe? Why are
     these given any credence, given the nature of SLORC? 
     Why are SLORC INTERPRETORS tolerated,
     instead of impartial ones from Bangladesh? This means
     UNHCR's contact with returnees EXPOSES THEM TO MORE DANGER.
     SLORC is, in effect, still escorting UNHCR, since
     interpretors must report to SLORC on returnees who speak
     freely. 

4.   Will UNHCR request that SLORC allow independent human rights
     monitors to accompany UNHCR workers in Arakan State in
     Burma? Will UNHCR suspend repatriation until SLORC takes
     steps to restore human rights in Burma? If not, UNHCR's
     repatriation program cannot be considered "voluntary."


FINALLY, TO THE GOVERNMENT OF BANGLADESH (GoB): what pressure are
they under (if any) to repatriate the refugees? It's not for
economic reasons, since UNHCR pays all their camp workers, and
the local economy benefits. Why, then, has it persistently
blocked UNHCR's attempts to protect the refugees in Bangladesh? 

>From Burma Issues, March 95:

"What can be done? It would appear that the most creative
approach to the problem is to work with the GoB in a way which
enables them to care for the refugees in a humanitarian manner
until such time as the Rangoon junta has been either toppled or
forced to cease victimising its own people. Some $3.2 million has
already been donated to local, non-refugee populations in health,
food and sanitation projects. The GoB has benefitted from tariffs
imposed on relief goods and from substantial donations of
equipment, including vehicles. Staff provided by the GoB for the
relief effort are paid by UNHCR. And, as everywhere, refugees are
used to provide Bangladeshi businesses with cheap labor.

"Yet until such time as a safe return can be genuinely
guaranteed, it seems even more effort must be concentrated on
helping both the government and citizens of Bangladesh to assist
the beleaguered and powerless Rohingyas. In doing so, they would
not only acquire the respect of the international community, they
could turn misfortune to advantage to the benefit of all
concerned."