ADVOCACY REPORT
A Report of Our Advocacy
Efforts for
The Persecuted Rohingya
Minority of Myanmar
(2016-2017)[1]
Abu Raihan Muhammed Khalid, Barrister-at-Law
Advocate, Supreme Court of Bangladesh
www.raihankhalid.com
March, 2017
ADVOCACY REPORT:
A Report of Our Advocacy Efforts for the Persecuted
Rohingya Minority of Myanmar (2016-2017)
March,
2017
Work in progress, incomplete. Draft Published on-line at https://www.researchgate.net/project/Advocacy-for-The-Persecuted-Rohingya-Minority-of-Myanmar
By Abu Raihan Muhammed
Khalid, Barrister-at-Law
Advocate, Supreme Court of
Bangladesh
322/2 Senpara Parbata,
Mirpur-10, Dhaka – 1216
Bangladesh
Telephone: ++ 01715941751
Email:
raihan.khalid@yahoo.com
ResearchGate: Abu Raihan Muhammed Khalid
YouTube: StrongWater
Facebook: www.facebook.com/raihan11
LinkedIn: Abu Raihan M Khalid
Referred
citation: Khalid, Abu Raihan Muhammed, A Report of Our Advocacy Efforts for the
Persecuted Rohingya Minority of Myanmar (2016-2017), March, 2017, Dhaka.
Contents
Foreword
Executive Summery
Introduction
1. An Appeal to Dalai Lama
On November 24, 2016 I read the news article ‘Myanmar
wants ethnic cleansing of Rohingya - UN official’ published by the BBC on November 24, 2016[2].
The
persecution of the Rohingya people just across our border in Myanmar has been recurrent
news in the media for the last few years. Horrific images of torture and
killing were circulated in the social media. This latest news puts the event in
a perspective, and that is the ethnic cleansing of the Rohingya people by the
State of Myanmar.
In March 20,
2016 when the EU-Turkey Agreement on the Syrian Refugees became known we
expressed our opinion that it violated the 1951 UN Convention on Refugees and
the Geneva Conventions in our Blog[3].
With that experience in the back of our mind, this news gave us an impetus to
think about the plight of the Rohingya people. We started to research about the
state of the Rohingya people in Myanmar and soon we realised that the matter
has indeed become one of the greatest offences against the humanity.
On December 07,
2016 based on our research on December 07, 2016 we decided to write an email to
His Holiness Dalai Lama, the spiritual leader of the Buddhist people of Tibet
and of the world. As it became clear that the atrocities caused against the
Rohingya people by the State of Myanmar were caused from an ethno-religious
perspective. The people of Myanmar are mostly Buddhist, and many Buddhist
people, including Buddhist Monks reportedly took part in these atrocities
against the Muslim Rohingya population.
Dalai Lama is
one of my favourite living persons. I have read most of his books which
propagate a peaceful and tolerant co-existence among, not only the human but,
all living beings. This is the teaching of the Buddhist religion. It greatly
confused me when it appeared that Buddhist people and even Buddhist Monks are
taking part in atrocities against a poor minority population of their country,
burning houses, killing people, raping women. This is clearly against the
teachings of the Buddhist religion.
It came to my
mind that what is happening in Myanmar is not natural to the Buddhist religion.
I felt that it was necessary to inform the leader of the Buddhist people of
these incidents and make an appeal to him and other leaders of human values to
call upon the Buddhist people of Myanmar and their State to bring an end to
these inhuman atrocities to the poor Rohingya minorities.
I wrote an
email to Dalai Lama and Kofi Anan and to the relevant United Nations agencies
the following email appeal:
6.
OHCHR
Civil Society Section, Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights: civilsociety@ohchr.org,
DALAI LAMA! Please save the Rohingyas from the
atrocities of the Buddhist people of Myanmar.
The
Rohingyas of Myanmar are the world's most persecuted people. Rejected by
the country they call home and unwanted by its neighbours, the Rohingya are
impoverished, virtually stateless and have been fleeing Myanmar in droves and
for decades.
Kofi
Annan, the former head of the United Nations, who leads a commission that was formed in
August to study conditions in Rakhine[4],
said in Myanmar on Tuesday that he was “deeply concerned” by reports of human
rights abuses in the country’s restive Rakhine State, where dozens of Rohingya
Muslims are said to have been killed since October in a crackdown by the
military.
The
international media has reported Video showing alleged site of
mass murder of Rohingya Muslims by soldiers[5].
Activists have relayed stories of rapes, arson, targeted killings and
other atrocities said to have been committed
against the Rohingya there by the army since Oct. 9[6],
when insurgents killed nine police officers in attacks on border posts.
When
the global community is expressing their deep concern against these atrocities
against the Rohingyas, the State of Myanmar and its current leader Aung San Suu Kyi’s failure to defend the Rohingya is
extremely disappointing; an outrage, say some observers[7]. "The point is that Aung San Suu Kyi is covering
up this crime perpetrated by the military"[8],
said Tun Khin, who for years had supported her democracy activism.
Under
these circumstances we call upon you as the humanitarian, spiritual and
cultural leader of the conscious people of the world and of the Buddhist people
to come forward in the aid of the persecuted Rohingya people of Myanmar; and
also to call upon the Buddhist people of Myamnar and their leader Ms. Aung San
Suu Kyi to bring an end to the atrocities against the Rohingya people.
We
must act fast; because "people are dying day by day and time is running
out[9]." And
they need your help.
Abu Raihan Muhammed
Khalid
On December 07, 2016 we
published the above letter as an open letter in social media website Facebook: DALAI
LAMA! Please save the Rohingyas from the atrocities of the Buddhist people of
Myanmar[10].
On the same day we also published the open letter in our
blog, The Curious Lawyer: DALAI LAMA! Please save the Rohingyas from the
atrocities of the Buddhist people of Myanmar[11]!
2. A call to write to the United Nations
On December 11, 2016 we posted an appeal in Bangla language on our blog,
The Curious Lawyer, inviting readers to write to the United Nations and other concerned international
institutions to take actions to save the Rohingya people. We have provided the
readers a text that can be used for their emails. We have also provided a list of
the international organizations with email addresses to which they may make
their appeal.
মিয়ানমারের রোহিঙ্গা মানুষেরা সে দেশের উগ্রবাদী বৌদ্ধদের হাতে হত্যা, ধর্ষণ, রাহাজানির শিকার হচ্ছে।
বৌদ্ধ ধর্মীয় নেতা দালাই লামা এবং জাতিসংঘের মানবাধিকার হাই কমিশনারের কাছে রোহিঙ্গাদের জন্য সাহায্য চেয়ে আমি নীচের এই চিঠিটি গত সাতই ডিসেম্বর ২০১৬ইং তারিখে লিখি।
বৌদ্ধ ধর্মীয় নেতা দালাই লামা এবং জাতিসংঘের মানবাধিকার হাই কমিশনারের কাছে রোহিঙ্গাদের জন্য সাহায্য চেয়ে আমি নীচের এই চিঠিটি গত সাতই ডিসেম্বর ২০১৬ইং তারিখে লিখি।
আসুন, আমরা সবাই নিজেদের ইমেইল থেকে দালাই লামা ও জাতিসংঘের মানবাধিকার হাই কমিশনারের কাছে রোহিঙ্গাদের জন্য সাহায্য চেয়ে চিঠি লিখি। রোহিঙ্গাদের ওপর অমানবিক নির্যাতনের বিরুদ্ধে বিশ্ব জনমত গড়ে তুলি।
চিঠির একটি ভাষ্য আমি নীচে দিচ্ছি। এই ভাষ্য নকল করে আপনার ইমেইল থেকে ohhdl@dalailama.com; webmaster@dalailama.com; haveyoursay@bbc.co.uk; newsdesk@independent.co.uk; info@kofiannanfoundation.org; InfoDesk@ohchr.org; civilsociety@ohchr.org; editor@thedailystar.net ঠিকানাগুলিতে তা পাঠিয়ে দিন।
চিঠির একটি ভাষ্য আমি নীচে দিচ্ছি। এই ভাষ্য নকল করে আপনার ইমেইল থেকে ohhdl@dalailama.com; webmaster@dalailama.com; haveyoursay@bbc.co.uk; newsdesk@independent.co.uk; info@kofiannanfoundation.org; InfoDesk@ohchr.org; civilsociety@ohchr.org; editor@thedailystar.net ঠিকানাগুলিতে তা পাঠিয়ে দিন।
চিঠির ভাষ্যঃ Email dated December 07,
2016, at
11:38 AM, “DALAI LAMA! Please save the Rohingyas from the atrocities of the
Buddhist people of Myanmar”.
গত বৃহস্পতি বার দিন (December 09, 2017) ৭০ জন ব্রিটিশ এমপি রোহিঙ্গাদের জন্য সাহায্য চেয়ে এক বিবৃতি প্রকাশ করেন।
পুনশ্চঃ গত ৮ই ডিসেম্বর ২০১৬ইং জাতিসংঘ একটি 'নোট টু করেস্পনডেন্স' প্রকাশ করেঃ Note
to Correspondents: Statement by Mr. Vijay Nambiar, Special Adviser of the
United Nations Secretary-General on Myanmar, 8 December 2016[13].
On December 11, 2016 we posted the same appeal in Bangla in Facebook: নিপীড়িত রোহিঙ্গাদের সাহায্য করুন! দালাই লামা ও জাতিসংঘকে চিঠি লিখুন[14]!
On December 13, 2016 we made
the same appeal to the Asia-Europe People's Forum (AEPF), an interregional
network of progressive civil society organisations across Asia and Europe and
wrote the following email urging the members to write to the United Nations and
other concerned international institutions to take actions to save the Rohingya
people. We have provided the members with a text that can be used for their
emails and the international organization with email addresses to which they
may make their appeal.
Dear Friends
Greetings of the festive Winter
from Dhaka, Bangladesh!
The Rohingya people of Myanmar are
suffering unprecedented atrocities in the hands of the extremist Buddhist
people in their own country.
In the light of the recent
aggravation of these atrocities, I have made an appeal on the 7th December 2016
to the global leader of the conscious people of the world, DALAI LAMA, the UN
Human Rights High Commissioner and the Global Media to come forward and call
upon the Buddhist people in Myanmar and the State of Myanmar to bring an end to these atrocities against the
Rohingya people.
The United Nations on 08th December
called on to Ms. Aung San Suu Kyi in a 'Note to Correspondents: Statement by Mr. Vijay Nambiar,
Special Adviser of the United Nations Secretary-General on Myanmar'[15] to
'visit the Maungdaw and Buthidaung and reassure the civilian population
there that they will be protected'.
On the same day 70 British MPs urged the UK government to ‘intensify
pressure’ on the Myanmar government and allow full humanitarian access to
Rohingya Muslims in the North Rakhine State of Myanmar'[16].
But the State of Myanmar is not
taking any step to stop these atrocities.
In these circumstances, I urge all
conscious members of this network to write to DALAI LAMA, the UN Human
Rights High Commissioner and the Global Media to come forward and take steps to
bring an end to these unprecedented atrocities against the most persecuted people of the world, the Rohingyas[17].
Please send an appeal to these
email addresses: "ohhdl@dalailama.com"
<ohhdl@dalailama.com>; "webmaster@dalailama.com"
<webmaster@dalailama.com> "haveyoursay@bbc.co.uk"
<haveyoursay@bbc.co.uk>; "newsdesk@independent.co.uk"
<newsdesk@independent.co.uk>; "info@kofiannanfoundation.org"
<info@kofiannanfoundation.org>; "InfoDesk@ohchr.org"
<InfoDesk@ohchr.org>; "civilsociety@ohchr.org"
<civilsociety@ohchr.org>; "editor@thedailystar.net"
<editor@thedailystar.net. Please add more recipients if appropriate.
You may use the text of the appeals
below, or create your own.
With best personal regards.
Abu Raihan Muhammed Khalid
Barrister-at-Law, of Lincoln's Inn
England; Advocate, Supreme Court of Bangladesh
3. Visit to Kutupalong Refugee Camp
We went to find out the location of the IOM Teknaf Field Office in
Teknaf, Cox’s Bazar, Bangladesh on January 7, 2017. Before that on 3 January
2017 I left Dhaka for a short trip to the region and returned from the Saint
Martin’s island to Teknaf on 07 January 2017. The IOM is the leading
inter-governmental organization in the field of migration. It is supporting the
Government of Bangladesh to increase access to healthcare services along with
water sanitation and hygiene to the vulnerable Rohingya Refugees at formal and
informal refugee Camps in the South Eastern Bangladesh, the Cox’s Bazar
District. My Rakhaine friend who helped me find a hotel room in Teknaf
introduced me to the local civil society- workers of NGOs, local community
leaders and media personnel in the evening. I was told by the local media
workers that IOM would be able to provide me with information regarding my
visit to a Camp.
On the next
morning, on 08 January 2017, I went to the IOM Teknaf office to find out more
about the Rohingya refugees and situations of the refugee camps where the
Rohingyas are living. I had brief meetings with two IOM Staff there, Mr. Kazal
Kumar Bardhan, WASH Coordinator, IOM Field Office-Teknaf and Mr. Kishore George
Palma, Admin and Finance Assistant of the IOM Field Office –Teknaf. The IOM
Office refused to give us any information whatsoever. I requested to give their
refusal in writing so that I may pursue an appeal against this decision to a
higher authority of the IOM. The IOM Staff protested saying that I did not make
the request in writing. Therefore, I wrote a request application at once and
gave it to him. The application read as follow:
Date: 08.01.2017
To
In charge
IOM Field Office, Teknaf
Holding No. 100, Main Road
KK Para, Teknaf
Cox’s Bazar, Bangladesh
Subject: IOM services provided to the Refugees in this
area.
Dear Sir/Madam
I am a Lawyer & Advocate
of the Supreme Court of Bangladesh. I am doing a research on the refugees in
this area as a part of my advocacy programme. For that purpose I would like to
know what services IOM is currently providing to the refugees and the number
and status of the refugees. I would appreciate any help in this regard.
With regard.
(Signed)
Abu Raihan Muhammed Khalid
Of Lincoln’s Inn Barrister-at-Law; Advocate, Bangladesh
Supreme Court.
322/2 Senpara Parbata, Mirpur-10, Dhaka-1216
Tel: 01715941751
Email: raihan.khalid@yahoo.com
The IOM Staff refused to receive the
application and at this point retracted from his position and refused to give
their decision not to provide any information in writing. Further details of
this visit to the IOM Teknaf office are stated in the Report below, ‘Rohingyas
at Kutupalong: A Story of Hope and Despair’.
On January 8, 2017 we visited the Kutupalong Refugee Camp in Ukhia,
Cox’s Bazar, Bangladesh. After leaving the IOM Teknaf office we started for
Kutupalong refugee camp, the largest of such camps in Bangladesh to see the
situations of the Rohingyas. We have spent the good part of the day there
observing the situation, interviewing some Refugees, taking photographic
evidence. Details of the visit are in the Report ‘Rohingyas at Kutupalong: A
Story of Hope and Despair’ below.
4. Message from Kutupalong
During our visit to the Kutupalong Refugee camp, in Cox’s Bazar
district of Bangladesh on 08th January 2017 we have recoded video
images of the Rohingya people living in the Camp. We have interviewed a few of
the Refugees. We have transcribed the interviews in the video images and
published the video evidence at the video-sharing website YouTube and to the business and employment oriented social
networking website LinkedIn on January 20, 2017.
Following is the list of the video images and transcription with their links to
the web location:
- Rohingya
Refugee Dil Mohammed tells his story[18].
- Rohingya
Refugee Sikander tells his story. Refugee Camp, Kutupalong, Cox's Bazar,
Bangladesh[19].
- Rohingya
Refugee Sirajul Islam tells me that his house in Myanmar was burnt by the
Military[20].
- A
day Inside the Kutupalong Camp: one refugee shows his broken leg[21].
- The
alleyway of Hope and Despair: A view of the refugee huts lining on both
sides of the passage[22].
- A
Market in the Kutupalong Refugee Camp, Cox's Bazar, Bangladesh[23].
- Rohingyas
cultivate Vegetable in land rented from Bangladeshis[24].
- Man
cutting side of a hill inside Kutupalong Refugee camp, Cox's Bazar,
Bangladesh[25].
- Erased
Hills and broken huts: Rohingyas rebuild huts previously destroyed by the
Bangladesh DoF[26].
- The
windy hilltop, an old Mosque and a tiny shop: Rohingya Refugee Camp,
Kutupalong[27].
On January 21,
2017 we posted the following video
image with transcript at our Blog:
Rohingya
Refugee Dil Mohammed tells his stories: Rohingyas are starving at Kutupalong
Refugee Camp, Bangladesh[28].
On January 21, 2017 we posted the following video image in
Facebook:
On January 21, 2017 we sent the video image of the following interview with
transcription in English language to the United Nations agencies related to the
refugees and human rights, several other international institutions and press
and electronic media both in Bangladesh and abroad.
