There are currently more than 120,000 refugees living in Thailand. Refugees from Burma are also in refugee camps along the Bangladeshi and Indian borders as well as working and living in Bangladesh, India, Pakistan and Malaysia. The line between refugee and migrant is a thin one and there are also an estimated 1 million migrant workers living in Thailand who have fled from their homes for many of the same reasons that official refugees have. (The topic of migrant workers from Burma is covered in the next chapter) The majority of refugees living in Thailand are from the Karen, Karenni, Shan and Mon ethnic groups with migrant workers coming from all ethnic groups and all areas of Burma. The majority of Burmese refugees in Bangladesh are Rohingya Muslims who face religious and ethnic persecution in their native Arakan State in western Burma. Many Rohingya refugees have been repatriated since 250,000 of them fled to the Cox’s Bazaar District of Bangladesh in 1992 and there are currently 22,000 refugees remaining in the camps. Thousands of Rohingya refugees have also migrated or been trafficked to India and Pakistan where there are a number of Rohingya refugee women and girls who have been sold into prostitution.

Refugees flee Burma for a number of reasons, including large scale human rights abuses such as forced relocations, rape, forced labor, torture, the confiscation of land and property, arbitrary arrest and lack of personal security. In areas where there are ethnic armed resistance groups still active, such as in Shan and Karen States, villagers have faced mass forced relocation programs in the past few years along with other human rights violations. More than 1 million people are living as IDPs with the potential to become cross-border refugees during times of increased military pressure or hardship. A new trend has been more ethnic Burmese leaving Burma from both urban and rural areas in family groups. They usually become migrant workers and leave Burma due to forced labor, heavy taxation, corruption, inability to maintain an adequate standard of living and interference with their livelihood through the theft or confiscation of land, property and livestock.

In 2000, in response to several incidents, including the raid on the Ratchaburi Government Hospital in January by members of an armed Burmese opposition group, Thailand took measures to increase security including restricting movement on the border areas. The effect of this on refugees has been increased confinement to the camps and restricted access to the camps for new refugees. Refugees on their way to camps have been stopped by Thai border patrols and taken into custody and later deported or immediately turned back at the border. For refugees already in Thailand this has meant an increased dependence on aid agencies for their needs, as if they are caught outside the camps for any reason, including work, they are liable to arrest and deportation. ZOA Refugee Care Netherlands statistics show that whereas in 1995/6, 19% of refugees worked outside the camps, in 2000 it had dropped to 2%. In 2000 there were more than 120,000 refugees living in camps along the border. The Ratchaburi Hospital incident also contributed to and increasingly negative atmosphere in Thailand towards refugees, and increased pressure on the international community and organizations to find solve the question of repatriation. In addition the Maneeloy Burmese Student Center in Bangkok was shut down which meant that ethnic camps along the border became the only places of asylum for refugees.

New asylum seekers, whose cases are now handled by Provincial Admissions Boards (PABs), face the rejection of their applications unless they were fleeing direct fighting in border areas. This is despite the fact that in the 1998 working arrangements worked out between Thailand and the UNHCR, people fleeing "the effects of fighting," should also be given consideration. During the visit of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees, Sadako Ogata, in October she asked that the Thai Government broaden admissions criteria and give the UNHCR a clear role on the Admissions Boards.

The process for asylum seekers has been extremely slow as PABs have no consistent meeting schedule and there is a delay between the time they are interviewed by District officials and their cases are presented to the PABs. Of 19,114 people who sought admission to the camps in 1999 and 2000, 8,000 had not had their cases presented to the PABSs as of December 2000. At the provincial level, 844 cases for asylum were rejected in 2000 and all were informally appealed against by the UNHCR. Final decisions were made for 499 of the applicants and all had their appeals rejected. Until recently, no action was taken to repatriate those rejected by the board, but now this has changed. 115 of the rejected refugees were deported from Ban Don Yang Camp in June and 152 from Nu Po camp in August, despite active protests by foreign embassies, and the office of the UNHCR. They were escorted out of the camp by Thai soldiers. Both of these forced repatriations occurred during the rainy season, when travel was difficult.

In the case of the group from Nu Po, the group consisted mostly of women and children who had fled from abuses in the Dooplaya District of Karen State. The group was taken to a remote area across the border where they were unable to build proper shelter due to the ongoing rain. By late September some of the refugees had fled back into Thailand, saying that some of the children had already died. There were also unconfirmed reports that two of refugees had been killed when fighting broke out in the remote border area that they were deported to. Yet despite these reports, there has been no sign that there are any plans to change the policy of PABs or forced repatriations, nor any sign of an international call for the authorities to be held responsible for these actions. Instead, the Thai National Security Council has begun agitating very strongly for the forced repatriation of all Karen refugees within the next 2-3 years.

During October 2000, outgoing High Commissioner for Refugees, Mrs. Sadako Ogata, visited both Thailand and Burma to discuss the refugee situation and the role of UNHCR. While visiting Tham Hin Camp in Thailand she noted that the camp, which housed 8,200 Karen refugees, lacked adequate space and sanitary conditions, saying "shelter-wise, very bad…I’m concerned." A Thai spokesperson defended Thailand against the criticism, saying that the conditions at the 16 acre camp 90 miles west of Bangkok were better than those of local Thais and that Ogata had only conducted a "superficial" visit. The government has said that it has no intention of expanding camps to alleviate overcrowding, however, after Mrs. Ogata’s visit there was discussion among local authorities and assistance organizations abut the eventual relocation of the camp to a larger site farther inside Thailand.

Although the biggest problems among camp refugees continue to be HIV/AIDS and drug addiction, skyrocketing birthrates are adding to overcrowding and could possibly contribute to developmental problems and malnutrition among children who have to compete for food and have stressed mothers. The average population growth for Thailand is 1%, while in the camps it is 4%. The problem is most serious in camps at Tham Hin in Suan Phung district, Ratchaburi, and Mae La in Tak’s Tha Song Yang district. Every month 20 babies are born at Tham Hin camp, said one official. The figure is even higher at Mae La, which is the biggest camp with some 30,000 refugees and in October the Tak Governor announced that all children under 12 would only receive half rations. Officials have encouraged refugees to plan their families and use condoms but have only limited success because birth control is against the religious beliefs of many refugees.

As refugees have become more aid dependent due to restrictions on their movement, this has caused concern that this has impact on their nutritional intake. Refugees receive a basic food basket of rice, salt, yellow beans, oil and fish paste from relief agencies, and in the past were able to supplement their diets by foraging, cultivating vegetables, raising livestock, growing crops on land held by opposition groups and purchasing other needed items with wages from seasonal work in Thailand. As the self-sufficiency of refugees has declined, due to tightened security in Thailand and the loss of land to the Burmese army previously controlled by oppositions forces, relief organizations have had to go from providing 50 percent of staple diet needs in 1984 to providing 100 percent by the mid 1990s. There is now a fear that the diet of many refugees may be deficient.

The majority of refugees in camps live in family units, either arriving as such or reuniting after separate arrivals to the camps. The ratio of males to females is 51:49 and there are relatively few single mothers. The average family size is 5.3. Women tend to be under-represented in the committees that organize the day to day administration of the camps but are active in areas such as teaching, health care work and home visits to gather information about the daily routine of refugees. Obstacles to increased participation in camp administration is lack of education and basic knowledge about their rights. There are various women’s groups in all the camps, some focusing on the daily needs and welfare of women and some on the more political aspects of women’s rights. (Source: BBC)

The majority of refugee women come from ethnic minority groups and suffer from a wide range of human rights violations prior to arrival in the camps. Ethnic minority women living conflict areas are used as forced labor on infrastructure projects and forced porters for the military, are subject to the constant threat of rape and have virtually no personal security. Conditions in the camps vary from place to place, but women have generally suffered from the recent tighter restrictions on movement outside the camps and have seen their ability to be self-sufficient decline. The conditions of refugee women strongly effect children, of whom women are the primary caregivers.

Although the decision to flee one’s home is usually made by adults, children are deeply affected by the situation. The physical dangers for children during flight are immense. They are threatened by landmines, shelling, sudden attacks and their health is put at severe risk due to long days of walking without adequate food and water. They become malnourished and their resistance to diseases, such as malaria, is lowered. Unaccompanied children are vulnerable to neglect, military recruitment, sexual assault and other types of abuse.

Children also suffer greatly from the emotional effects of fleeing their homes. They leave behind friends, relatives, possessions and established social structures and witness the fear and uncertainty felt by adult authority figures. This is in addition to the their exposure to the factors that caused their flight to begin with, such as the killing, torture, rape and use of forced labor of their family and community members. All of this, along with shortages of basic resources, can lead to harmful effects of the physical, psychological and social development of refugee children.

Rumored possible ties between the RBSW and students at the Maneeloy Burmese Student Center was one factor in the decision by the Thai National Security Council to close down the center and resettle the caseload overseas. As of December 31, 2000, 1,662 people had been accepted by Third Countries for resettlement and 564 were waiting decisions on their resettlement.