“Rohingya Refugee Dil Mohammed tells his
stories: Rohingyas are starving at Kutupalong Refugee Camp, Bangladesh”
- The Office of
the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR): infodesk@ohchr.org,
- dspalthoff@ohchr.org,
- Forum on
Minority Issues, the
Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR): minorityissues@ohchr.org,
- OHCHR
Civil Society Section, Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights: civilsociety@ohchr.org,
- Australia
for UNHCR: info@unrefugees.org.au,
- UNHCR
Office for Switzerland and Liechtenstein: SWIGE@unhcr.org,
- United
Nations Refugee Agency, Bangladesh: BGDCO@unhcr.org,
- The UNHCR
Representative in Myanmar: MYAMY@unhcr.org,
- National
Human Rights Commission Bangladesh: nhrc.bd@gmail.com,
- The British Broadcasting Corporation (BBC): haveyoursay@bbc.co.uk,
yourpics@bbc.co.uk,
- The Daily Samakal
newspaper, Dhaka, Bangladesh.
- The New
Nation, newspaper, Dhaka, Bangladesh.
- Bdnews24.
Com news service, Dhaka, Bangladesh.
- The Daily
Ittefaq newspaper, Dhaka , Bangladesh.: editor@clickittefaq.com,
- The Financial
Express newspaper, Dhaka, Bangladesh.: editor@thefinancialexpress-bd.com,
- The Daily
Prothom-alo newspaper, Dhaka, Bangladesh.: editor@prothom-alo.com,
- NTV satellite
television channel Dhaka, Bangladesh.
- Mohona
TV, satellite television channel Dhaka, Bangladesh.
- Desh TV,
satellite television channel Dhaka, Bangladesh.
- Ekushey
Tv satellite television channel Dhaka, Bangladesh.
- SA TV
satellite television channel Dhaka, Bangladesh.
- My TV
satellite television channel Dhaka, Bangladesh.
- New Yorker
Magazine, New York City, New York, U.S.A.: themail@newyorker.com,
- The New York
Review of Books (NYRB), New York
City, U.S.A.: editor@nybooks.com,
- The Daily Janakantha
Newspaper, Dhaka, Bangladesh.
- Reuters
News Agency India, New Delhi, India: delhi.newsroom@reuters.com,
- RTV satellite
television channel Dhaka, Bangladesh: newsroom@rtvbd.tv,
- The Independent
newspaper, London: newsdesk@independent.co.uk,
- The
Washington Post Newspaper, Washington, D.C., U.S.A.: foreign@washpost.com
Transcription of the video image:
Video images taken on the 8th January, 2017 at Rohingya Refugee Camp,
Kutupalong, Teknaf, Cox's Bazar, Bangladesh:
Rohingya people of the Myanmar have started
arriving as refugees to Bangladesh in the early 1990s. They are still arriving
in great numbers.
The last big arrival was caused by the
atrocities that took place in October 2016, ohchr.org[32]; CNN[33]; time.com[34]; bbc.com[35].
These refugees who arrived following the last wave of atrocities in October 2016 have received very little or no any assistance from the UNHCR[36], IOM[37], the Government of Bangladesh or any other organization.
They are starving. Living in dismal conditions, suffering from injuries inflicted by the Myanmar Military.
They desperately need help from the international community.
These refugees who arrived following the last wave of atrocities in October 2016 have received very little or no any assistance from the UNHCR[36], IOM[37], the Government of Bangladesh or any other organization.
They are starving. Living in dismal conditions, suffering from injuries inflicted by the Myanmar Military.
They desperately need help from the international community.
In this video Rohingya Refugee Dil Mohammed tells me that he arrived at
this Camp 10/15 days ago. When they were attacked, they left the home at once;
there was no time even to close the doors. He could not bring any money with
him, not even the clothes, he tells me.
He arrived by walking through the hilly forests that separates Myanmar
and Bangladesh. It was horrible, he tell me. His entire family could not
come with him. Some of his children are still behind, but they are alive, he
says.
They are eight now in his family in Kutupalong Camp. He did not receive
any help, food or otherwise, from anybody yet. He does not know if any
help is given at the Camp by the Govt. or by any NGOs. He received no
information.
I told him that many NGOs have their offices at the nearby Kutupalong
Bazar. Did he try to get any help from there? He said he tried once or twice,
but could not get through the big crowd of people there. He adds that he felt
embarrassed to look for food from people. He was a well to do farmer in
Myanmar.
I asked him if the refugees who came earlier are helping the newcomers
with information. He said no. I had a volunteer with me who is also a Rohingya
refugee who came some months ago. He confirmed that there is no such organized
effort among the old refugees in the Camp to help the new comers with
information.
This is important because although these Rohigya people speak a distant
dialect of Bengali, their language quite different from the language of the
local population. Besides, they do not know the locality, or the governance
structure of Bangladesh. They are also in severe distress.
No Govt. or non-Govt. organization came to register him as a refugee.
He and his family are going through severe hardships. The night before
our conversation the family had boiled rice with a green chilli chatni. They
had no food that day up to the time when we had the conversation, around 12.55
pm.
Reported by:
Abu Raihan Muhammed Khalid
On January 21, 2017 we
posted the above video and seven other videos with English transcription to
Facebook:
Rohingya
Refugee Dil Mohammed tells his stories: Rohingyas are starving at Kutupalong
Refugee Camp, Bangladesh[38].
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Video images taken on the 8th January, 2017 at Rohingya Refugee
Camp, Kutupalong, Teknaf, Cox's Bazar, Bangladesh:
Rohingya people of the Myanmar have started arriving as refugees to
Bangladesh in the early 1990s. They are still arriving in great numbers.
The last big arrival was caused by the atrocities that took place
in October 2016, ohchr.org; CNN; time.com; bbc.com
These refugees who arrived following the last wave of atrocities in
October 2016 have received very little or no any assistance from the UNHCR,
IOM, the Government of Bangladesh or any other organization.
They are starving. Living in dismal conditions, suffering from
injuries inflicted by the Myanmar Military.
They desperately need help from the international community.
In this video Rohingya Refugee Dil Mohammed tells me his story.
More stories from Kutupalong Refugee Camp
---------------------------------------------------------------
---------------------------------------------------------------
2. Rohingya
Refugee Sikander tells his story. Refugee Camp, Kutupalong, Cox's Bazar,
Bangladesh[40].
In this video we see Rohingya Refugees are erasing parts of hills
in order to make room for building new huts. Bangladesh Government destroyed
some of the huts built earlier, but they are building again. In reply to my
question Sikander, a Rohingya Refugee who came 10/15 days earlier said there is
no other place to build a hut around here. The hills are the only place not
occupied by the Bangladeshi people. Sikander told me that he is now living in
his relative's hut. His relatives are also refugees in this Camp who came
earlier. His relatives are also paying for his hut, which is being built behind
him. He does not whether the Government of Bangladesh is providing any food or
other help. Nobody gave him any information.
In this video we see numerous new makeshift huts built on
hillsides.
This Refugee, Sirajul Islam, tells me that his house in Myanmar was
burnt by the Military.
He received 25 Kilograms rice from the Government of Bangladesh. He
does not know if there will be more help later. He was not registered as a
refugee at the Camp, no paperwork whatsoever was done. He collected the rice in
exchange of a token which was given earlier by a 'Majhi', a community leader,
in the Camp.
Nobody gave him any information regarding how he may register
himself as a refugee so that he may receive more assistance. His fellow
refugees are themselves in great distress, he tells me, and are unable to help.
In this video we see huts built by the Rohingya Refugees are
destroyed by the Department of Forest, which manages this area.
This video shows a section of the Kutupalong Refugee Camp in Cox's
Bazar, Bangladesh. This section of the Camp has both old and new refugees; some
are living in this Camp for 15 to 20 years. We see a Mosque built for the old
refugees.
In the last part of this video clip we see a refugee opened a tiny
shop on a table top catering for other refugees. He is selling lozenges,
biscuits, carbonated bottled drinks etc.
We distribute some rice among the newly arrived refugees. One
refugee shows me his broken leg in braces. Military broke his leg with a rod,
he says. He treated the broken leg with brace in Bangladesh. He did not receive
any medical assistance from anybody in this Camp.
A man is cutting the side of a hill inside Kutupalong Refugee camp.
It is not clear whether he is a refugee or a local Bangladeshi. There are rice
fields behind him planted by the locals Bangladeshis.
On January 24, 2017 we
posted a collection of photographic images taken at the Kutupalong Refugee
Camp, Cox’s Bazar at Facebook:
‘Kutupalong:
An Offence Against Humanity,’[48] Stories from the largest
Refugee Camp in Bangladesh- Kutupalong, Cox's Bazar. A collection of
photographic images taken at the Kutupalong Refugee Camp, Cox’s Bazar,
Bangladesh on 08 January, 2017.
5. The Report: Rohingyas at Kutupalong: A Story of Hope and Despair. Story
of the most unfortunate people of our time
On January 25 2017 we wrote an email to the United Nations
agencies related to refugees and human rights and several other international
and Bangladeshi intergovernmental, non-governmental and private establishments
related to human rights advocacy and media with our Report “Rohingyas
at Kutupalong: A Story of Hope and Despair- Story of the most unfortunate
people of our time” dated 25.01.2017.
“Rohingyas at Kutupalong:
A Story of Hope and Despair. Story of the most unfortunate people of our time”
- The Office of
the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR): infodesk@ohchr.org,
- dspalthoff@ohchr.org,
- Forum on
Minority Issues, the
Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR): minorityissues@ohchr.org,
- OHCHR
Civil Society Section, Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights: civilsociety@ohchr.org,
- Australia
for UNHCR: info@unrefugees.org.au,
- UNHCR
Office for Switzerland and Liechtenstein: SWIGE@unhcr.org,
- United
Nations Refugee Agency, Bangladesh: BGDCO@unhcr.org,
- The UNHCR
Representative in Myanmar: MYAMY@unhcr.org,
- National
Human Rights Commission Bangladesh: nhrc.bd@gmail.com,
- The British Broadcasting Corporation (BBC): haveyoursay@bbc.co.uk,
yourpics@bbc.co.uk,
- The Daily Samakal
newspaper, Dhaka, Bangladesh.
- The New
Nation, newspaper, Dhaka, Bangladesh.
- Bdnews24.
Com news service, Dhaka, Bangladesh.
- The Daily
Ittefaq newspaper, Dhaka , Bangladesh.: editor@clickittefaq.com,
- The
Financial Express newspaper, Dhaka, Bangladesh.: editor@thefinancialexpress-bd.com,
- The Daily
Prothom-alo newspaper, Dhaka, Bangladesh.: editor@prothom-alo.com,
- NTV satellite
television channel Dhaka, Bangladesh.
- Mohona
TV, satellite television channel Dhaka, Bangladesh.
- Desh TV,
satellite television channel Dhaka, Bangladesh.
- Ekushey
Tv satellite television channel Dhaka, Bangladesh.
- SA TV
satellite television channel Dhaka, Bangladesh.
- My TV
satellite television channel Dhaka, Bangladesh.
- New Yorker
Magazine, New York City, New York, U.S.A.: themail@newyorker.com,
- The New York
Review of Books (NYRB), New York
City, U.S.A.: editor@nybooks.com,
- The Daily Janakantha
Newspaper, Dhaka, Bangladesh.
- Reuters
News Agency India, New Delhi, India: delhi.newsroom@reuters.com,
- RTV satellite
television channel Dhaka, Bangladesh: newsroom@rtvbd.tv,
- The Independent
newspaper, London: newsdesk@independent.co.uk,
- The
Washington Post Newspaper, Washington, D.C., U.S.A.: foreign@washpost.com
- International
Organization for Migration (IOM): hq@iom.int
- IOM
Regional Office for Asia and the Pacific, Bangkok, Thailand: ROBangkok@iom.int
- International
Organization for Migration (IOM), Dhaka Office, Dhaka, Bangladesh: IOMDhaka@iom.int.
- International
Organization for Migration (IOM) Country Office Japan with Resource
Mobilization Function, Tokyo, Japan: iomtokyo@iom.int
- International
Organization for Migration (IOM) Malaysia, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia: Iomkualalumpur@iom.int,
- Mission of
the International Organisation for Migration, London, United Kingdom: iomuk@iom.int,
- Rohingya
Vision TV, www.rvisiontv.com: editor@rvisiontv.com, info@rvisiontv.com,
- Al Jazeera
Satellite television network, Doha, Qatar: info@aljazeera.com,
- Kaladan
Press Network (KPN), www.kaladanpress.org: info@kaladanpress.org,
fayasamed@gmail.com,
- General
Assembly and ECOSOC Affairs Division, General Assembly of The United
Nations, UN Headquarters, New York City, U.S.A.: muturi@un.org,
- General
Assembly Secretariat, General Assembly of The United Nations, UN
Headquarters, New York City, U.S.A.: poliakova@un.org,
- The United
Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs (UN DESA), New York
City, United States of America: migrationp@un.org,
- The
Independent Newspaper, London, United Kingdom: newsdesk@independent.co.uk,
- The Hindu
daily Newspaper, Chennai, India: letters@thehindu.co.in,
- Bangladesh
Legal Aid and Services Trust: BLAST, Dhaka, Bangladesh: mail@blast.org.bd,
- Dr. Kamal
Hossain, Bangladeshi jurist, statesman, politician and
freedom fighter, Dhaka, Bangladesh.
- Association
for Land Reforms and Development (ALRD), Dhaka, Bangladesh.
- Bangladesh
Environmental Lawyers Association (BELA), Dhaka, Bangladesh.
This
is a story of the most unfortunate people of our time.
Their
own country rejects them. The country they came in denies them.
This is a story of the Rohingya refugees living in Kutupalong Refugee
Camp in Cox's bazar District, Bangladesh. I have visited the Camp on 8th
January 2017 and taken photos and videos of the situation there. I have already
sent some of that content to many of you. Some of the video images you may have
seen in my last email.
This feature contains a harrowing tale of the miseries the Rohingya
people going through even inside Bangladesh. Nobody knows how many of them are
in Bangladesh, because nobody went to register or count them. Nobody knows how
they are doing, because nobody went there to ask them.
This is my personal attempt to tell the stories of this most unfortunate
people of our time. Their own country rejects them. The country they came in
denies them.
Note: If you find it difficult to download the annexed document, please
use the text in the email.
Rohingyas at Kutupalong:
A Story of Hope and Despair
A round the clock narrative of the Refugee Camp.
Abu Raihan Muammed
Khalid
8.12 am: I arrived at the International
Organization for Migration (IOM) Office in Teknaf, Cox’s Bazar.
I arrived here in Teknaf the evening before
from St. Martin’s Island, a nearby coral island and popular holiday destination.
I have come to see for myself the condition of the Rohingya Refugees who are
living in Bangladesh. I spent the later part of the last evening discussing with
the local media workers the whereabouts of the Rohingya refugee Camps and how
best to visit one.
A new wave of Rohingya refugees are arriving
following the latest wave of atrocities caused by Myanmar since October 2016. Human
Rights Watch New York reported on November 21, 2016 that “new
satellite imagery of Burma’s Rakhine State shows 820 newly identified
structures destroyed in five different ethnic Rohingya villages between
November 10-18, 2016”[49]. The
day after I visited Kutupalong Rohingya Refugee Camp the New York Times
published ‘There
Are No Homes Left’: Rohingya Tell of Rape, Fire and Death in Myanmar[50].
It’s a grim, frustrating picture.
Fortunately, I had a friend at the town from my
University days who introduced me to the people who might be able to help me.
My friend showed me where the IOM office is so that I can come here by myself
in the early morning.
Photograph
1: Entrance of the International Organization for Migration (IOM) Office,
Teknaf, Cox's Bazar, Bangladesh. Photo: Author
Photograph
2: Main Entrance of the International Organization for Migration (IOM) Office,
Teknaf, Cox's Bazar, Bangladesh. Photo: Author
Three nights ago I went through Teknaf to the
St. Martins Island. On the very first morning when I came out of the Mosque in
the centre of the town after saying my morning prayer a man approached me. He
looked like an educated well to do local young man. But he told me that he is a
Rohingya and arrived here some days ago from Myanmar. He has relatives living
in Bangladesh, and will join them soon.
During my visit in the scenic St. Martin’s
Island only a couple of hour ferry ride away from the Teknaf peninsula I met
another Rohingya who was a waiter in a restaurant I had dinner. He told me his
mother is from the Island and he came to live in with his maternal relatives
some years ago. He did not have any Bangladeshi identity papers, or any papers
whatsoever. In fact I was told that about 20% of the inhabitants of St.
Martin’s island are Rohingyas, arrived in fishing boats and trawlers without
ever encountering an immigration post.
I assume that there will be a good many
Rohingyas living in Teknaf town and in the surrounding area as well. Since the
dialect they speak is somewhat similar to that of Teknaf, and the physical
appearance is undistinguishable from the Teknaf population, it is very hard to
identify one just by looking at or talking to. It only adds to the problem that
Rohingyas, fearing push back or general persecution from certain section of the
Bangladeshis, would try to hide their Rohingya identity. It needs to be
mentioned that the official Bangladeshi position is to push back the current
onslaught of the Rohingyas in order to discourage further migration. For one
reason Bangladesh already have a very large number of Rohingya refugees living
in the country.