The center had been the only place of asylum outside the refugee camps and had been holding students, as well as other "Persons of Concern" who had applied for asylum in Bangkok but could not stay at the border for their own security. An attempt was made to transfer 85 Karen for whom it was considered safe to stay at the border to Umpiem Mai camp. However, this move was blocked by Thai groups in Mae Sot who felt that the transfer would be a security risk.

January: An SPDC offensive against a KNU base at Mae Pya, which was overrun on January 13, caused Karen refugees to flee to Thailand but they were prevented from crossing the border. However, by the last two weeks in January, 1,000 refugees had been allowed to set up camp at Bor Wii after fighting intensified and were registered by the UNHCR.

Ratchaburi Hospital: Around the same time as the offensive at Mae Pya, the SPDC also launched an attack on Kamerplaw, possibly aimed at the presence of the Vigorous Burmese Student Warriors (VBSW). Both the SPDC and the Thai army fired on territory held by the Gods Army where members of the VBSW were staying. On January 23, 10 soldiers, who were never identified, hijacked a bus near the border and drove to Ratchaburi where they seized the government hospital. They demanded that the attack on their base cease and that medical aid be given to the wounded and refugees allowed into Thailand. After laying explosives and holding hundreds of hostages for a day, all 10 were killed by Thai commandos on January 24.

February: In the wake of the Ratchaburi Hospital incident, a crackdown on armed ethnic minority groups by the SPDC forced hundreds of civilians to flee to Thailand. More than 1,000 refugees fled to Thailand as the result of fleeing heavy shelling by the SPDC on Kamerplaw, the base of the God’s Army. Security on the border became very tight and it was reported that refugees were being denied access to Thailand and being held at Huay Sot, Baan Ta Ko Lang, Suan Phung District. On February 3, 254 women and children were allowed to move into to Bor Wii. They were later joined by a group of 31 men, but another 50 men were reported to be held at Huay Sot on the border.

On the night of February 23, after negotiations between the Thai army, the UNHCR and NGOs, the entire population of Bor Wii, 1,400 refugees, mostly elderly, women and children, were moved to the less sensitive area of Ban Don Yang, 300 kilometers to the north. Many refugees were opposed to the move as they did not want to move so far from their homes. It was reported that about 100 of the refugees were suffering from malaria and other diseases and some were sent to Suan Phung hospital to receive treatment. Subsequent new arrivals from Mepia were temporarily held at Bor Wii before being moved to Ban Don Yang.

By the end of the month, the 50 men that had been held at Huay Sot were still "missing". Refugees reported that the men had been taken by soldiers from Thailand’s military Task Force 29 on February 15 and marched into the forest. The UNHCR asked the Thai government for an explanation and were that told that the men had been KNU soldiers and had been refused entry to Thailand because they refused to lay down their arms. This contradicted an earlier statement in which the Thai government said that the men chose to return to Burma on their own volition as they did not wish to stay in Thailand. It is feared that the men were pushed back into oncoming SPDC troops and were executed. It remained unclear whether the men were civilians or KNU soldiers.

At the end of March, SPDC attacked Mae La Pho Hta, a Karen camp on the Burma side of the Moei river, 10 kilometers north of Mae La camp. The offensive was part of an ongoing campaign to prevent any KNU buildup along the border. The camp, which was one and a half years old, housed 4,500 people. After the camp was attacked and burned down, including 3 schools and a hospital, the refugees fled to Thailand. 3,500 found shelter at Mae U Su, and were registered by the UNHCR. A number of them were suffering from malaria. The refugees were later told by the Thai authorities that they either had to return to Burma or move into Mae La camp.

May: On May 10, 447 of the refugees that fled Mae La Pho Hta in April chose to move to Mae La along with another group of 160 refugees from Mae Ra Mat.

June: A total of 2,000 refugees originally from Mae La Pho Hta returned to the Burma side of border to a new location called Ler Ber Her, four kilometers north of the Mae La Pho Hta site.

July: On July 9, The Ler Ber Her camp population was evacuated to Thailand after SPDC attacked a KNU base.

October: On October 18, 200 Karen villagers fled to Thailand to escape an offensive by the SPDC/DKBA against the KNU. They found refuge in the border district of Mae Ra Mat in the northwestern province of Tak.

November: On November 23, 11 prisoners, 9 of whom were Burmese, broke out of Samut Sakhon jail, taking 8 hostages with them. After a shootout, shown on live television, all 9 of the Burmese prisoners were killed and 3 of the hostages ended up dead. The incident caused for more calls for repatriation of all Burmese even though the perpetrators were criminals and not refugees.

December: On December 30, 6 Thai villagers were shot dead by a group of armed men robbing a store in Ban Nai Noi. It was said that the men were Karen, and may have been part of God’s army. This led to Thai villagers demonstrating against the presence of nearby Tham Hin refugee camp.

The situation inside Burma across from Ratchaburi Province in Thailand has worsened over the past year, according to recently arrived refugees. At the same time that Thailand has restricted movement along the border, cutting of sources of basic supplies, the SPDC has increased military pressure. One refugee reported that the quality of life in their area had significantly declined over the past five years as control of the area switched from the KNU to the SPDC. When the KNU controlled their area and they had sufficient food and better personal security.

Around the same time fighting broke out between the KNU and SPDC and forced refugees from Mae Pya Po to seek shelter on the border. They were allowed to sleep at the border overnight but the next day the Thai authorities made arrangements with Burma to repatriate them. Rather than be repatriated, some villagers fled to the jungle.

As of January 17, approximately 1,000 Karen had villagers fled to Thailand and took refuge in Suan Phung District after SPDC attacked a KNU camp opposite Huay Khok Mu pass near Ban Bo Wi during the previous days.

On May 10, 2000, 145 Karen villagers from 37 families fled to Thailand at Ban Phu Rakam in Suan Phung District, Ratchburi province. Thai authorities allowed them to cross to the Thai side of the border and take temporary shelter at Ban Huai Kamu. Another 34 villagers from 8 families later joined them. The majority of the refugees were women, children and elderly persons. On June 6, they were all moved to Ban Don Yang refugee camp in Kanchanaburi province. The refugees were from the Tenasserim Riverside near Buthawplaw (Kyaukpa). More than 200 had tried to escape but many did not make it to Thailand.

On June 12, 2000, 116 Karen refugees were deported from Ban Don Yang refugee camp to Mon State in Burma. The applications for asylum of the 116 refugees had been rejected earlier by the Kanchanaburi PAB. The refugees had fled fighting between the KNU and SPDC in 1997 but had not reported to the camp until 1998 border wide registrations. Their delay in reporting to the camp was used as the basis of the rejection of their applications. Many of the refugees fled the camps rather than face forced return and when Thai authorities arrived at the camps to deport the refugees, they found only 40 to 60 of those scheduled to be returned. It is reported that the officials made up the difference by deporting other refugees from the camp that had not yet been registered or passed through the admissions process. It is thought that the 116 deported refugees moved into IDP camps in Mon State in an area where there is a cease- fire between NMSP and SPDC.

During the week of July 14, 2000 Karen villagers fled to Thailand after the SPDC and DKBA attacked the KNU opposite Sop Moei and Mae Sariang Districts.

On August 15, 2000, a group of Karen villagers fled to the Thai-Burma border opposite Suan Phung district, Ratchaburi province, Thailand. The Thai authorities allowed them to cross the border and temporarily take refuge in Ban Bo Wei, Suan Phung district. On August 20, another group arrived. The combined number of arrivals was 96 villagers from 3 families. On September 15, the Thai Authorities moved them to Ban Don Yang refugee camp in Kanchanaburi province. Prior to fleeing to Thailand, the villagers had been in hiding along the Tenasserim Riverside in the area of Thutawhkee, Sgeh Ker Hkee, and Htee Po Naw Ae Hkee since 1997, when the SPDC made an offensive against the Mergui-Tavoy District of the KNU. On July 31, 2000, SPDC troops entered their hiding site and burned down 21 houses and destroyed their crops and property. They said they made the decision to flee to Thailand because they lacked food and security.

On December 20, 2000, 81 Karen villagers arrived in Thailand at Bor Wii following an 8-day trek through the jungle. An estimated 200 villagers had fled for the border after SPDC troops raided and torched their settlement at Mae Kong Ni, in which 1 Karen man was killed and another 17-year-old woman was abducted. Her fate is not known. 40 villagers who were too old or sick to make the journey were left behind. It is possible that more than a hundred other refugees were also making their way to the border but got lost or had to go into hiding along the way.

Since 1996, 14,000 Karenni refugees have fled to Thailand to escape forced relocations by the SPDC. Prior to 1996 there were approximately 5,000 Karenni refugeees in Thailand.