The IOM is the leading inter-governmental organization[51]
in the field of migration. It is supporting the Government of Bangladesh to increase
access to healthcare services along with water sanitation and hygiene to the
vulnerable Rohingya Refugees at formal and informal refugee Camps in the South
Eastern Bangladesh, the Cox’s Bazar District. I was told by the local media
workers that IOM would be able to provide me with information regarding my
visit to a Camp.
The IOM Office Teknaf does not have a signboard
at the entrance of the property it is located in, as can be seen from Picture
No. 2 above. It does have a small stainless still sign post at the door of the
building it is housed in, which is behind the first building in the walled
property. We were told about this location by a Taknaf man who runs a community
radio. But on arrival last evening I became confused. In my mind I thought an
International Organization working for a vulnerable group must have a large
openly visible sign board declaring a reassuring bold presence. There is no
signboard on the entrance of the property at all.
We entered the empty deserted-looking property
and seeing no signs or people I started calling for any people who may be
present there; a guard or an attendant. But nobody replied. We decided this
could not be the IOM office and went to find a local man who can help us find
it. The man guided us into the same property and confirmed that this is indeed
the IOM Teknaf office. That evening I turned down a dinner invitation from my
friend in order to be able to wake up early to prepare for the day. I went to
bed right after an early dinner at a local restaurant.
At my arrival at 8.12am I found the Guard of
the office and a woman sweeping the floors of the office. I told the Guard that
I wanted to meet the Manager or the person in charge of the office. He said no
body has arrived yet and indicated that I leave. But I did not want to leave
and asked if I could wait there. He agreed and I signed into the visitor’s
register. About half an hour later of the usual office time, according to the
Guard, a woman arrived complaining about the smell on the staircase. Indeed, I
too noticed a very strong unpleasant smell coming from perhaps a rotting rat.
Slowly more people arrived and one person asked me what I wanted.
I introduced myself and told him that I wanted
to know about the Rohingya refugees. He said that they are working with the
Rohingyas in at least three distinct locations; Lyada, Kutupalong and Noyapara.
But he cannot give me any information. I wanted to see the Manager and he told
me that there is no head of this unit; everybody is doing their own work. But
then another person, a relatively older person, came to talk to me.
He too said that they cannot give me any
information regarding the number of the Rohingya refugees, or an estimate of
their number, or what different sort of services IOM is providing them. The
elder person then left me as he had to go to one of the Camps. I asked if there
is any printed literature regarding IOM’s activities in that area that he may
give me, and the first person gave me a printed page. This later turned out not
to an IOM literature but Government of Bangladesh’s Strategy regarding the
Myanmar Refugees and unregistered citizens, which at one corner has an IOM
emblem.
I was surprised by this refusal. Rohingya refugees
are not any new or secret matter. The newspapers are regularly publishing their
news. What could be the reason behind this refusal by an international
organization to give any information? My training as a Barrister in the UK
indicated that I should get the refusal in writing. I requested the person to
give me the refusal in writing; he said that I did not make any request in
writing so how should he give the refusal in writing. I wrote an application
requesting to know about the Rohingyas IOM is working with.
The IOM employee now refused to accept the
application or to reject the request in writing departing from his previous
position. He said I needed to speak with the information officer and gave me a
telephone number. We called that number from his mobile telephone and a person
in Cox’s bazar answered the phone. He was in great hurry. He kept telling me
that he was in a meeting and I needed to say what I wanted to say quickly. On
enquiry however, he said that he is the coordination officer and the information
officer is stationed in the Capital Dhaka. I took the telephone number and
address so that I contact the office later.
I requested as a last resort if I could travel
along with him when he told me that he is now going to visit a Camp and he said
no. I could use some help as I did not know where the Camp is and how to go
there. When I was leaving the office I took some photograph with the permission
of the security guard.
Today on 24th January ’17 I have
searched using Google to learn more about what IOM does about the Rohingyas in
Bangladesh. They have a website for Bangladesh[52],
and apparently publish Newsletters. I searched the site and found one
item containing the term ‘Rohingya’[53],
and about four
more items about ‘Myanmar Nationals’[54]. None
of these are from 2016 or 2017.
I have found two issues of the Newsletter on
the website, one is the Issue 2, 2014, and the other one is Issue 1 2016. The
2014 issue[55]
has one item of news about “Myanmar Refugees and Undocumented Myanmar Nationals
living in Bangladesh”. The
2016 issue[56]
has nothing on Rohingya issue.
The use of the term ‘Rohingya’ in related
literature is important. “Myanmar
is seeking the ethnic cleansing of the Muslim Rohingya minority from its
territory”[57],
a senior UN official has told the BBC. In December 2016 Malaysia
has accused Myanmar of engaging in "ethnic cleansing" of its Rohingya
Muslim minority[58].
A Myanmar refugee other than a Rohingya has never been reported in Bangladesh.
The common identity of all these refugee
victims characterizes these atrocities as ethnic cleansing, an offence against
humanity. In a case of ethnic cleansing the ethnic identity of those persecuted
is of great importance.
That is why it is extremely important to refer
to them in their ethnic identity Rohingya every time we mention them. This is
as important for human rights advocates as for the United Nations legal
systems.
So why IOM is not using ‘Rohingya’ to refer to
these refugees? The Rohingyas themselves see this as a major problem, so do the
human rights advocates. Integrated
Regional Information Networks IRIN reports that “Myanmar rejects their citizenship and their name itself[59], and recently condemned[60] UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon for saying
"Rohingya" during the November Association of Southeast Asian Nations
summit in Myanmar”[61].
Focusing on the problem in hand, I remembered a
conversation I had with an IOM Volunteer at St. Martin’s Island during my stay
there and also on the previous evening over telephone. He suggested that
instead of consulting the office I visit a Camp myself on my own.
I asked the shopkeepers at the bus station
about the bus for Kutupalong Camp and with their advice I boarded a bus. I fell
asleep in the bus, I was exhausted. About an hour later I was at Kutupalong
Bazar, and entered the first tea stall that I saw for a cup of tea and some
snack. I felt better soon and approached the two young men standing nearby, if
they could work as my guide in the Kutupalong Refugee Camp. The shop owner soon
intervened and told me that these young men would not be very helpful, for one
reason one of them is a Rohingya himself and does not understand the standard
form of Bangla language I speak. I requested him to arrange me a guide. He did
help me and a man sitting in the same tea stall stood and came near me. I paid
my bill and soon we started afoot towards the Camp, which is only half a
kilometer from the Bus station.
11.45 am: Kutupalong Camp
Photograph
3: Solar Street Lights in Kutupalong Refugee Camp. Photograph taken on 08
January 2017 by this author.
We arrived at the Camp around half past eleven.
At first sight it reminded me of the tea garden’s workers colony in Sylhet,
Bangladesh that I visited in my student days. It’s not that bad a place, you
might think at first. The roads are clean earthen roads; no garbage littered on
the sides of the house, there is solar light on the street which imports an air
of modern sustainability. This picture shows bean and pumpkin vines on the roof
of the hut; a sign of resilience of the inhabitants. This part of the Camp is
old. The inhabitants arrived some years ago, some even 20 years ago, when the
crisis first began in Myanmar. They have made the Camp their home.
Photograph 4: Water and Sanitation facilities at Kutupalong
Camp. Photo Credit: Author
Photograph 5: Water and Sanitation facilities at Kutupalong
Camp. Photo Credit: Author
The inhabitants get their water from tube wells
installed by the various aid agencies. This one in the picture No. 4 has IOM[62], SIDA[63]
and USA[64]
emblem marked on the foundation. The Camp is located on hilly forests. There are
no water sources around. The low grounds between the hills that accumulated
some rain water are now dry in this winter. There is also bathroom and latrines,
three units together, beside the tube well, provided by the Central Emergency
Response Fund of the UN, IOM-OIM and USA through a local NGO SHED[65].
People are collecting water from the tube well for domestic use.
Photograph 6: A boy standing in front of a line of huts in
Kutupalong. 08 January 2017. Photo: Author
But the scenario changes fast. Once inside the
Camp we see lines of huts built mainly with shards of polythene paper and few tree
branches on bamboo structures. The tree branches are not the usual coconut,
betel nut or date branches that are often used on roofs in these parts. These
are taken from some wood trees from the surrounding thin forest and are not
suitable for the purpose.
These huts are much worse than the first few we
saw at the entrance of the Camp. They are one room accommodations of about 7
square feet for one family. Rohingyas have large families. Number of the family
members can be up to 8 members or more. The beginning of January was mildly
cold, but in a cold whether the huts would provide little protection from the cold
or from the rain in the coming monsoon. We see one family planted a vegetable
vine next to the hut’s door. They inhabitants of this hut are here for at least
a few weeks.
Photograph 7: A Man standing in front of a hut answering our questions. 08 January 2017. Photo:
Author
We started to talk to the residents of the Camp. A man comes
out of a hut. He tells us that they came here about 20 days ago. They are part
of the latest wave of the refugees that came in to Bangladesh following the
last major atrocities that began in October 2016.
Photograph
8: Kutupalong Camp has grown inside a thin planted forest. Photo: Author
The Camp is located[66] inside
a thin planted forest on the west side of the Cox’s Bazar Teknaf highway in
Ukhia Upajila (Sub-district) of Cox’s Bazar District. To its west lie vast
hilly forests that end on the popular beach resorts of Inani on the Bay of
Bengal.
Photograph
9: Banana field inside the Camp. Photo: Author
The plane land of the
surrounding area is occupied by the Bangladeshi people. There are patches of
rice fields, vegetable and fruit orchards like the one in Photograph 9 above in
between the hills, cultivated by the Bangladeshi people. The same sorts of
encroachments in forests are seen in all parts of the country.
Photograph
10: These latrines and water fountains are not as good as the ones near the
entrance. Photo: Author
Although the tube well, bath
rooms and the latrines that we saw near the entrance were made of bricks and
corrugated tins, we see latrines made with bamboo walls and polythene roof on
an earthen foundation as we progress. The initial impression of the Camp being
a quiet modern sustainable place soon fades away. I could not find any emblem
of any international or national aid agency on these facilities as we have seen
on the better ones near the entrance. It is possible that the UN, IOM-OIM, USA and SIDA which assisted
building the facilities near the entrance did not provide assistance for
building these not so good ones.
Photograph
11: A Mosque with loudspeakers; dilapidated huts on the side of the hill.
Photo: Author
The Rohingyas are all Muslims.
Mosques with brick walls, tin roofs and loud speakers are seen frequently
beside the dilapidated and unrecognisable living quarters. While we appreciate
the good intentions, these relatively better looking Mosques help bring a quick
consolation to the onlookers mind; just like the solar panels, street lights
and the better sanitation facilities near the entrance. These are the images
that will linger in the mind of a visitor long after leaving the Camp, not the
7 square feet excuses for houses, or the lives of their inhabitants.
12.15
PM: Rohingya Refugee Sikander tells his story. Refugee Camp, Kutupalong, Cox's
Bazar, Bangladesh[67]
In this video we see Rohingya
Refugees are erasing parts of hills in order to make room for building new
huts. Bangladesh Government destroyed some of the huts built in this area earlier,
but they are building again.
In reply to my question
Sikander, a Rohingya Refugee who came 10/15 days earlier said there is no other
place to build a hut around here. The hills are the only place not occupied by
the Bangladeshi people.
Sikander told me that he is
now living in his relative's hut. His relatives are also refugees in this Camp
who came earlier. His relatives are also paying for the construction of his
hut, which is seen being built behind him. He is certainly lucky to have
relatives who are so helpful.
He does not whether the
Government of Bangladesh is providing any food or other help. Nobody gave him
any information.
This video shows a section of
the Refugee Camp which has both old and new refugees; some are living in this
Camp for 15 to 20 years. We see a Mosque built for the old refugees.
There are also new houses
being built on the top of the hill. Bamboo structures are rising on bare sandy
ground. The wind is quite strong on the hilltop. Vast expanse of the
surrounding area was visible from this point. Yellowish brown bare sandy ground
dotted with numerous shabby refugee huts as far as eyes goes. A line of hills and
mountains are on the eastern horizon. That is Myanmar, only about few miles
away, where these Rohingyas came from crossing the River Naf.
In the last part of this video
clip we see a refugee opened a tiny shop on a table top catering for other
refugees. He is selling lozenges, biscuits, carbonated bottled drinks etc.
Their resilience is inspiring.
12.19: Erased
Hills and broken huts: Rohingyas rebuild huts previously destroyed by the
Bangladesh Department of Forest[69].
In this video we see the
Bangladesh Department of Forest, which manages this area, destroyed huts built
by the Rohingya Refugees. Rohingyas are now rebuilding huts in the same
location. The ground is visibly erased; it is not unlikely that there were
trees standing on this location before.
Photograph
12: Environmental Campaign by the Aid Agencies. Photo: Author
Prominent emblems of ACF
International, USA and EU are seen on large billboards dedicated to
environmental awareness of the residents of the Camp. The one in the Photo No.
12 tells to dispose of the waste into garbage bins. Although we did not see any
garbage bins in the Camp. We did not see the entire of it, which is true.
Photograph
13: Some more huts, a pair of solar panel on top of one. My two guides are seen
standing on the left side. Photo: Author
The guide who accompanied me is seen
standing on the left in white lungi and blue shirt. The man standing next to
him in a white shirt is a resident refugee of the Camp who arrived some years
ago. He volunteered to show me around the Camp and hushed into my ear a few
times that my guide is trying to shorten my tour so that I do not see the most
of the Camp. The houses in this section of the Camp are made of mud walls and
roof made of polythene shards. The next monsoon will be a trying time for the
inhabitants.
Photograph 14: Corridors are not that clean
inside the Camp. Photo: Author
The corridors seen in Photo 14
are dirty, wet in places even in dry winter. It appears that there is no place
near to dispose of the rubbish or the household waste water, so they have just
been thrown outside the house. This type of environment is regularly seen in
the urban slums of Dhaka and Chittagong in Bangladesh. They create an ideal
environment for infectious diseases. There have been reports that the
Rohingyas in Camps in Bangladesh had been suffering from topical disease-
pneumonia, diarrhoea, fever and cough[70].
Photograph 15: A woman selling fuel woods from
her hut entrance. Photo: Author
In the photograph above a woman
selling fire woods from the entrance of her house. The Camp is located inside a
forest, so the first thought that came to my mind was that this came from a
tree of that forest. There were reports in the Bangladeshi media in the past
that the Rohingyas are cutting down trees of the surrounding forests to sell. I
asked the woman where she got that fire woods, she said she bought those from
the market.
12.35:
The alleyway of Hope and Despair: A view of the refugee huts lining on both
sides of the passage[71].
My Rohingya volunteer guide in
blue half shirt tell reminds me of the vastness of the Camp. It would be easy
to lose direction inside the Camp. We see numerous huts lined on both sides of
way.
Thousands of Rohingyas found
shelter in these ramshackle huts. It is an alleyway of hope and despair. This
is the thickest part of the Camp that we have visited. Street light, solar
panel on roof and one unit of brick built latrine with male and female signs on
different doors are seen.
This part is not new, vegetable
vines are seen on more than one roofs. They are not the refugees who came
following the latest October onslaught.
My guides reiterate their warning
not to give money to the refuges. There could be troubles if I tried that, they
said.
A man is cutting the side of a
hill inside Kutupalong Refugee camp. It is not clear whether he is a refugee or
a local Bangladeshi. There are rice fields behind him planted by the locals
Bangladeshis. It could very well be the Bangladeshis who are still cutting
hills. There are abundant signs of past hill cutting in the area, the patches
of rice and vegetable fields, banana plantation, etc.
I have a feeling that the man in
the video cutting hill in a vigorous manner is a local Bangladeshi. It could
not be examined though; my guides were going another way. It is easy to think
that the locals who have in the past established their dominance over the Rohingya
refugees in the Camp will dominate matters like these too. I heard rumours
during my tour there that some Bangladeshi influential locals are building some
of these huts on hills and renting them to the Rohingyas, it could not be
substantiated.
However, a 2013 news report published
by Kaladan Press Network (KPN), which claims to be an independent and
non-profitable news agency of Rohingyas of Arakan, Burma, stated that “a
Bangladeshi killed a Rohingya refugee named Nur Mohamed (45), living in unregistered refugee camp for rent of open
space in front where Nur denied to pay
for rent of space”[73].
Similar accusations of violence by local Bangladeshis towards the Rohingyas have
been made by another Rohingya media the Rohingya Vision TV[74] and IRIN[75].
We could not find any independent
report substantiating the view that Bangladeshis are renting space to the
Rohingya refugees.
However, in video image taken by
us below titled ‘12.53: Rohingyas cultivate Vegetable in land rented from
Bangladeshis’ we hear my guide telling me that the Rohingyas are growing
vegetables in land rented from the Bangladeshis.
Some of the rumours might be
true.
Photograph 16: A small temporary shop selling
packaged and freshly made snacks. Photo: Author
We have seen quite a few shops
and a market in the Camp. This temporary shop is selling packaged and freshly
made snacks to the Refugees. The man is frying sweetened round shaped dough in
oil. These deep fried sweet dough balls are called ‘gulgula’. This is made by
mixing unrefined wheat flour with sugar and water and then deep frying the
dough in hot oil in a karai. It was quarter to one in the afternoon, lunchtime.