March 9: 757 refugees from 137 families crossed the Thai-Karenni border and reached the refugee camp # 2 on March 9. The refugees were mainly women, and elderly persons. Three elderly persons were reported to have died on the way due to exhaustion and lack of food. The new arrivals were mainly from Tee Lon and Htee Sakeh village tracts, Loikaw district. Some of them escaped from the SPDC forced relocation camps. The refugees reported that they were fleeing from arbitrary arrest, torture, extortion and forced portering. When some of the villages were forced to relocate, some people fled to Shan state, some went into hiding in the jungle, and others fled to Thailand. They also reported that the Kayah, a major ethnic group in Karenni State were being prohibited from using their own language by the military junta.

April 7 : Eleven villagers from Baw Tar and Kayeh Kee villages, Pasaung district, Lopwakoe Province crossed the Thai border and reached Karenni refugee camp # 5. They had escaped from Pasaung relocation camp.

April 12 : Approximately 54 villagers from Wam Ngaw forced relocation center escaped and arrived to the Karenni refugee camp # 2.

April 15 : Over 90 Karennis refugees, 60 of whom were children and elderly persons, crossed the Thai-Karenni border and arrived at Karenni refugee camp # 2. The refugees were mainly from Daw Tamadu village tract, Deemaw Soe district. They reported that they were frequently threatened and used a forced labor by Burmese troops stationed in the area. For this reason they could not provide enough food for themselves or engage in business in order to feed their families and fled to Thailand.

May 5: Thirty new arrivals reached the Karenni refugee camp #2 in the beginning of May. The new arrivals were from Beh Ngaw, Tapho, Wasaw and Daw Taku villages, No. 1 Province. They reported that they fled due to SPDC military operations and threats on their lives made by the troops.

May 29: Nine villagers from Kabawtar No. 1, district, Lopwakoe Province crossed the Thai-Karenni border and reached refugee camp #5. They were all elderly persons and children.

June: In early June 2000, several battles close to Ban Mai Nai Soe refugee camp (Camp 3), caused the refugees to fear for their security. As the SPDC moved closer to the border in order to attack Karenni strongholds, the attacks were within earshot of the refugee camps.

In 2000, there were approximately 3,000 repatriated Mon refugees in the area opposite Prachaub Kirichan District of Thailand who have been staying there since 1997 with some assistance from NGOs. During 2000 thousands of illegal migrants were deported by the Thai authorities and some of them found temporary refuge in the Halockhani resettlement camp.

At the beginning of 2000, the entire population of Payaw refugee camp, 4,000 Mon, Tavoyan and Burmese refugees, were forced to move to Halockhani resettlement camp closer to the Thai border. This included new refugees who had fled from forced labor used on the construction of the Ye-Tavoy railroad and other human rights abuses. Since 1999, when the NMSP stopped receiving rice from Thailand based NGOs, they have been unable to accept many new refugees into the camps. The majority of the refugees rejected from the camps have either returned to Burma or gone to Sangklaburi in Thailand.

In March and April of 2000, following the hospital seizure in Ratchaburi, Thai authorities in the area of Thong-phar-phoom began checking villagers to ensure everyone had the proper I.D. Villagers without Identity Cards were arrested and deported to the border areas. This included several Mon families in "Ban Bilockhi" village who did not have Thai or Tribe ID as well as other villagers who had been living illegally in Thailand for years. 160 displaced villagers crossed the border and settled in the Tavoy resettlement camp during the first two weeks of April. The burden of finding food and shelter for them fell on the site leaders.

The deported villagers were refugees who had fled their native villages in Yebyu and Tavoy townships five years ago to escape human rights abuses, including forced labor and tax collection related to the construction of the Ye-Tavoy railroad. None of the villagers chose to return to their original villages as they preferred to wait until the human rights situation there improved.

Although human rights abuses in Shan State in Burma are just as bad as in other ethnic minority areas, for unknown reasons, Shan refugees are not officially recognized by the Thai government. The SHRF has estimated that over 100,000 Shan refugees have entered Thailand since SPDC began a large scale village relocation program in 1996. During 2000, SHRF recorded 12,000 new refugees arriving at just one border crossing. The majority of Shan refugees live in the northern provinces of Chiang Mai, Chiang Rai and Mae Hong Son where they are sometimes able to find work but have extremely limited access to health care and education. They are in the same precarious situation as other migrant laborers and are subject to exploitation and abuse by employers and arrest and detention by the Thai authorities.

In January 2000, a makeshift Shan refugee camp, 2 kilometers inside Thailand, near Pangbawn Village, Pang Mapha District, Mae Hong Son Province, was burned down by Company 751, Battalion 5, Regiment 7 of the Thai Army. The camp contained 300 refugees who had arrived at the site in December of 1999 with the help of the SSA. The refugees were then driven back across the border.

In July and August 2000, Burmese troops manning the BP-1 border in Murng Ton across from Chiang Mai province refused to accept Shan refugees that the Thai authorities attempted to forcibly return. The refugees were then released in Nawng Ook, a border town on the Thai side of the border.

Beginning in June of 2000, SPDC troops in Kun-Hing township, central Shan State, intensified their search for IDPs in hiding in the relocation areas, causing many to flee to the border areas and Thailand. Kun-Hing township has been one of the worst affected by mass forced relocation program that began in 1996. Approximately 70-75 SPDC troops from Company No. 4, IB246 led by Capt. Than Nyunt with 25 forced porters were searching the relocations areas that includes the village tracts of Wan Lao, Kaeng Lom, HoYaan, Kun Pu and Loi Keng. Another column of 50-60 troops from Company No. 5 of IB246 led by Capt. Cit Oo with 30 forced porters was searching the village tracts of Naa Teng, Naa Poi, Saai Khaao, Wan Phui, Saai Murng and Loi Khio. If the villagers are found by these troops they face possible execution, rape, beatings and abductions for forced portering. Often troops will shoot into villages or huts without any warning to the people inside. News of the intensified search for IDPs in hiding sent many people fleeing for the border. Most of the refugees are women and small children, like members of a family in the following list who have arrived at the Thai border in early July 2000.

The Muslim Rohingya of Arakan State suffer human rights abuses above and beyond their non-Rohingya Buddhists living in the same area. As a result of ethnic and religious discrimination dating back to independence, the Rohingya are not given Burmese citizenship. As a result of this, their status as both migrants and refugees is made more precarious, with Burma refusing to accept some repatriated refugees back, saying they are not citizens. Rohingya refugees in Bangladesh and Malaysia, as well as Chin refugees in India, were all subject to the threat of repatriation or deportation, raising concerns of refoulment, and forcible return, which is contrary to international law.

In 1991 more than 250,000 Rohingya refugees fled from Burma to the Bangladeshi district of Cox’s Bazaar to escape atrocities committed by the military government during a crackdown on Rohingya in Arakan State. Since that time more than 31,500 children have been born and nearly 7,500 refugees have died in the camps. The majority of refugees were repatriated before 1997 as the result of agreements between Burma, Bangladesh and the UNHCR worked out in 1992. However, the agreement contained no provisions for impartial screening of the refugees before they went back or for monitoring their well-being afterwards. The majority of the refugees who were first repatriated did so involuntarily and there are reports that the authorities in Bangladesh used food withdrawal and beatings to force people to return home. In 1997 repatriation was halted by the Burmese government and only began again in very limited numbers the next year.

In 1996, between 10,000 and 15,000 new asylum seekers entered Bangladesh as the result of increased forced labor, heavy taxation on Muslims and cases of rape in Arakan State. New refugees were not welcomed by the Bangladeshi authorities, and in April of 1996, 15 women and children who were part of a group of asylum seekers drowned in the Naf river as they were being brought back to Burma by border authorities. In June of 1997, 5,000 new refugees arrived in Bangladesh, however 500 of them were sent back by local authorities. Refugees who managed to find places to stay in the camps, with friends or relatives, were tracked down by the Bangladeshi authorities and charged with illegal entry. Other did not enter the camps but hid in jungle areas or slums in Cox’s Bazaar. It is estimated that a between 10,000 and 15,000 Rohingya arrived in Bangladesh in 1997, as well as 1996, but because they didn’t enter refugee camps there is no exact number. In July of 1997, police officials announced that 2,000 newly arrived refugees had been sent back to Burma in the preceding months. One commander of the border security forces stated, "If caught, we are pushing [refugees] back or sending them to jails".

As of 2000, there were approximately 22,000 refugees living in UNHCR-run refugee camps and temporary shelters in Noryapara (Ukhia) and Kutuplong (Teknaf) in Phalongchake Township, Cox’s Bazaar. The Burmese government has agreed to take back only 7,000 of these, saying the rest are not Burmese nationals. The UNHCR requested the Bangladeshi authorities to allow the remaining 14,300 Rohingyas to settle in Bangladesh, but was turned down. The Burmese Ambassador to Bangladesh said that as of June 2000, 1,500 of the 7,000 refugees cleared for repatriation had been repatriated and an additional 5,000 were in the process of scrutiny before being sent back. However, although 50 refugees were supposed to be repatriated each week, as of July much fewer were being sent back. As a result the Bangladeshi government was pushing Rangoon to expedite repatriation. Among Rangoon’s conditions for repatriation were that repatriated refugees must not be from a split family to avoid people illegally going back to Bangladesh to meet family members left behind.