But this is not a lunch time food, it is an all-day snack. Later, at the end of
our visit in the Camp I ate some of these ‘gulgula’ in Kutupalong Bazar with my
guide and volunteers. That was our lunch for the day, because that was all that
was available there. Although freshly grated coconut was added to the ones we
ate.
Photograph 17: More huts are being built on
partly erased hill sides. Earth slide and erosion may become big problems
during next monsoon. Photo: Author
In Photo 17 we saw sides of hills
have been erased and more huts are being built on them. Earth slide and erosion
may become big problems during next monsoon. Later we have seen a man cutting
down the side of a hill by the side of a rice field. It was not clear if he was
a local Bangladeshi or a Rohingya Refugee.
12.51pm: Rohingya Refugee
Sirajul Islam tells me that his house in Myanmar was burnt by the Military[76].
In this video we numerous new
makeshift huts built on hillsides. A woman washing clothes in the little puddle
of rain water in the low ground between the hills wearing a full burka. I do
not remember ever seeing a woman wearing a full burka while washing clothes in
the open in Bangladesh. I wonder if this is to save one’s dignity in the harsh and
hostile environment of the Refugee Camp or a regular observance of religious
edict. Another family is seen bathing on the left in this same puddle.
The huts in front of us were
built about a month ago, tell the locals.
The Refugee in this video,
Sirajul Islam, tells me that his house in Myanmar was burnt by the Military. He
received 25 Kilograms rice from the Government of Bangladesh. He does not know
if there will be more help later. He was not registered as a refugee at the
Camp, no paperwork whatsoever was done. He collected the rice in exchange of a
token which was given earlier by a 'Majhi', a community leader, in the Camp.
Nobody gave him any information
regarding how he may register himself as a refugee so that he may receive more
assistance. His fellow refugees are themselves in great distress, he tells me,
and are unable to help.
In this very short video image a
nice field of a few plots of vegetable are seen. My guides told me that the
Rohingyas are cultivating these fields; the land belongs to the local Bangladeshis.
Rohingyas paid the Bangladeshis some money for the land so that they can grow
vegetables there.
In this video Rohingya Refugee
Dil Mohammed tells me that he arrived at this Camp 10/15 days ago. When they
were attacked, they left the home at once; there was no time even to close the
doors. He could not bring any money with him, not even the clothes, he tells
me.
He arrived by walking through the
hilly forests that separates Myanmar and Bangladesh. It was horrible, he tell
me. His entire family could not come with him. Some of his children are still
behind, but they are alive, he says.
They are eight now in his family
in Kutupalong Camp. He did not receive any help; food or otherwise, from anybody
yet.
I told him that many NGOs have
their offices at the nearby Kutupalong Bazar. Did he try to get any help from
there? He said he tried once or twice, but could not get through the big crowd
of women there. He adds that he felt embarrassed to look for food from people.
He was a well to do farmer in Myanmar, tells my guide.
I asked him if the refugees who
came earlier are helping the newcomers with information. He said no. I had a
volunteer with me who is also a Rohingya refugee who came some months ago. He
confirmed that there is no such organized effort among the old refugees in the
Camp to help the new comers with information. Although media reports often refers
to Camp Committee, I wonder why none of the residents, new and old, mentioned
this Committee to me during conversation.
This is important because
although these Rohigya people speak a distant dialect of Bengali, their
language quite different from the language of the local population. Besides,
they do not know the locality, or the governance structure of Bangladesh. They
are in severe distress too.
No Govt. or non-Govt.
organization came to register him as a refugee, Dil Mohammed says..
He and his family are going
through severe hardships. The night before our conversation the family had
boiled rice with a green chilli chatni. They had no food that day up to the
time when we had the conversation, around 12.55 pm.
Photograph 18: A used clothes shop near the
Mosque. Photo: Author
A used clothes shop near a Mosque
where we said our noon prayer with the refugees. It was a very hot midday with
dry air. After climbing up and down several hills in the open sun I was feeling
as though I would faint soon. I drank some water and rested little bit inside
the shade of the Mosque before staring our tour again.
I did not see any interested
buyers, but the shopkeeper said that business is all right. The clothes are
mostly used jeans trousers and western style shirts, and some women’s clothes.
Dil Mohammed, the Refugee I
interviewed who said that he and his family did not eat anything since morning
came to meet me again after the prayer. He was clearly looking for some money
this time, but I did not give him any. At the Kutupalong Bazar when I hired the
guide I was advised by the shop keeper not to give any money to a refugee. He
said if they see handing out money big crowds of refugees would harass me for
more money and there were instances where they have even assaulted such
benefactors, tearing clothes etc.
It was probably a wise decision
if the story is correct, but my conscience still hurts me when I think that I
could have given that man some money to buy a meal for his family that noon.
Later we did give some rice to a few families of newly arrived Rohingyas, but
Dil Mohammed’s family was in a different neighbourhood of the Camp.
Photograph 19: The small open house is the place
for consultation and mediation in the Camp, a parliament and a court combined. Photo: Author
This beautiful structure is
located near the market that grew in the Camp. The structure resembles a type
of leisure houses built in the past in Bengal, with a roof and no walls, so
that wind comes in to relieve from the heat and humidity. These houses were known
as haoyaghor, or air house. People would sit in there and gossip in the hot and
humid days.
But this was no leisurely air
house. I was told that it is the place where the people of the Camp sit to
discuss matters related to governance of the Camp, or to mediate a dispute. It
is the parliament and the court combined for the Camp.
A billboard near the structure
tell the residents that nobody can defecate on the drains of the Camp in
Bengali and Myanmar languages. This billboard was installed by EU, NGO Forum
for Public Health and the UNHCR.
Photograph
20: An unlikely business woman in a temporary shop in the market that grew up
in the middle of the Camp. Photo: Author
It is the market that grew inside
the Camp. A woman is selling vegetables in her shop. She brought dried fish,
potatoes, radishes, aubergines, kakrol, a type of gourd and green chillies to
sell.
She is wearing an unmistakably
Burmese long sleeve blouse and a long sarong like gown with a large scarf
covering her head and upper body. The worn but beautiful blouse and shiny metal
bracelets in her hands and an uncomfortable look on her face tells of better
days in the past, perhaps a housewife in a farmer’s household; and her unease
in this new position as a business woman.
There are quite a few other
shops, both temporary and permanent, in the market spread around a large open
area. We have taken video image of the market.
This is the market that we spoke
about above. A boy is selling dried fish to two women wearing full Burkas.
Dried fish are the protein of choice for the people of the part of Myanmar they
come from, the Rakhain state.
I remember in 1996 when I stayed
at my Rakhain friend’s house in Teknaf, the friend who helped me find the
address of the IOM office in Teknaf and also booked my hotel room for this
visit, we had dried fish dishes almost every meal of the day. It was quite an
experience for me. The mainstay of Bengali diet is fish and vegetable curries,
dried fish are treated as a food of interest for a few.
There is a shop with fresh leafy
vegetables, the next shop is selling inexpensive local fruits called boroi
(Ziziphus mauritiana) and tentul (tamarind), then there is another used clothes
shop, a tea stall, another dried fish and vegetable shop, and some permanent
tea stalls.
Before starting my journey I
intended to give some alms to the Rohingya refugees. I said that to my guides.
They said they will help me arrange that. We went to the Kutupalong Bazar, and
there we bought fifty kilograms of rice. We made about 25 two kilograms packets
and carried that to a part of the Camp where the newly arrived Rohingyas live. We
distributed the packets. Each packet to a family, which will give them one meal
of boiled rice for that day. The above is the video image of that. It cost me
about 3,000 taka, including the payments of the guides, which is equivalent to
37 US Dollar.
When we were doing that one
refugee shows me his broken leg in braces. Myanmar Military broke his leg with
a rod, he says. He treated the broken leg with braces in Bangladesh. He did not
receive any medical assistance from anybody in this Camp.
We return to the Kutupalong bazar
soon after that and eat our lunch with gulgula. Then I leave in a shared
microbus for Teknaf where I shall spend the night before starting for Dhaka the
next morning. It was almost sunset time when I reached Teknaf. Our microbus was
miraculously saved from an accident on the way back.
On January 28, 2017 we sent the
Report to more International refugee and human rights organizations,
international and national NGOs, international and Bangladeshi news media organizations,
and members of the civil society in Bangladesh and abroad.
Rohingyas at Kutupalong: A Story of Hope and Despair. Story of the
most unfortunate people of our time
To:
- NTV satellite
television channel Dhaka, Bangladesh.
- Mohona
TV, satellite television channel Dhaka, Bangladesh.
- Desh TV,
satellite television channel Dhaka, Bangladesh.
- Ekushey
Tv satellite television channel Dhaka, Bangladesh.
- SA TV
satellite television channel Dhaka, Bangladesh.
- My TV
satellite television channel Dhaka, Bangladesh.
- Reuters
News Agency India, New Delhi, India: delhi.newsroom@reuters.com,
- International
Organization for Migration (IOM): hq@iom.int
- IOM
Regional Office for Asia and the Pacific, Bangkok, Thailand: ROBangkok@iom.int
- International
Organization for Migration (IOM), Dhaka Office, Dhaka, Bangladesh: IOMDhaka@iom.int.
- International
Organization for Migration (IOM) Country Office Japan with Resource Mobilization
Function, Tokyo, Japan: iomtokyo@iom.int
- International
Organization for Migration (IOM) Malaysia, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia: Iomkualalumpur@iom.int,
- Mission of
the International Organisation for Migration, London, United Kingdom: iomuk@iom.int,
- Rohingya
Vision TV, www.rvisiontv.com: editor@rvisiontv.com, info@rvisiontv.com,
- Kaladan
Press Network (KPN), www.kaladanpress.org: info@kaladanpress.org,
fayasamed@gmail.com,
21. General Assembly and ECOSOC Affairs
Division, General Assembly of The United Nations, UN Headquarters, New York
City, U.S.A.: muturi@un.org,
22. General Assembly Secretariat, General
Assembly of The United Nations, UN Headquarters, New York City, U.S.A.: poliakova@un.org
- The United
Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs (UN DESA), New York
City, United States of America: migrationp@un.org,
24. Muhammad
Anisur Muhammad (Anu Muhammad), Professor at Jahangirnagar University,
anujuniv@gmail.com
25. Professor
Dr. M Shah Alam, Member at Law Commission, Bangladesh: shahaamcu50@gmail.com
26. Association for Land Reforms and
Development (ALRD), Dhaka, Bangladesh
- Bangladesh
Environmental Lawyers Association (BELA), Dhaka, Bangladesh.
28. Ain
o Salish Kendra (ASK), a national legal aid and human rights organisation: ask@citechco.net
29. The
Daily New Age Newspaper, Dhaka, Bangladesh.
30. The
daily Janakantha Newspaper, Dhaka, Bangladesh.
31. Dr.
Iftekharuzzaman, Executive Director at Transparency International Bangladesh
(TIB), edtib@ti-bangladesh.org
32. Dr.
Meghna Guhathakurta, Executive Director at Research Initiatives, Bangladesh
(RIB): meghnaguhathakurta@gmail.com
33. Dr.
Abu Mohammad Shapan Adnan (Dr. Shapan Adnan), Member of the Editorial Board of
Contemporary Perspectives: History and Sociology of South Asia, published by
Cambridge University Press, India. at Cambridge University Press, India, amsa127@gmail.com
34. Dr.
Mizanur Rahman, Adjunct Professor. Professor and former Chairman of Law,
University of Dhaka at University of Asia pacific, koli@citechco.net
35. The
Daily Prothom Alo Newspaper, Dhaka, Bangladesh
36. Professor
Nazrul Islam, Chairman at Centre for Urban Studies (CUS), Dhaka: cus@dhaka.net,
37. Dr.
Md. Nazrul Islam (Asif Nazrul), Professor at University of Dhaka,
asifnazrul@gmail.com,
38. Professor
Ainun Nishat, Professor Emeritus at Centre for Climate Change and Environmental
Research, nishat@bracu.ac.bd,
39. Kofi
Anan, Founding Chairman at Kofi Annan Foundation, Geneva, Switzerland:
info@kofiannanfoundation.org work, media@kofiannanfoundation.org
40. Refugees
International (RI), Washington, USA: ri@refugeesinternational.org
41. Danish
Refugee Council (DRC), Copenhagen, Denmark: drc@drc.dk
42. Alyssa
Eisenstein, Refugees International (RI), Washington, USA: alyssa@refugeesinternational.org,
43. International
Rescue Committee, New York USA: communications@rescue.org
46. Refugee
Action, London, United Kingdom: info@refugee-action.org.uk
47. Stephanie
Bengtsson, Refugee Action, London, United Kingdom: stephanieb@refugee-action.org.uk
48. Migration
Policy Institute, Washington, DC, United States of America:
info@migrationpolicy.org
49. Michelle
Mittelstadt, Migration Policy Institute, Washington, DC, United States of
America: mmittelstadt@migrationpolicy.org
50. Center
for Refugee Solidarity, Malmo, Sweden: info@refugeesolidarity.org
51. Norwegian
Refugee Council, Oslo, Norway: nrc@nrc.no
52. Norwegian
Refugee Council’s expert deployment capacity, Oslo, Norway: norcap@nrc.no
53. Refugee
Council USA, Washington, United States of America: info@rcusa.org
On January 28, 2017 we posted the Report Rohingyas at Kutupalong: A Story
of Hope and Despair in our Blog, The
Curious Lawyer.[81]
On the same day on January 28, 2017 we posted the Report Rohingyas at Kutupalong: A Story of Hope and Despair
in Facebook[82].
On January 28, 2017 we posted the Report Rohingyas at Kutupalong: A Story
of Hope and Despair in LinkedIn[83].
6. Advocacy at IOM
On January 29, 2017; 10:49 AM The National Communication Officer of the International
Organization for Migration (IOM) Bangladesh Mission contacted us by email
requesting a meeting regarding our Report ‘Rohingyas at
Kutupalong: A Story of Hope and Despair’:
Jan 29 at 10:49 AM
RE:
Rohingyas at Kutupalong: A Story of Hope and Despair. Story of the most
unfortunate people of our time
Dear
Mr. Khalid,
Thank
you for sharing your experience and observation on one of the most persecuted
minorities in the world. We would like to discuss it more with you. We,
therefore, would like to invite you at our office today to have a meeting with
our Deputy Chief of Mission. Could you please kindly share your contact number
or get back to me at 01711187499 to schedule a convenient time for the meeting?
We are very much looking forward to have a discussion with you.
Regards,
Shirin AKHTER (Ms.)
National Communication Officer
IOM Bangladesh Mission
House: 13/A, Road – 136
Gulshan – 1, Dhaka – 1212
Office: +88 – 02 – 55044811 - 13
Skype: shirin.akhter| Web: www.iom.int
The same day the said IOM Staff sent us a text message by
the Short Message Service of mobile telephone and also called us over telephone
requesting a meeting.
On January 29 2017 at
3:00 PM we agreed to the proposal over telephone and later wrote the following
email to IOM Bangladesh:
RE: Rohingyas at
Kutupalong: A Story of Hope and Despair. Story of the most unfortunate people
of our time
Raihan Khalid
Barrister-at-Law <raihan.khalid@yahoo.com> Jan 29 at 3:00 PM
To: AKHTER Shirin
Dear Ms. Shirin
Akhter
Thank you for your
reply.
It is very kind of
you that your office invites me for a meeting. I have visited the Camp only
once. I am sure your office has far more important insights and information on
the matter. A meeting with your office would rather enrich my understanding of
the matter.
Having said that I
am very much interested to take this opportunity to meet your office.
I can come any day
of this week. I would prefer the morning for a meeting if that is possible.
With many thanks
and best regards.
Raihan
Khalid Barrister-at-Law
On January 29 2017 at
3:16 PM considering the gravity of the matter we wrote another email enquiring
whether a telephone confirmation from my side is required to confirm the
meeting. This time we copied the email to the IOM Head Quarters in Geneva,
Switzerland:
RE: Rohingyas at
Kutupalong. Possible meeting.
Raihan Khalid
Barrister-at-Law <raihan.khalid@yahoo.com> Jan 29 at 3:16 PM
To: AKHTER Shirin
CC: hq@iom.int
Dear Ms. Shirin
Akhter
Thank you for your
reply.
It is very kind of
you that your office invites me for a meeting.
I have visited the
Camp only once. I am sure your office has far more important insights and information
on the matter. A meeting with your office would rather enrich my understanding
of the matter.
Having said that I
am very much interested to take this opportunity to meet your office.
I can come any day
of this week. I would prefer the morning for a meeting if that is possible.
Do I need to give
you a telephone call as well to finalize the time? My telephone number is
01715941751.
With many thanks
and best regards.
Raihan
Khalid Barrister-at-Law
On January 29, 2017
at 4:58 PM IOM Bangladesh confirmed
the meeting via the following email:
RE: Rohingyas at
Kutupalong. Possible meeting.
AKHTER Shirin
<sakhter@iom.int> Jan 29 at 4:58
PM
To: Raihan Khalid
Barrister-at-Law
Dear Mr. Khalid,
It was a pleasure
talking to you over phone and we look forward to see you at 9:30am tomorrow at
our office (House - 13/A, Road - 136, Gulshan - 1) in Dhaka.
Regards,
Shirin
AKHTER (Ms.)
On January 29, 2017 at 6:23 PM we enquired about the
agenda of the meeting during the telephone conversation and were not told of any
specific agenda. Therefore we wrote the following email in order to clarify our
expectations from the meeting. We copied the email to the IOM Head Quarters in
Geneva, Switzerland and the IOM Regional Office for Asia and the Pacific in
Bangkok, Thailand:
Re: Rohingyas at
Kutupalong. Meeting on 30.01.17; possible agenda
Raihan Khalid
Barrister-at-Law <raihan.khalid@yahoo.com> Jan 29 at 6:23 PM
To: AKHTER Shirin, CC:
hq@iom.int, robangkok@iom.int
Dear Ms. Shirin
Akhter
That is very kind
of you. Thank you for the address.
Although we
understand that there is no specific agenda for this meeting other than taking
an opportunity to learn about each other's work regarding the Rohingya
Refugees, I thought of the following:
1. Do you work for the
Rohingya Refugees in Bangladesh?
2. What are the
assistances you are providing them?
3. Do you have any
printed literature on IOM's work with the Rohingyas in Bangladesh?
4. If you do work with
the Rohingyas, then why your website does not contain any details on IOM's work
with them?
5. Why your website
www.iom.org.bd is not complete and/or up to date?
6. Have you officially
taken notice of the latest wave of Rohingya Refugees that in entering
Bangladesh since the October 2016 atrocities?
7. Why IOM does not
use the term Rohingya in all literature where a reference to the Rohingya
refugees are made?
8. Why the IOM Teknaf office
refused to provide me any information on IOM's work with the Rohingyas, or to
give the refusal in writing when I presented a written request, or show any IOM
Policy which prohibits such cooperation, or provide any IOM printed literature
on its work with the Rohingyas?
9. My work on the
Rohingya Refugee issue.
I am sure I will
have more issues to discuss during the meeting.
Thank you again for
this generous opportunity.
With my best
regards.
Raihan Khalid
Barrister-at-Law
During the evening
we did some research on the related matters and added some more questions to
the agenda:
10. Some of these
Rohingyas are staying in Bangladesh for about 20 years. It is uncertain when
they will be able to return. Is IOM doing anything to enable them earning a
living here in Bangladesh so that their reliance on aid lessens?
11. The registration of
the newly arrived refugees.
12. Giving information
to the new refugees regarding help provided etc. New refugees told us that they
have not been registered and received no information.
13. Camp Committee and
use of volunteers for the above purposes- we have learn during our visit to the
Camp that often referred Camp Committee is not active.
14. Is the information
that IOM has on Rohingyas confidential?
a. If yes why? If yes
would IOM consider posting a declaration stating so it its website?
b. If the information
is not confidential, why it is not on IMO’s website?
15. Is there a
coordination plan of action among the Aid Agencies working for the Rohingyas
where specific roles are identified in order to avoid overlapping in efforts
and wastage of resources?
16. Does IOM develop
specific policy to guide its work on Rohingyas? If yes may I see that policy?
If no why not?
17. Does IOM Bangladesh
produces periodical reports on its activities on Rohingyas that are shared with
people?
18. Does IOM
differentiate between the needs of the new refugees and old refugees who may
require assistance beyond the immediate needs such as medical care, shelter,
water and provisional food?
On January 30, 2017 we had a meeting with Mr. Abdussattar
Esoev, Senior Programme Manager, IOM Dhaka at 9.30am at the IOM Bangladesh
office at IOM Bangladesh Mission, House: 13/A, Road – 136, Gulshan – 1, Dhaka –
1212, Bangladesh. We had a long meeting for about two and a half hours and
discussed the agenda above.
The IOM Senior
Programme Manager stated at the very beginning that they are aggrieved by our
report where we reported the affairs that took place in the IOM Teknaf Office.
We replied that we did not make any judgment and only stated what actually happened.
The meeting went smoothly thereafter.
He complained why I
did not contact IOM Dhaka office before visiting their field office. I
explained that when I started from Dhaka although I had the intention to visit
the Kutupalong refugee camp I was not aware of the activities of IOM. It was
only on the evening before I visited the IOM office that I was told by the
members of the local civil society about IOM’s activities in relation to the
Rohingya refugees. During our meeting at the IOM office I was told to contact
the Communications Officer of IOM and the IOM Staff called someone and gave me
the telephone to talk to the person. It later appeared that the person on the
phone was not the Communications Officer but rather the Coordination Officer
based in Cox’s Bazar.
I asked why the IOM
website is not up-to-date, as in the Report ‘Rohingyas at Kutupalong: A Story
of Hope and Despair’ we have stated that the IOM Bangladesh website does not
contain any item of news or other literature related to the Rohingya refugees
from the period 2016-2017. Although IOM certainly worked for the Rohingyas in
that period. Mr. Esoev agreed that the IOM Bangladesh website is indeed not up
to date. He assured me that they will soon update the website and I thanked him
for that.
In reply to my
question why IOM does not refer the Rohingyas by their ethnic name ‘Rohingya’,
the Manager stated that Government of Bangladesh does not address them as
Rohingyas in the Government Strategy[84].
He referred to the ‘National Strategy on Myanmar Refugees and Undocumented
Myanmar nationals, Government of Bangladesh’ which the Government of Bangladesh
adopted in September 2013, and took efforts to implement in 2014[85]. The
Manager stated that the Rohingya issue has become ‘politicised’ and that IOM
respects the policy of the host government. This is how the government wants
IOM to operate, he added. During my visit to the IOM-Teknaf Field Office on 08
January 2017 when I asked for any printed materials on their work on the
Rohingyas, one IOM Teknaf Field Office staff handed me this document, which I
found to be a Government of Bangladesh (GoB) instrument, and not an IOM one.
The instrument at its top depicts the emblem of the Government of Bangladesh on
the left and the emblem of IOM.OIM on the right. At its very beginning the
instrument states that “It is a comprehensive strategy by the Government of Bangladesh
to address the situation of the undocumented Myanmar nationals living in Cox’s
Bazar, Bangladesh”, making it clear that it is a GoB document.
In reply to my
question “Do you have any printed literature on IOM's work with the Rohingyas
in Bangladesh?” the Manager assured me that he will give me some documents and
before leaving he handed me a folder containing an assortment of documents. The
folder contained 12 documents in total. The first document is a two sided page IOM document titled “Safe
Migration Framework” which contained lists of ‘immediate response to migration
crisis’ and ‘Long-term intervention to address the root cause of migration
crisis’ which deals with Bangladeshi migrants going overseas in search of employment.
The second document is a 4 pages document
related to the Rohingya refugees titled ‘IOM
Programme Brief- Humanitarian Assistance for Undocumented Myanmar Nationals and
Host Communities in Cox’s Bazar’ dated January 2017. The third document is a two sided page document titled ‘IOM SNAPSHOT’,
September 2016, which is a brief overview of the IOM organization and its
activities. We noted that the ‘Current and significant IOM emergency
operations’ list at the backside of the document which lists 10 countries does
not include Bangladesh or the Rohingyas in Bangladesh, although it includes
Myanmar. The fourth document is a two
sided page document titled ‘Members & Observers’ dated 2016 and it lists
the 165 Member States of IOM, 8 Observer States, and a long list of
intergovernmental and international organizations. The fifth document is a two sided page titled ‘Strengthening Migration
Governance with IOM’ which is related to the Bangladeshi migrants going abroad
in search of employment; The sixth
document is a one two sided page titled ‘IOM Bangladesh FACT SHEET’, dated
August 2016 and is on “Coordination and Capacity Building for humanitarian
assistance for Undocumented Myanmar Nationals
and Host Communities in Cox’s Bazar”, The seventh
document is a two sided page document titled ‘IOM Bangladesh Migration
Health Programmes’ 2015 and it describes the Migration Health Assessment and
Travel Assistance services offered by the Migration Health Division (MHD) of IOM
Dhaka through its two such centres in Dhaka and Sylhet. This programme as
stated in the document focuses only on the migrants and not on refugees. The eighth document is titled IOM
Bangladesh Labour Migration Programme 2015; it is a two sided page document and
is related to the Bangladeshi workers going abroad for employment. The ninth document is titled ‘IOM
Bangladesh Operations and Movements Programmes’ dated 2015. It is a two sided
page document and is related to the transportation of migrants in need of
assistance. The document makes no reference to refugees. The tenth document is titled ‘IOM
Bangladesh fact Sheet- Health care Services for Undocumented
Myanmar Nationals and Host Communities in Cox’s Bazar’ dated August
2016. The eleventh document is
titled ‘IOM Bangladesh Environment, Climate Change and Migration’ dated 2015.
It is a two sided page document and it describes the “IOM’s initiatives in the Migration-Climate
Change Nexus in Bangladesh”. The twelfth
and last document is titled ‘IOM Bangladesh Counter Trafficking Programme’
dated 2015. It is a two sided page document and is related to the “human
trafficking-an exploitative form of irregular migration”. This document does
not make any reference to the Rohingya people or refugees.
It appears that only
3 of the 12 documents given to me at the IOM Dhaka office are related to the
refugees, i.e. Rohingya refugees and the rest 9 are either related to migrants
or not specifically related to the Rohingyas. The documents related to the
Rohingya refugees in Bangladesh are the second, sixth and tenth document
described in the paragraph above and we shall now examine them in that order. The
‘IOM Programme Brief- Humanitarian Assistance for Undocumented Myanmar
Nationals and Host Communities in Cox’s Bazar’ dated January 2017 is the latest
and the largest among these three documents. It contains the following
sections: ‘Project Background and Overview’, ‘Coordination/Communication with
Communities’, ‘Capacity Development’, and ‘Way Forward’. The document starts
with the following declaration: “within the framework of the National Strategy
on Myanmar Refugees and Undocumented Myanmar Nationals (UMNs) in Bangladesh,
the International Organization Migration (IOM) has been mandated by the
Government of Bangladesh (GoB) to coordinate the humanitarian services to the
Undocumented Myanmar Nationals (UMNs) and vulnerable host communities in
Bangladesh’s south-eastern district of Cox’s Bazar”[86]. This
document does not use the term ‘Rohingya’ anywhere and refers to the refugees
as ‘Undocumented Myanmar Nationals (UMNs)’. The document gives a brief overview
of the IOM project for the assistance of the so called UMNs, i.e. Rohingya
refugees. The document throughout refers to the two Refugee camps set up by the
Government of Bangladesh as “Kutupalong Makeshift Settlement (KMS)” and “Leda Makeshift
Settlement (LMS)”[87]. It
is not clear why IOM differs in this position from other UN assistance agencies
such as the UNHCR which repeatedly refers to these two places as “Refugee
Camps”[88]. UNHCR has throughout its engagement referred
to the Kutupalong and Leda as Refugee camps citing Government and UNHCR sources[89]. It
appears that “IOM’s existing programming is planned as a three year project
(2014-2017) with an overall budget of USD 18 Million. The Project is supported
by the USA, Sida, Humanitarian Aid and Civil Protection of the EU, UKaid and
CERF. It is not stated if there is plan for extending the project beyond 2017.
The next document is ‘IOM Bangladesh FACT SHEET’, dated August 2016 and is on
“Coordination and Capacity Building for humanitarian assistance for Undocumented
Myanmar Nationals and Host Communities in Cox’s Bazar”. which at the outset
states “(U)nder the framework of the National Strategy on Myanmar Refugees and Undocumented Myanmar National (UMN) in Bangladesh[90]
adopted by the Government of Bangladesh in 2013, the International Organization
for Migration (IOM) has been given the mandate to coordinate humanitarian
assistance provided to the UMN population and vulnerable host communities in
Cox’s Bazar through other international and national non-governmental
organizations (NGOs)”[91].
It then depicts a flowchart of the ‘UMN[92]
Coordination Structure’, a list of the supporting countries and organizations
that we have listed above, and the main activities for coordination and
capacity building followed by a list of key achievements. It therefore appears
that IOM is the Coordinator of all assistance programmes provided to the
Rohingyas in Bangladesh and is the centre of the hub, so to speak.
Interestingly, we also noted that, the document makes a distinction between
Myanmar Refugees and Undocumented Myanmar National (UMN)[93]
on top of not recognising them as Rohingyas anywhere in the document. This
appears to be the position agreed by all the organizations including the
countries and agencies supporting this programmes[94],
because the document does not provide any reservations by any member of the
Coordination Structure or the supporters. We are faced with three questions
here, firstly, why is this distinction made and on what basis, secondly, why
the Coordination Structure appears to be only for the UMNs as it is named “UMN
Coordination Structure” instead of ‘Myanmar Refugees and Undocumented Myanmar
National (UMN) Coordination Structure’? And finally why these people are
referred to as Undocumented Myanmar National (UMN) instead of Rohingya
refugees? The third and last IOM Bangladesh document given to me is the ‘IOM
Bangladesh fact Sheet- Health care Services for Undocumented Myanmar Nationals
and Host Communities in Cox’s Bazar’ dated August 2016. This is a two sided
page document relating to the health care services IOM Bangladesh provides to
the Rohingya people although we note that they are referred to by the term
‘Undocumented Myanmar Nationals’ or by its acronym UMNs throughout the
document. It states that “under the framework of the National Strategy on
Myanmar Refugees and Undocumented Myanmar nationals (UMNs) in Bangladesh
adopted by the Government of Bangladesh in 2013, IOM has been given the mandate
to provide direct health care services and coordinate health services offered
to UMN population and vulnerable host communities in Cox’s Bazar District in
collaboration with other international and national NGOs”[95].
The document does not use the term ‘Rohingya’ or ‘Refugee’ anywhere in the
document.
We note further
with frustration that although a list of countries and agencies supporting the
programmes are given in this and another document, this document which focuses
on coordination in the assistance provided to the Rohingyas does not state
which are the other organizations and agencies that are part of this
coordinated programme beyond that there are “GoB, IOM, UN, INGOs, DPs, NGOs” in
the UMN Coordination Structure. In particular it is not known which of the
INGOs, NGOS, DPs, are part of this Coordination Structure. However, from an IOM
head Office document we understand that 17 intergovernmental and NGOs attend
the meeting[96].
Agencies contributing to regular data gathering include 10 organizations”[97].
It is necessary to remember that it is not stated to be an IOM Bangladesh
document and that the printed materials at the IOM Dhaka office, and in
particular the document in question that introduces the ‘UMN Coordination
Structure, does not contain this information. Besides, this above statement
merely states that these are the organizations and agencies that “attend the
meeting”, referring to the emergency meetings in Cox’s bazar and Dhaka, but
does not make it sufficiently clear that all these, and none other,
organizations are the members of the ‘UMN Coordination Structure’ for the
assistance of the Rohingya refugees.
On February 2, 2017
we sent an email thanking IOM for giving us the opportunity to have the meeting
in their Dhaka Country Office:
Re: Rohingyas at
Kutupalong. Meeting on 30.01.17; possible agenda
Raihan Khalid
Barrister-at-Law <raihan.khalid@yahoo.com> Feb 2 at 12:14 PM
To: aesoev@iom.int, CC: hq@iom.int, robangkok@iom.int, AKHTER Shirin
Dear Mr. Abdusattor
Esoev
Greetings of the
month of the Language Martyrs!
I write to thank
you again for giving me the opportunity to have a meeting with your office. It
was an enriching experience for us.
We look forward to
hearing about the updated IOM Bangladesh website very soon. It is a great
relief to learn that IOM Bangladesh has taken initiative to update the website.
The concerned
people in Bangladesh and the world would be able to know the great
contributions IOM Bangladesh is making to help the Rohingya refugees in
Bangladesh when the website would be updated.
As I have already
mentioned during our meeting, IOM Bangladesh already enjoys a good reputation
among local people of Teknaf, Bangladesh.
I take this
opportunity to thank you again for the generosity of your office.
With my best
regards.
Raihan Khalid
Barrister-at-Law
On February 3, 2017
the IOM sent us an email appreciating our efforts and inviting us to reach out
to the IOM Country Office whenever we deem necessary for any constructive
discussion:
RE: Rohingyas at
Kutupalong. Meeting on 30.01.17; possible agenda
ESOEV Abdusattor
<aesoev@iom.int> Feb 3 at 10:54 AM
To: Raihan Khalid
Barrister-at-Law, CC: Telecom Operations
Regional Office for Asia and the Pacific (Bangkok), AKHTER Shirin
Dear Mr. Khaled,
Thanks for your
time to meet me in IOM office. I think it was very productive meeting and we
had a long discussion on what IOM is doing with the concerned population and
IOM’s mandated role in coordination and implementation of humanitarian
assistance to that population.
Do feel free to
reach me whenever you deem necessary for such constructive discussion we had.