There continue to be Rohingya refugees arriving Bangladesh, but not in large numbers and it is difficult to ascertain the exact number as many of them enter with valid permits for one week and then become migrant workers. In addition there is large scale trafficking or Rohingya from Bangladesh to Pakistan. Apart from these registered refugees in the camps, there are estimated twenty thousand Muslim refugees who are scattered in the Chittagong Hills and other areas of Bangladesh having run away from the two refugee camps.

On March 7, 2000, Gul Mohammad, a 70 year old Rohingya refugee housed in shed No. 72, Room No. 6, Block C, of the Nayapara refugee camp 1 in Bangladesh was killed by a Magistrate of the camp. According to refugees living in the camp Gul Mohammad, who had consented to be repatriated to Arakan State from Bangladesh, was beaten to death when he approached the camp authorities for the quota he deserved to get as a returnee. The incident was said to have occurred before the UNHCR staff. There have been reports of many untoward incidents in the Rohingya refugee camps in Bangladesh in the past. (Source: ARNO)

There are currently 10,000 Muslim Rohingya refugees in Malaysia. A 2000 Human Rights Watch Report criticized both the UNHCR and the Malayasian Government’s treatment of Rohingya in Malaysia, saying that the "treatment of the Rohingya falls short of internationally accepted standards." and the treatment of refugees from Burma is "bad and getting worse." Rohingya refugees in Malaysia are considered illegal immigrants even if they are recognized by the UNHCR and are at constant risk of arrest. There is no asylum system in Malaysia which is not a signatory to the Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees. Malaysia is selective in which refugees groups it recognizes and the Rohingya have been refused recognition despite the fact that their situation has been deteriorating in recent years. The HRW report also criticized the Malaysian police and immigration officers, saying that they are ignorant of what it is to be a refugee and that because detainees are kept out of the view of international monitors, they are beaten, robbed, inadequately fed and denied medical care in detention camps. Rohingya children are often not allowed to go to school and have been detained with adult non-relatives and deported alone. The report also says that the UNHCR has not fulfilled its role to provide international protection and seek durable solutions.

There are an estimated 40,000 to 50,000 Chin, an ethnic and religious minority in Burma, and Lushai living in Mizoram State, India. In a decision criticized by the US Committee for Refugees (USCR) HRW, and Amnesty International, the Indian government made a decision to deport hundreds of ethnic Chin living in the northeastern region back to Burma. A USCR spokesman said that the Chin should be treated as refugees because they fled Burma due to persecution and that their forced repatriated could constitute refoulment, or forced return, which is contrary to international law. India is not a signatory to the 1951 Refugee convention but is a member of UNHCR’s Executive Committee.

Beginning in August, refugees were arrested and detained in Aizawl, Champai, Saiha, Tanhril, Babutlang, Vaiva, Kulikawn, and Lungmaul and other cities and towns after the Mizoram state government issued an order that all Chin and other Burmese refugees must leave India on or before August 31. A list of all Chin refugees in many towns and villages was collected for the purpose of deportation and many refugees were not allowed to take their belongings with them. On August 3, 87 people were deported to Burma. On August 8, 27 refugees were deported to the Tio River on the border with Burma and on August 18, and additional 82 refugees from the Aizawl town area were deported after being jailed for the required 7 days. As of August 16, there were approximately 1,000 refugees jailed in Mizoram state. During the first week of August 2000, 114 Chin were deported to the Burma border and handed over to the SPDC.

On August 3, Mr Lalrinchan, aged 25, originally from Leilet village, Falam Township, Chin State, died at the police lock-up in Aizawal. He was first arrested by the Village Defense People (VDP) of the Electric Ward, Aizawal and then handed over to the police. He had been charged with drug use and was tortured while in police custody.
(Source: CFC)