Best Regards,
Abdusattor
Abdusattor Esoev
Senior Programme Manager
IOM Bangladesh Mission
House: 13/A, Road – 136,
Gulshan – 1, Dhaka – 1212
Office: +88 – 02 – 55044811 - 13
Skype: Abdusattor.esoev|
www.iom.int
7. Conveying the message
On February 10, 2017 we sent the Report “Rohingyas at Kutupalong: A Story of Hope and Despair-
Story of the most unfortunate people of our time” dated 25.01.2017:
Rohingyas at
Kutupalong: A Story of Hope and Despair. Story of the most unfortunate people
of our time
Raihan Khalid Barrister-at-Law
<raihan.khalid@yahoo.com> Feb 10
at 9:06 AM
Sent the email dated Wednesday, January 25, 2017 5:51 PM,
Subject: Rohingyas at Kutupalong: A Story of Hope and Despair. Story of the
most unfortunate people of our time, to the following:
To
1. Allison
Wolfgarten
2. Faraha
Kabir
3. Monju
Sir
4. Prof.
Abdullah Abu Sayeed
5. Adnan
Karim
6. Redwanul
Harbang
7. Bazlur
Rashid Dolon
8. Choudhury
jinnat
9. Jahirul
Islam
10. Affan
Siddiqi
11. Bhaia,
Aftab Uddin
12. Bstr
Nazir Ahmed
13. Afrin
Ahmed
14. ainun
nishat
15. Junaied
Akm
16. Shaheen
Anam
17. Engineer
Hilaluddin
18. PAVEL
PARTHA
19. A.
Wahid
20. Donald
Anton
21. Anwar
CU
22. AOSED
Khulna
23. Abu
Reza
24. Arifujjaman
Khan
25. Nasir
Ashim
26. Asheka
Troberg
27. Ashraf
Hossen Razzaque
28. Shahed
Montu
29. Fowzul
Azim
30. Aziz
Haque
31. Mohibul
Aziz
32. Azmal
Brentag
33. Barkatul
Biplob
34. Zakir
Kibria
35. Sarwar
Hossain
36. BAPA
Bangladesh
37. Brr
Niaz
38. Barrister
Syed Abedin
39. Tasmia
Prodhan
40. Farzana
Bindu
41. Mr.
Mizanur Rahman Bijoy
42. Biplab
Poddar
43. Yeasin
Khokan
44. Hemnnthi
Ranasinghe Situatie
45. Bodruddoza
Badal
46. Bulbul
Ahmed
47. Carol
Ransley
48. Rashed
Chanchal
49. Chandan
Nath
On February 10, 2017 we sent the said Report dated
25.01.2017 to more members of the Bangladesh civil Society and some other
members of the international civil society:
Rohingyas at Kutupalong: A Story of Hope and Despair.
Story of the most unfortunate people of our time
Raihan Khalid Barrister-at-Law
<raihan.khalid@yahoo.com> Feb 10
at 9:18 AM
To
1. Christine
Richardson
2. Cumar
Dey
3. Prof.
Nazrul Islam
4. Keshab
Dahal
5. M.
Danesh Miah
6. Uttam
Das
7. Daud
Hassan
8. Debasish
Roy
9. Eng.
Inam ul Huq
10. Md
Farid Uddin
11. Mohan
Devika
12. Muhsin
Khan
13. Belal
Joy
14. LAW
Star
15. Ehsanul
Habib
16. eiri
ohtani
17. EJohn
Bonine
18. Michael
Odhiambo
19. Emon
Chowdhury
20. Fahmida
21. Faisal
Mahmud
22. Fakruddin
Onneyshon
23. Farhana
Siraj
24. “Farida
Akhter “
25. Shaila
Shahid
26. Abdullah
Al Faruque
27. Farzana
Sharmin
28. Fayez
AHMED
29. Field
Home
30. Sirajul
Mamun
31. Harshini
Silva
32. Mr.
Alamgir Kabir
33. Gyankosh
Prokashoni
34. Habib
ProthomAlo
35. Haider
Ali
36. Barrister
Halim
37. Halima
Neyamat
38. harun.rashid@bd.care.org
39. Comodre
Rashid
40. Harun
dosto
41. Mahmud
Hasan
42. Adv.
Hasanat Quaium
43. HealthRights
Bangla
44. Hemantha
Withanage
45. Hillol
Dutta
46. “Ruhin
Hossain Prince”
47. Hemanta
Tripura
48. Badrul
Mamun
49. Shahed
Iqbal
50. Imran
Bhuiyan
51. Mostain
Billah
52. Kayser
Imtiaz
53. Imtiaz
Ahmed
54. Mr.
Alison Baroi
55. Ti
Bangladesh
56. Info WBB Trust
57. Ipat
Luna
58. Rafiqul
Islam
59. Mr.
Sharif Jamil
60. Alfred
Khokon
61. Javed
Rahim
62. Jayanta
Kumar Singha
63. Jorden
de Bouvé
64. Jennifer
Gleason
65. Tanjina
Prema
66. Jigme
Tshering
67. Johannes.Gaisen@afci.de
68. Jona
Razzaque
69. Joynath
Nandy
70. Tawhidul
Khan
71. Jillur
Jewel
72. Jyotirmoy
Nandy
73. Keith
Simpson
74. Ariful
Russell
75. Kallol
Mustafa
76. Kawser
Ahmed
77. Kayes
Amin
78. Khalilur
Rahman Sajal
79. Khaled
Chowdhury
80. Shuvo
Kibria
81. Lalanath
Desilva
82. Tushar
Das
83. Lalanath
De Silva
84. Lipton
Sarker
85. Mynul
Lipu
86. Noweid
Ali
87. Arup
Rahee
88. Sabina
Lucky
89. Morshed
Imtiaz
90. Munir
Maniruzzaman
91. Sawkat
m_sawkat
92. Munir
Sharif
93. Shaklan
Emon
94. Masud
Rana
95. Dr.
Mahboob Hossain
96. Imtiaz
Mahmood
97. Tarek
Mahmud
98. Legal
Steps
99. CU
Sumon
100.
Maksudul Alam
101.
Tuhin Malik
102.
Prof. M. Abdul Matin
103.
Mark Chernaik
104.
Maung Wein
105.
Anisuzzaman WUB
106.
M Mehta
107.
Mohammad Ali
108.
Dr. Meghna Guhathakurta
109.
Md. Haider
110.
Michael Stanley-Jones
111.
Mihir Biswas
112.
Prof Monirul Khan
113.
Mominul Mukul
114.
Mintu Das
115.
Sayed Anwar
116.
Mizan R Khan
117.
M Mace
118.
Barrister Payel
119.
Br Muddasir Hossain
120.
Mostafa Naser
121.
Dr Mahbuba Nasreen DU
122.
Prof. Dr. M Monowar Hossain
123.
Prof. Monjurul Kibria
124.
Mo Alam
125.
Monirul Azam
126.
Monsur Faruqui
127.
Biplob Mrinal
128.
Shahjahan Mondol
129.
Taufan Suranto
130.
Mufti Nafees
131.
Prof. Mujibur Rahman BUET
132.
Ismail Hossain
133.
Muneeza Ayesha Khan
134.
Munir Muniruzzaman
135.
MUNJURUL Khan
136.
Mohammad Abdul Muntakim
137.
mohammed mustafa
138.
Zillur Aca
139.
Nahid Ahmad
140.
Parvin Junan Nashit
141.
Bishwajit Nandy
142.
Nayeem Wahra
143.
Nazma Nigar
144.
Nazmus Abhi
145.
Naznin Jahan
146.
নজরুল
ইসলাম
147.
Tokon Thakur
148.
Nazrul Islam
149.
Jatiyo Manobadhikar
150.
Nazmul Shamal
151.
Nick Greenwood
152.
Nirmalendu Goon
153.
Nityanand Jayaraman
154.
Nazmul Sabuj
155.
Abu Noman
156.
Nur Julhaj
157.
onneyshan
158.
Motasim Billah
159.
Jaber Ahmed Palash
160.
Nurul Panna
161.
Shakhawat Pavel
162.
Asis Perez
163.
Pinaki Ranjan Banerjee
164.
Najrana Imaan
165.
Prashanta Barua
166.
Hayat Hussain
167.
Qazi Iqbal
168.
Dr. Quazi Kholiquzzaman Ahmad
169.
Mia Quamruzzaman
170.
Quamrul Chowdhury
171.
Dr. Rowshan Ara
172.
Rafet Hossain
173.
Rafique Sherajee
174.
Rafiqul Islam Kabir
175.
Dr. M Mizanur Rahman
176.
Mizanur Water
177.
Rahat Mustafiz
178.
Ahmed Choudhury
179.
Rakib Kishore
180.
Ram Sah
181.
Mr. Aminur Rasul
182.
Raja Roy
183.
Fahima Hossain
184.
Shanjida Khan
185.
Ritwick Dutta
186.
Shrabon Prokashani
187.
Isaac Robinson
188.
Robyet Ferdous
189.
Romel Barua
190.
Roy Laifungbam
191.
Razequzzaman Ratan
192.
'Campaign Right to food and Social
Security'
193.
Rugemeleza Nshala
194.
Rumana Anis
195.
Nazrul Islam
196.
Sanis Dipu
197.
Hassanul Banna
198.
Dr. Shahidul Islam
199.
Surya Subedi
200.
Sultan Ahmad
201.
Afzal Zami
202.
Saber Chowdhury
203.
Dr. Sadeka Halim
204.
Anwar Sadi
205.
Saiful Karim Sumon
206.
Ryadh Salahuddin
207.
Salehin Arshady
208.
Md Salequzzaman
209.
Salim Mahmud
210.
Salim Momtaz
211.
Somokal
212.
samia ahmed
213.
Samia Jaman
214.
Sanjay Upadhay
215.
Sanjeeb Drong
216.
Sayed Hossain
217.
Abu Sayem
218.
Sazzad Hossain
219.
Sanjoy Chaki
220.
Dr. Soumitra Sekhar
221.
Zahidur Rahman Sento
222.
Kazi Shah
223.
Prof. M Shahidul Islam
224.
Shahin Alam
225.
Shakeva Perveen
226.
Shakil Monzur
227.
Khondokar Shakir
228.
Shameem Patwary
229.
Rayhan Rashid
230.
Sharif Bhuiyan
231.
Mohammed Islam
232.
Sharmin Sumi
233.
Shaun Bruwer
234.
Sk Salauddin
235.
Shirin Akhter M.P
236.
Shishir Moral
237.
Kazi Hassan
238.
Shuvagata Dey
239.
Shyamol Barma
240.
Shafiqul ic
241.
sienho Yee
242.
Gazi Sipar Hossain
243.
Shantha Hennayake
244.
Sarguna Kumaari
245.
Mohammad Tahid
246.
Arundhaty Roy
247.
Khaled Tito
248.
Sohail Javed
249.
Selim Raihan
250.
Firoz Ahmed
251.
Suche Masum
252.
Suja Uddowla
253.
Sukanta Saikat
254.
Suvra Chakravorty
255.
Swadhin Sen
256.
Syeda Afsana
257.
Syed Alam
258.
Tahmina Polly
259.
Tanima Tasmin
260.
Tanvir Parvez
261.
Tanvir Zahir
262.
Engr. Taqsem A Khan
263.
Afrida Tasnim
264.
Tayab Kiron
265.
Theivanai Amarthalingam
266.
Stanveer Hussain
267.
Tokon Thaakoor
268.
Tom Eskildsen
269.
Hafizur Rahman
270.
Farhad Mazhar
271.
Mazharul Ujjal
272.
Uttam Sen
273.
Bari Vibgyor
274.
Kamal Saha
275.
Ramananda w
276.
alayas Hajisalah
277.
Prof. Dr. Sudhakar YEDLA
278.
Zafreen Choudhury
279.
Zahedi Sohel
280.
Zakir Hussain
281.
Dr. Shima Zaman
282.
Zeeshan Hyder
283.
Zulfiqar Halepoto
284.
Ziaul Haque
285.
Zakir BAPA
286.
Md. Haque
287.
Zahirul Islam Khan
8. The determination of refugee status of the Rohingya People in Bangladesh.
8.1. Undocumented
Myanmar nationals or refugees?
8.1.2. The
Government of Bangladesh Position
We were told by the
IOM Bangladesh that they are referring to the Rohingya people in Bangladesh as
Undocumented Myanmar nationals UMNs because it is the GoB policy to do so and
they are obliged to adhere to the Government’s position inside the territory of
Bangladesh[98].
The said Bangladesh position is expressed in the Government’s ‘National
Strategy on Myanmar Refugees and Undocumented Myanmar nationals, Government of
Bangladesh’ (hereinafter referred to GoB Refugee Strategy’). It is necessary to
mention here that despite our research for the instrument on the World Wide Web
using the Google.com search engine for several days in the months of January, April
and May of 2017 CE we could neither find the original GoB Strategy of 2013
relating the Rohingya refugees nor any reference to it in any other document
other than the title of the instrument. We have also explored the Ministry of
Disaster and Relief of the Government of the People’s Republic of Bangladesh
without any success. We have, however, found two summarised version of the
Strategy, one in the form of a leaflet that we were given at the IOM Teknaf
Office[99]
and the other is memo bearing No. UN-HR-5013/14/121 dated 31 march 2014 shared
by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the GoB with the offices of UNRC, UNHCR,
WFP, UNFPA, ICRC, IFRC, IOM DHAKA with an enclosed ‘Strategy Paper on
Addressing the Issue of Myanmar Refugees and Undocumented Myanmar Nationals in
Bangladesh: A Summary Presentation’. It is important to note here that the
title of this instrument is different from the title of the instrument that we
were given at the IOM office on 08 January 2017 and also found on the web.
While the title of the instrument given to us at the IOM Teknaf Office states
that it is the ‘National Strategy on Myanmar Refugees and Undocumented Myanmar
nationals, Government of Bangladesh’ (hereinafter referred to as ‘Strategy
Version 1’), the title of the second instruments states that it is the ‘Strategy
Paper on Addressing the Issue of Myanmar Refugees and Undocumented Myanmar
Nationals in Bangladesh: A Summary Presentation’ (hereinafter referred to as
‘Strategy Version 2’). Clearly, they are not the same instrument. Beside the
contents of the two instruments are also different. While the first instrument
does not tell us when this was adopted and by which part of the Government, the
second instrument tells us the details as we have stated above. What appears in
examination of both the documents that neither is a complete version of the
instrument in question and both are two different versions of summery of the
said instrument. The main instrument is, however, as we have explained above,
not available anywhere.
The ‘Strategy Version 1’ appear to be a promotional leaflet
of the said Strategy containing a summery, and the PDF document that we have
downloaded from the web states in the name of the file that it is a leaflet.
The Strategy Version 1 does not state which ministry of the Government adopted
it, or how and when it was adopted[100].
In fact other than the emblem of the Government of Bangladesh on the top left
corner there is no other information that links this document with the
Government of Bangladesh. It does not appear similar to other Government of
Bangladesh instruments which are named Strategy, such as the Bangladesh Climate
Change Strategy and Action Plan 2009 (BCCSAP 2009)[101],
which, unlike this Strategy, clearly states which Ministry of the Government
published it and contains message from the Prime Minister, the Relevant
Minister etc. at the beginning of the instrument as one would expect. The
document has six sections, they are named “What it is?”, “Current Scenario”,
“Why a Strategy”, “5 main elements”, “Who is implementing it?” and “Who is
monitoring and how?” The other side of the document contains the same text in
Bangla language. We searched the web for a text of the document on 23.04.2017.
Google.com returned three locations[102],
all three are pages of the www.cxbcoordination.org, a “portal serves as a one
stop source of the latest information and updates on humanitarian programming
for the Undocumented Myanmar Nationals and Rohingya Refugees living in Cox's
Bazar”. Out of these three links the first
one[103]
when clicked replied “The page cannot be found”. The second link[104]
also replied that “The page cannot be found”. The third link[105]
contained the document. This document does not use the term Rohingya and rather
refers to the people in question as ‘undocumented Myanmar nationals’. We do not
agree with this and we shall explain why later in the Report.
The ‘Strategy
Version 2’ is a larger document; it has four pages and is divided in to 7
paragraphs. The first 4 paragraphs describe the context of the Strategy drawing
on historical familiarity of the people of Bangladesh with the state of
refugee. Paragraph 5 states “(T)he Strategy Paper contains the following key
elements:” and goes on to describe five such key elements in sub-paragraphs a)
to e). Paragraph 6 states the objective of the Strategy paper and Paragraph 7
states that “The Cabinet approved the Strategy Paper at its regular meeting
held on 09 September 2013, under the Chair of the Hon’ble Prime Minister. It is
necessary to add that Paragraph 4 of the document stated that “the Ministry of
Foreign Affairs organised a series of meetings along with all relevant
Ministries/Divisions/ agencies of the Government, including, in particular, the
Ministry of Disaster Management and Relief and the Ministry of Home Affairs”[106].
It is therefore apparent that although the Cabinet Division of the Government
Chaired by the Prime Minister adopted the instrument, it is a product of the
Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Government[107].
Paragraph 7 further states that “(T)he Cabinet also instructed the concerned
Ministries/ Divisions/ agencies of the Government to ensure implementation of
the Strategy Paper and report thereon at regular intervals”[108].
No list of such Ministries and agencies which are responsible for the
implementation of this Strategy is, however, given.
Both versions of
the GoB Rohingya Refugee Strategy used two different terms to refer to the
Rohingya people in Bangladesh as the title of the instruments suggest the GoB
divided them in to two groups, a first group of the ‘Myanmar Refugees’ and a
second group of ‘Undocumented Myanmar nationals’. Unfortunately, neither
version provides any definition to either of these terms. They do not give any
explanation either for making this division among the same people who came in
from the same country.
IOM used Rohingya
and ‘Undocumented Myanmar Nationals’ alternatively at least in one document that
so far we have found[109]
beside also making a distinction between the “UMNs and the refugees”[110].
It therefore appears that IOM designates four different terminology for these
people in question, three in its Bangladesh operation being Rohingya,
‘Undocumented Myanmar Nationals’, and refugee, and another term in its Myanmar
Operation, being ‘Muslim Minority of Rakhine State’[111].
However, a reference to these people as ‘Rohingya’ or ‘Muslim Minority of
Rakhine State’ only came in the foot note explanation that we have so far found
in only one document[112].
So far we have examined, it does not provide this explanation for not using the
ethnic name of the Rohingya people, i.e. Rohingya, when it refers to these
people in other documents. This lack of consistency in IOM’s position towards
the Rohingya people makes it difficult or even impossible for the general
people or the persecuted population in question to ascertain the IOM’s position
regarding the Rohingya refugees. The IOM documents related to the Rohingya
refugees that the IOM Bangladesh office provided me did not have this
declaration anywhere, nor does the IOM Bangladesh website contain this
declaration visibly to clarify its position to the viewers.
Having said that,
it remains the IOM position that it shall use ‘Undocumented Myanmar Nationals
(UMNs)’ to refer to the Rohingya refugees in Bangladesh in accordance with the
Government of Bangladesh Strategy. The Bangladesh Government Strategy however
does not use the term Rohingya interchangeably with UMNs, it rather recognises
two distinct groups of people and refers to them accordingly as Myanmar Refugees and Undocumented Myanmar
nationals[113].
Further research in to the matter reveals that IOM also Therefore, we find that
the instruments deals with two distinct group of people, Myanmar Refugees and
Undocumented Myanmar nationals (UMNs),
and this is the Strategy under which IOM supposedly operates in Bangladesh.
8.2. Who are
‘Undocumented Myanmar Nationals’ (UMNs)?
If, according to
IOM and the GoB Strategy referred to above, there are ‘Myanmar Refugees’ and
‘Undocumented Myanmar Nationals (UMNs)’ and we must understand who are these
UMNs are. In reply to my question why these people are not referred to as
Rohingya refugees the IOM Officer I had meeting with at the IOM Dhaka Office
stated that it is a Government of Bangladesh position and they are obliged to
adhere to the GOB policy in this regard if they are to work in Bangladesh. It is also the IOM official position as we have found
in an IOM document titled ‘Bangladesh, Humanitarian Response to Undocumented
Myanmar Nationals in Cox’s Bazar, 5 January - 28 February 2017 where IOM states
in a footnote to the term Rohingya “(T)he largest Muslim group within Rakhine
State self-identify under the term “Rohingya,” a designation that is not
accepted by the majority of the ethnic Rakhine population, and is not
recognized by the central Government of Myanmar as one of the 135 official
nationalities in the country. In order to preserve neutrality on the issue, IOM
Myanmar alternatively refers to this group as “Muslim minority of Rakhine
State.” In line with the National
Strategy of the Government of Bangladesh, IOM Bangladesh refers to unregistered
members of this minority group as “Undocumented Myanmar Nationals (italics
by author)[114].” It appears that IOM Myanmar
‘alternatively refers’ to these people as “Muslim minority of Rakhine State”,
but in its Bangladesh operation IOM refers to them as UMNs because it is the
Bangladesh policy to do so. However, this declaration itself is confusing as in
the last part of the declaration IOM states that IOM Bangladesh refers to the
‘unregistered members of this minority group’ as UMNs and we are immediately
faced with the question that what registration IOM is referring to here, their
registration as Rohingya people in Myanmar or their registration as refugees in
Bangladesh? If IOM is referring to their registration as refugees in
Bangladesh, which is the likely scenario, and for the sake of argument if we
accept the IOM plea that it does not use ‘Rohingya’ in order to maintain its
“neutrality”, then why it is not referring to them as ‘unregistered Myanmar
refugees’ dividing the population in to two groups of registered Myanmar
refugees and unregistered Myanmar refugees? This appears to be the most
reasonable option to us. The only reasonable answer to this question seems to
be that IOM does not recognize the unregistered population arriving from
Myanmar as refugees and shall only designate that status after obtaining
information from them during the process of registration. We shall examine this
proposition later.
For now, it is
mentionable that there is no debate on the issue that all these non-Bangladeshi
people that are subject to the GoB Strategy and the IOM documents mentioned
above are the people who came in to Bangladesh from Myanmar. We did not see a
newspaper report yet which did not refer to these people as Rohingya refugees
from Myanmar and there have been numerous news reports by the media
establishments in Bangladesh and abroad. There is no suggestion made by any
quarters that these people came from India, the only other bordering neighbour
of Bangladesh in that part of the Country or in any other part of Bangladesh,
or that they came in from any other country by boat. They are Myanmar
nationals.
Before we examine
the possibility that IOM is referring to these people as UMNs only because they
are not registered yet as refugees and the implications of such a position, we
need to understand the meaning and implications of the phrase “undocumented
nationals” which is for now designated to the Rohingya refugees in Bangladesh.
Despite our sincere efforts we could not find a definition of ‘Undocumented
Nationals’ in any legal document of the United Nations or the UNHCR or IOM
itself, organizations which governs the international efforts for the
assistance of the refugees. We have searched the United Nations website using
its internal search engine and the search returned two documents which
contained the phrase “undocumented nationals”[115],
the first one is UNHCR - Tough choices for Afghan refugees
returning home after years in exile[116]
which itself available in 10 different locations, and the other document is Country Operations Plan,
Overview, Country: Romania, Planning Year: 2006[117].
The first document, as the name suggests, is about the Afghan refugees in
Pakistan and the phrase is at one place used interchangeably with refugee[118]
and in another perhaps to indicate unregistered refugees returning from
Pakistan[119].
The other document, the UNHCR 2006 country plan for Romania uses the phrase to
refer to the “Romanians (who) have gone abroad, in search for a better life” “given
up their Romanian citizenship hoping to acquire the citizenship of the States
where they resided, mainly in the EU. Many of them, failing to acquire another
citizenship and forcibly returned to Romania, have chosen to remain stateless
in Romania”[120]
A search of the
phrase “undocumented nationals” on the UNHCR website returned 4 results, the
first two documents are the two that we found on the UN website. The third
document is ‘Update
No.9 on the humanitarian situation in Libya and the neighbouring countries’
dated 16 March 2011[121],
and although it uses the phrase once where it spoke about “sub-Saharan and undocumented
nationals”[122]
The document does not state whether these “undocumented nationals” are refugees
or economic migrants. With further research we understand that these “sub-Saharan
and undocumented nationals” are irregular foreign workers[123]
who came in to Algeria as “Saharawi refugees as a result of the conflict over Western
Sahara between Morocco and the Polisario Front”[124]. The fourth and last document is ‘Update
on UNHCR’s operations in Africa’, dated 21 February 2017[125],
and it appears that this document used the phrase to refer to people who are
‘stateless’ as the phrase appears in a paragraph titled “Statelessness” and
speaks about “undocumented nationals living in Côte d’Ivoire who were at risk
of becoming stateless”[126].
The document does not make it clear who are these people who are on the verge
of becoming stateless and whether they are refugees or economic migrants. With
further research we now understand that these “undocumented nationals” referred
to in the above document are Burkina Faso nationals who have been trafficked to
Côte d’Ivoire and they left their country in search of better economic
opportunities i.e. as economic migrants and not refugees[127][128].
It appears that it
is the asylum seekers in a country who are referred to or often termed as
Undocumented nationals. For example a Joint Committee on Human Right of the
Parliament of the United Kingdom publications terms the asylum seekers as
Undocumented Nationals[129].
The United States of America Government also uses this term to refer to the
asylum seekers, as in one Audit Report the Office of Inspector General of the
Department of Treasury reported “the arrest of 14 undocumented nationals of the
Dominican Republic” along with the seizure of 2,513 pounds of cocaine[130].
However, a search
of the phrase “Undocumented Nationals” on the IOM
website returned 99 results, of which only 5 are related to the Rohingya
refugees and Bangladesh[131].
It appears that although the phrase is found in 2 UN documents, 4 UNHCR
documents as we have described above it is present in 99 IOM documents, making
it an IOM favourite and that is not only in the case of Bangladesh but
globally. While it is beyond the scope of this work to analyse all 99 documents
here, we shall try to discover any pattern in the usage of the phrase in order
to understand the IOM designated meaning of this phrase, if there is any.
Before delving in to the analysis of the usage of the phrase “Undocumented
Nationals” it is necessary to state here that in all likelihood it appears that
the use of the phrase “Undocumented Nationals” in the GoB Strategy may be newer
than the IOM organizational preference for this phrase. It certainly does not
appear to be the case that IOM has only started using this phrase following the
Government of Bangladesh position in its Strategy for the Rohingya refugees, as
suggested, and hence started to use that in its document around the world.
In one of the items that is related
to the Rohingya refugees in Bangladesh, ‘Undocumented
Myanmar Nationals in Bangladesh Border Camps Need Increased Protection,
Humanitarian Aid: IOM[132]’IOM
used a photograph of the Rohingya Refugees and stated that the photograph was a
“File photo: Al Jazeera”.
Figure 1: IOM used this Al Jazeera
photograph but omitted the "Rohingya refugees" part of its caption
and referred to the people in the photo as "Undocumented Myanmar families
in Bangladesh". Image Credit: [Al Jazeera].
The photograph
contains a caption “Undocumented Myanmar families in Bangladesh”. We wanted to
make sure that Al Jazeera also refers to these people as “Undocumented Myanmar
families” and conducted an image search using the ‘Google Images[133]’
program and located the photograph in the Al Jazeera Feature piece titled “(N)o
respite for Rohingya in Bangladesh[134]”.
We have found that Al Jazeera in fact did not use the photo caption that IOM
designated; it was IOM’s own invention. Al Jazeera’s photo caption for that
photograph reads “Numbers of Rohingya refugees have swelled as violence in
neighboring Arakan state increased [Al Jazeera]”[135].
EU- Turkey Agreement
“This has brought a new phase
in the EU-Turkey relationship, embodied in the 18 March 2016 EU Turkey
Statement, which built on the 29 November 2015 EU-Turkey Joint Action Plan”[136]. On 29
November 2015, at the EU-Turkey summit, Turkey and the EU activated the Joint
Action Plan (JAP) that had been agreed ad referenda on 15 October 2015[137].
8.3. Refugee
The next question that we are
faced with is this- are these people in question ‘Undocumented Myanmar
Nationals (UMNs)’ as GoB and the ‘UMN Coordination Structure’ headed by the IOM
referred to above are calling them or are they refugees? This question and
other matters pertaining to the status of refugees are governed by
international law comprising the ‘Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees 1951’
and the ‘Protocol Relating to
the Status of Refugees 1967’ and the subsequent jurisprudence emanating
under the Convention.
The Convention Relating to the
Status of Refugees 1951 defines a refugee a person who “(2) owing to
well-founded fear of being persecuted for reasons of race, religion,
nationality, membership of a particular social group or political opinion, is
outside the country of his nationality and is unable or, owing to such fear, is
unwilling to avail himself of the protection of that country; or who, not
having a nationality and being outside the country of his former habitual
residence, is unable or, owing to such fear, is unwilling to return to it”[138].
Whether the Rohingya people in
Bangladesh are covered by this definition requires consideration of two
questions. Firstly, since Bangladesh is not a signatory to the Refugee
Convention of 1951[139], we
need to examine what implications that may have on the determination of their
refugee status[140].
Secondly, we need to apply this definition in to the circumstances of the Rohingya
and see if they fulfil the criteria to be considered refugees and thus receive
international protection.
8.4. The implications of Bangladesh’s non-participation in to the
Refugee Convention of 1951
It is often forgotten that
Bangladesh is not unfamiliar with the refugee problems. In 1971, during the
Bangladesh War of Independence an estimated 10 million people of Bangladesh,
then known as East Bengal, themselves fled to India in the aftermath of the
genocide by the State of Pakistan[141]. In
addition to that “250-300 thousand [Biharis] have been living as stateless
people in Bangladesh for more than a quarter of a century”[142]. These
Biharis, or stranded Pakistanis[143], left
in Bangladesh became the first group of stateless because Bangladesh did not
accept them as citizens either[144].
This has been recognised in
the GoB ‘National Strategy on Myanmar Refugees and Undocumented Myanmar
Nationals in Bangladesh’. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Government of
The People's Republic of Bangladesh in a Memorandum being UN-HR-5013/14/121,
dated 31 March 2014 sent to the OFFICE OF THE UNRC, UNHCR, WFP, UNFPA, ICRC,
IFRC, IOM in DHAKA stated “In light of Bangladesh’s experience during its War
of Liberation in 1971 and from overall humanitarian considerations, Bangladesh
gave refuge to around 2,00,000 Myanmar (Burmese) refugees in 1978 and to
2,50,877 in 1991, even if we are not a Party to the 1951 Convention on the
Status of Refugees”[145].
“Bangladesh is not a party to
any international or regional refugee instruments and has no domestic laws or
administrative procedures governing refugees”[146].
8.5. The determination of refugee status
The people in question, the
Rohingyas, are undoubtedly habitual residents of Myanmar. The Government of
Myanmar does not recognise them as one of the ethnic groups of its country and
did not include them in the population census. Even though in accordance with
the provision of Article 1 of the Refugee Convention of 1951 quoted above they
come under the purview of the Convention of 1951 as Myanmar is their “former
habitual residence” and they are “outside the country of (their) former
habitual residence” (i.e. Myanmar) and are “unable or, owing to well-founded
fear of being persecuted for reasons of race, (i.e. their ethnic Rohingya
identity) religion (i.e. Islam) unwilling to return to it”. Two matters are
thus resolved in this paragraph, firstly, that these people do come under the
purview of the 1951 Refugee Convention, and secondly, that they are refugees
under the definition provided by the 1951 Refugee Convention and the 1967
Refugee Protocol.
The GoB Strategy of 2013
referred to above does admit the existence of refugees of Myanmar origin,
referring to them as “Myanmar Refugees[147]”,
although the UMN Coordination Structure headed by the IOM refers to them only
as UMNs as we have seen above. However, the same GoB Strategy in the same
instruments refers to a population as “Undocumented Myanmar Nationals (UMNs).
The Strategy does not define either of the terms and gives any explanation for
designating such terms. It appears that this term could not be in reference to
their undocumented status in Myanmar since in that case they would not be
referred to as “Myanmar Nationals”. It is most likely the case that they are referred
so because of their undocumented status in Bangladesh. These people usually
arrive in big waves through the unattended border between Bangladesh and
Myanmar and in most cases the GoB defacto
allows them to enter and reside inside Bangladesh. Although on several
occasions, we must remember here, the GoB has pushed the Rohingya people back,
or to use the terminology of the 1951 Convention, ‘refouled’ them, to Myanmar. Although
this new policy position regarding the Rohingya refugees as enumerated in the
GoB Strategy of 2013 is inconsistent with the long standing Government of
Bangladesh policy towards these people. For example in a State Party report
submitted to the UN Committee on the Rights of the Child dated 14 March 2003
the Government of Bangladesh reported to the UN that “(T)he
Government has also in recent years provided temporary protection to
approximately 250,000 Rohingya refugees who crossed the Bangladesh-Myanmar
border from the State of Rakhine in 1991 and 1992”[148]
recognising, firstly, that they are Rohingya people and secondly, that they are
refugees.
A good many of them are
undocumented, meaning that no Government or any other authority has counted
them in and registered them. In our visit to the Kutupalong Refugee Camp we have
interviewed several newly arrived Rohingya refugees as well as Rohingya
Refugees who arrived much earlier and the newly arrived Rohingya refugees
informed us that they have not been registered by any Government or
Non-Government entity. Some of them arrived 10/20 days before the interview,
and some about a month ago.
Assuming that these are the
people the GoB Strategy and the UMN Coordination Structure documents refer to,
we must now examine whether this position is valid according to the provisions
of the international law found in the 1951 Refugee Convention and the
subsequent jurisprudence emanated from it.
While the procedure of determination
of refugee status is not provided in the Refugee Convention of 1951[149] a “Handbook
and Guidelines” was issued by the UNHCR in 1979 at the request of Member States
of the executive Committee of the High Commissioner’s Programme to fill in that
gap. The Handbook is titled ‘Handbook And Guidelines On Procedures And Criteria
For Determining Refugee Status Under The 1951 Convention And The 1967 Protocol
Relating To The Status Of Refugees, 1979’ (UNHCR Handbook and Guidelines’)[150]. The
Handbook was later updated in 1992[151]. In addition,
in response to the varying legal interpretations of Article 1 of the 1951
Convention in national jurisdictions, UNHCR has continued to issue legal
positions on specific questions of international refugee law[152]. These
Handbook and Guidelines and the other instruments issued by the UNHCR under the
authority of the 1951 Refugee Convention governs the regulations of all matter
related to refugees under the international law.