A Rohingya refugee, Jafar Alam, who had been imprisoned in Deoband, India since 1998 was released during the last week of October 2000, but later rearrested. It was feared that he would be deported to Burma. Jafar Alam was a former member of the National Democratic Party for Human Rights and had been arrested by the military government in 1989 and released in 1994. He had also been taken to do forced labor on the Indian/Burma border in 1996. In 1997 he entered India to join his brother Budiul Alam, a UNHCR refugee. His brother went to New Delhi to talk about getting refugee status for Jafar. While he was gone Jafar was arrested for illegal entry to India. He was first interviewed by the UNHCR on May 7, 1998 but was not aware of the purpose of the interview and there was no translator present. On June 11, 1998, Jafar was sent a letter denying him refugee status on the grounds that he could not prove he had or could suffer persecution of enough severity to grant him refugee status. He was given a second interview on October 25, 1998 with his brother acting as interpreter. The interview went well but his brother was later told by the first person to interview Jafar in May that it was unlikely he would be granted refugee status. After Jafar’s release and re-arrest in October 2000, the South Asian Human Rights Documentation Center asked the National Human Rights Commission to intervene in the matter, who then sent the request to the Ministry of External Affairs and UNHCR for speedy action. However, Jafar’s brother alleges that UNHCR staff told him there was little chance that he would get refugee status unless new information came to light, as there was political pressure to deny Muslims from Burma refugee status. However, this was later denied by the UNHCR.

On October 21, 2000, 58 Burmese fisherman languishing in two jails in Calcutta ended a hunger strike after being assured of a prompt release by the Indian authorities. The fisherman had crossed into Indian water territory in 1997, and as they carried no documents were arrested under Section 14 of the Foreigners Act. After serving more than one year in jail, they were acquitted on September 23, 1999, but not released because the Burmese authorities refused to take them back. The Indian authorities promised to do their best and work the Burmese Embassy in New Delhi to ensure their return home. The prisoners were of the Mon, Rakhine, Burman and Karen nationalities of Burma. (Source: Mizzima)

Name: Lu Ral

Sex: Male

Age: 30

Ethnicity: Karenni

Religion: Buddhism

Address: Pa Kyae village, Loi Khaw Township, Karenni State

Occupation: Farmer

Education None

Marital Status: Married with 3 sons

Date of interview: February 23, 2001

Source: KNAHR

The reason I came here was that I had no job, and my hill side fields were confiscated by the military unit, LIB (250). They also ordered us to do forced labor every day. Although LIB 250 was about 2 "ParLone" away from our village, they came to our village every day and demanded this and that. We didn’t appropriate this, and were sure if we continued to stay and couldn’t give what they asked, that one day they would torture and beat us. My sons were so young and couldn’t do anything. So we had to come here. The things that the military are doing are such that even the monks in our village couldn’t stand it. They wouldn’t stay any longer and had to run away.

In 1995, the military forced the villages in the Che Kul village groups to expand 200 acres of fields cultivated beside our village. This was an order that came from the Loikhaw Operations Command to LIB 250. The plan was to use the fields and forced labor in the fields to grow paddy for the government services. They hired tractors at 300 kyat per acre, and forced the Chee Kal village groups to cultivate the fields. They ordered us to grow maize, sesame, beans, and bananas in these fields, and then took all the profits and the villagers didn’t get anything. Even now there are many requirements for us to do forced labor with our own food supplies. There was another forced labor ordered by LIB 250 where we had to build army camps for them. They ordered us to build fences, dig trenched, and every three houses had to draw water two times a day for them. Once in the morning and once in the evening. As there was no water in our area, we had to draw it from a village 3 miles away. Also there was the firewood, which we had to send every day from every two or three houses. The army soldiers stole chickens, ducks and pigs when they come to the village, and if they saw cows outside of the village, they shot and ate them. They behaved like this every time they came to the village, and the villager can’t live like this any more.

We had a primary school in our village, but the teachers didn’t really want to come and teach because they were afraid. They came and taught once a week. We really worry for the future of the children. Another thing is that the military constantly came and demanded porters from our village for their operations. If they took porters, the porters would be gone for a month, and some would die along the way. When we couldn’t carry things, they tortured and beat us in various ways. In 1998, there were 200 porters from Pa Kya San Pya, Pa Tee Ma, Thone Mai and Daw Mu Ka La villages, including myself. After they arrested us they put us in a house. But we were able to break out of the house and run away. Some were arrested again and the military tortured them very, very badly. I don’t want to talk about it again, because the military was really, really hard on them.

We arrived to this camp from our village after 10 days (of travel). We were very afraid and worried coming here. We didn’t know if we would die or not, and we couldn’t breathe. We could only breathe easily after we arrived. We are OK here because they give us the food that we need. And we have some happiness. Right now we are staying in barracks. I think we will heal slowly. That is all that I wish to tell.