The UNHCR Handbook and
Guidelines states that “(A) person is a refugee within the meaning of the 1951
Convention as soon as he fulfils the criteria contained in the definition. This
would necessarily occur prior to the time at which his refugee status is
formally determined. Recognition of his refugee status does not therefore make
him a refugee but declares him to be one. He does not become a refugee because
of recognition, but is recognized because he is a refugee”[153]. If we
apply this law in to the Rohingya case, it would mean that their undocumented
status in Bangladesh does not deprive them of the Refugee status under the law.
Rohingya people in Bangladesh are ‘Refugees’ by the definition provided by the
1951 Convention as soon as they found themselves on the territory of Bangladesh.
“9. A prima facie approach is
particularly suited to situations of large-scale arrivals of refugees.
Large-scale situations are characterised by the arrival across an international
border of persons in need of international protection in such numbers and at
such a rate as to render individual determination of their claims
impracticable”[154].
““Large scale movements” or “large-scale arrivals” are the preferred terms for
these Guidelines, although it is noted that other terms are used in other
Guidelines, such as “mass influx”. There is no scientific number of persons for
a situation to qualify as a “large-scale movement” or “large-scale arrival.”
Rather such a designation is at the discretion of the State of arrival,
factoring in such matters as the capacity for registration, processing as well
as assistance to respond, also related to the speed and daily or monthly rates
of arrivals”[155].
This question is a perplexing
one and the UNHCR issued an “Advisory Opinion on the Extraterritorial
Application of Non-Refoulement Obligations under the 1951 Convention relating
to the Status of Refugees and its 1967 Protocol[156]” in
order to provide guidance to “States’ regarding their “non-refoulement
obligations with regard to refugees and asylum-seekers under international
refugee and human rights law”[157].
“In the recent past,
Bangladesh has experienced two influxes of refugees from Myanmar, the first in
1978 and the second in 1991-92. Around 250,000 people were involved both times.
Both influxes were followed by large-scale repatriation exercises whose
voluntariness was seriously questioned. Some of those who were repatriated
subsequently fled again to Bangladesh, but many were unable to recover their
former and government-acknowledged refugee status”[158].
“Government
attitude and action with regard to Rohingya refugees have not altered greatly
given
their denial/reluctance to grant asylum to Rohingyas arriving from Myanmar, quite often claiming
that they were actually illegal economic migrants. Despite reassurance by the UNHCR that they
were indeed refugees, they are denied registration and on occasion arrested by the police and
imprisoned under the Foreigners’ Act.19 Rohingyas continue to experience other violations such
as abuse, rape, assault, deprivation of food, lack of medical care, education and opportunity to
earn a livelihood.”[159].
their denial/reluctance to grant asylum to Rohingyas arriving from Myanmar, quite often claiming
that they were actually illegal economic migrants. Despite reassurance by the UNHCR that they
were indeed refugees, they are denied registration and on occasion arrested by the police and
imprisoned under the Foreigners’ Act.19 Rohingyas continue to experience other violations such
as abuse, rape, assault, deprivation of food, lack of medical care, education and opportunity to
earn a livelihood.”[159].
“The Rohingya ethnic and
religious minority forms one of the world’s largest stateless populations and
is at the centre of a chronic and growing humanitarian crisis across Southeast
Asia. Up to 500,000 Rohingyas are now believed to be in Bangladesh since being
stripped of citizenship in Myanmar, where ethnic tensions and reported violent
campaigns of persecution for the past three decades have been acute”[160].
…
“8. Special protection
measures
(arts. 22; 30; 38; 39; 40; 37 (b)-(d); 32-36 of the Convention)
Refugee children
78. The Committee notes that the State party is not a party to any international or regional
treaty relating to refugees nor does it have any legislative or administrative provisions for
refugees. The Committee also notes the concerns expressed by the State party delegation
regarding, in particular, the effects of “pull factors” if conditions for refugee children were to be
regularized. The Committee is concerned that the State party has only agreed, in principle, to
issue birth certificates to all children registered as refugees in Bangladesh. While noting the
position of the State party to only grant refugee status to the Rohingya children from Myanmar,
the Committee is concerned about these and other groups of refugee children such as the Bihari
who have difficult or no access to services in the State party. The Committee expresses deep
concern that no durable solution has yet been found to comprehensively address the rights of
refugee children.
79. The Committee reiterates its recommendation to the State party to:
(a) Establish national legislation and procedures to allow immediate access to
relevant procedures determining refugee status to all refugee children and their families;
(b) Consider allowing children residing in the refugee camps and their families to
access, inter alia, education, and continue to ensure that all refugee children and their
families have adequate access to better health and nutrition services, protection against
violence and that those who are particularly at risk are offered support;
(c) Address the concerns of approximately 100,000 – 200,000 Rohingya, including
children, not registered as refugees by the State party but who reside in the country for
similar reasons as the registered refugees in official camps and to provide them with, at a
minimum, legal status, birth registration, security and access to education and health care
services;[161]”
(arts. 22; 30; 38; 39; 40; 37 (b)-(d); 32-36 of the Convention)
Refugee children
78. The Committee notes that the State party is not a party to any international or regional
treaty relating to refugees nor does it have any legislative or administrative provisions for
refugees. The Committee also notes the concerns expressed by the State party delegation
regarding, in particular, the effects of “pull factors” if conditions for refugee children were to be
regularized. The Committee is concerned that the State party has only agreed, in principle, to
issue birth certificates to all children registered as refugees in Bangladesh. While noting the
position of the State party to only grant refugee status to the Rohingya children from Myanmar,
the Committee is concerned about these and other groups of refugee children such as the Bihari
who have difficult or no access to services in the State party. The Committee expresses deep
concern that no durable solution has yet been found to comprehensively address the rights of
refugee children.
79. The Committee reiterates its recommendation to the State party to:
(a) Establish national legislation and procedures to allow immediate access to
relevant procedures determining refugee status to all refugee children and their families;
(b) Consider allowing children residing in the refugee camps and their families to
access, inter alia, education, and continue to ensure that all refugee children and their
families have adequate access to better health and nutrition services, protection against
violence and that those who are particularly at risk are offered support;
(c) Address the concerns of approximately 100,000 – 200,000 Rohingya, including
children, not registered as refugees by the State party but who reside in the country for
similar reasons as the registered refugees in official camps and to provide them with, at a
minimum, legal status, birth registration, security and access to education and health care
services;[161]”
s.
The Committee also expresses concern that lack of registration is a basis for
discrimination and exclusion from access to social services, especially in the
case of refugee children.
41. The Committee recommends that the State party take all necessary
measures to accelerate free of charge birth registration for all children born
within the national territory, including refugee children[162].
Government of Bangladesh committed that “In
addition, the Birth Registration
project of the Government with support from UNICEF has plans to expedite birth
registration for the following children [interalia]:
Refugee Children”[163].
“The
Committee [UN Committee on the Rights of the Child (CRC)] notes with appreciation: (b) The State party’s agreement
to issue birth certificates to all refugee children also retroactively”[164].
“The Committee is also concerned that there are cases of children born to
refugees married to Bangladeshi nationals who are not recognized as Bangladeshi
and may remain in a situation of statelessness”[165].
3. General principles
(arts. 2, 3, 6 and 12 of the Convention)
Non-discrimination
32. While noting the commitment taken by the State party in its
Constitution[166] and
“Vision 2021” to create an equitable, just and non-discriminatory society, the
Committee is nevertheless concerned that the principle of non-discrimination
contained in article 2 of the Convention is not fully respected in practice. Girls
continue to face discrimination and disparities, particularly with regard to
health care, nutrition and early marriage, as do particular groups of children,
including refugee children…
33. The Committee strongly recommends that the principle of
non-discrimination, as provided for under article 2 of the Convention, be fully
and vigorously applied by the State party and integrated into the
implementation of all other articles to guarantee, without discrimination, the
rights set out in the Convention. The Committee further recommends that the
State party take the necessary measures to ensure that efforts to address
persistent discrimination and reduce disparities are adequate and effective in
the family, schools and other settings, and in particular among marginalized
and excluded children, including girls, children of ethnic minorities and
refugee children[167].
…
“In
particular, the Committee was concerned that the principle of
non-discrimination contained
in Article 2 of the CRC is not fully respected in practice. It noted that girls continue to face
discrimination and disparities (see also Section 2.4.3), as do vulnerable groups of children,
including children with disabilities, children in slums and rural areas, refugee children, and
children of ethnic and religious minorities”[168].
in Article 2 of the CRC is not fully respected in practice. It noted that girls continue to face
discrimination and disparities (see also Section 2.4.3), as do vulnerable groups of children,
including children with disabilities, children in slums and rural areas, refugee children, and
children of ethnic and religious minorities”[168].
Case Study: Mohammed Islam, Nayapara camp
“I
would like to heartfelt thanks on behalf of whole Rohingya refugees from
Nayapara camp to GOB and UNHCR but I'm extremely sorry to express that, we
don't get appropriate treatment and medicine but management and systems are at
best level in camp. My daughter Umme Kulsum age 07 has been suffering with a
disease for 05 years. She can't walks well as other normal Babies. She trembles
and always falls down. I requested many times for better treatment of my
daughter to the MTL or Medical Team Leader of Nayapara camp, field staffs of
UNHCR and including UNHCR Dr. Tymul and Bul Bul unfortunately they didn't look
at my daughter but told that no treatment available. According to my knowledge
many serious refugee patients are suffering cause of neglect of doctors and
lack of needed or appropriate treatment. I'm former camp chairman of Nayapara
camp. Name: Mohammed Islam. Mobile No. 01824512193”[169].
On 27th April 2016 he further commented that “(T)his
is just a display but refugees don't get appropriate treatment at Nayapara
Rohingya refugees camp in Bangladesh”[170].
8.6. Ethnic
Cleansing
The Guiding Principles on Internal Displacement (E/CN.4/1998/53/Add.2)
is the first UN instrument that uses the
term 'ethnic cleansing'[171].
United nations General Assembly Resolution 3 (1) of 13
February 1946 and 95 (1) of 11 December 1946 which confirm war crimes and
crimes against humanity as they are defied in the Charter of the International
Military Tribunal of 8 August 1945;
Law no. 10 of the Control Council for Germany of 20
december 1945 for the Punishment of Persons Guilty of War Crimes, Crimes
against Peace and Crimes against Humanity;
9. History of the Rohingya people
9.1.
Introduction
9.1.1.Anthropological
constitution of the Rohingya people.
9.1.2.Arakan,
the home of the Rohingyas - Short description covering location, geography,
climate, economy and demography. 120 words.
9.1.3.Rohingyas
are not indigenous people of the Arakan. They are a mixture of the Arabs,
Persian, Bengali and other indo-persian people who later, except the Arabs and
the Persians, converted to Islam and started to call themselves the Rohingyas.
9.1.4.Who are
the indigenous people of Arakan?
9.2.
Migrations into Arakan
9.2.1.Mongolian
people including the Rakhine.
9.2.2.Arabs,
Persian, Bengali and other indo-persian people, which is the principal stock of
the Rohingya people, hereinafter referred to as Rohingya people.
Francois Bernier, who was one of the
earliest Europeans to travel and report about India, stated in his book ‘Travels
in the Mogul Empire, A.D 1656-1668’ that there were many Muslims living
in Arakan in the 17th Century. He states “(A)lthough the King of Rakan[172] be a
Gentile[173],
yet there are many Mahometans[174] mixed
with the people, who have either chosen to retire among them, or have been
enslaved by the Portuguese before mentioned[175], in
their expeditions to the neighbouring coasts”[176][177]. We
note that Bernier reported that the Muslim population of Arakan in the 17th
century CE went there through two routes; they either migrated to Arakan to
live there or were enslaved from the lower Bengal[178]. The
Muslim population that were enslaved from the lower Bengal were taken there
arguably in the contemporary period of the narrative in question, i.e. around
1660 CE[179],
however, Bernier did not make any suggestions regarding any possible period
when the other part of the Muslim population living in the Kingdom of Arakan at
that time migrated there or any possible number of this people.
9.3.
Different waves of non-mongolian migration in to
Arakan
9.3.1.First wave
in 8th century CE following amalgamation of the Chittagong region of Bengal in
to the Vesali kingdom of Arakan.
9.3.2.Second
wave in the 8th century CE of the Muslim Arab and Persian shipwrecked traders
when the Arab Muslim traders were in great numbers in the Bay of Bengal.
9.3.3.Third wave
of possible migrants following the second conquest of Chittagong in the 9 century
by the Mongolian rulers of the Arakan.
9.3.4.Fourth
wave of migration following the British conquest of Burma in the 19th century.
9.3.5.Fifth wave
of migration in the second world war period, mostly as economic migrants as
agricultural and forest labourers.
9.4.
The First wave of migration into the land of
Arakan. The first wave of migration of the non-Mongolian in to the Arakan
happened in the 8th century CE. This wave of migrants were from the south east
Bengal, currently known as the Chittagong region. They were Bengali people. In
order to understand the background of this and other migration events we need
to gain a simple understanding of the history of the Arakan land.
9.4.1.History of
Arakan
9.4.2.Periods in
Arakan history.
9.4.3.City of
vesali or vaishali or Waithali
9.4.3.1.
Introduction - time line, emergence and decline.
They were a trading people.
“Arakan was discovered and forgotten by the rest of the
world as its power rose and fell. In the first century AD the Alexandrian
geographer Ptolemy knew it as Argyre, the land of silver, which was visited by
merchants from southern India. Chinese Buddhist pilgrims of the seventh century
knew it and the area of east Bengal within its cultural sphere as A-li-ki-lo or
Harikela”[180].
“After the fall of Dhanyawadi in the 4th century CE, the
centre of power shifted to a new dynasty based in the town of Waithali. The
Waithali kingdom ruled the regions of Rakhine from the middle of the 4th
century to 818 CE. The period is seen as the classical period of Rakhine
culture, architecture and Buddhism, as the Waithali period left behind more
archaeological remains compared to its predecessor”[181].
“Meanwhile, in the west of modern Myanmar, on the strip of
coastline extending southward from the Bangladesh border now called Arakan,
another state took shape, the Chandra kingdom.
It’s people probably related to the Pyus, the Chandra state took shape
during the 2nd century BCE and extended through several dynasties until the 8th
century CE. During the 7th century the
state split into four parts, Vaisali and Parapura in the south and Pattikera
and Harikela in the north, the latter with a capital at Chittagong, now in
Bangladesh”[182].
“It has been estimated that the centre of power of the
Arakanese world shifted from Dhanyawadi to Waithali in the 4th century AD.
Although it was established later than Dhanyawadi, Waithali is the most
Indianized of the four Arakanese kingdoms to emerge. Like other Arakanese
kingdoms, the Kingdom of Waithali was based on trade between the East
(pre-Pagan Myanmar, Pyu, China, the Mons), and the West (India, Bengal,
Persia).
Anandachandra Inscriptions date back to 729 AD originally
from Vesali now preserved at Shitethaung indicates adequate evidence for the
earliest foundation of Buddhism and the subjects of the Waithali Kingdom
practised. Dr. E. H. Johnston's analysis reveals a list of kings which he
considered reliable beginning from Chandra dynasty. The western face
inscription has 72 lines of text recorded in 51 verses describing the
Anandachandra's ancestral rulers. Each face recorded the name and ruling period
of each king who were believed to have ruled over the land before
Anandachandra.
Important but badly damaged life-size Buddha images were
recovered from Letkhat-Taung, a hill east of the old palace compound. These
statues are invaluabe in helping to understand the Waithali architecture, and
also the extent of Hindu influence in the kingdom.
According to local legend, Shwe-taung-gyi (lit. Great Golden
Hill), a hill northeast of the palace compound maybe a burial place of a
10th-century Pyu king.
The rulers of the Waithali Kingdom were of the Chandra
dynasty[183],
because of their usage of Chandra on the Waithali coins. The Waithali period is
seen by many[by whom?] as
the beginning of Arakanese coinage - which was almost a millennium earlier than
the Burmese. On the reverse of the coins, the Srivatsa (Arakanese/Burmese: Thiriwutsa),
while the obverse bears a bull, the emblem of the Chandra dynasty, under which
the name of the King is inscribed in Sanskrit”[184].
“Wesali or Vaisali was founded by Hindu Chandra Dynasty.
"The area known as North Arakan had been for many years before the 8th
century the seat of Hindu dynasties. In 788 AD a new dynasty, known as the
Chandras, founded the city of Wesali. This city became a noted trade port to
which as many as a thousand ships came annually; the Chandra kings were
upholders of Buddhism, ... their territory extended as far north as
Chittagong;---- Wesali was an easterly Hindu kingdom of Bengal --- Both
government and people were Indian[185]. So
far as Arakan is concerned, the inscriptions show traces of two early dynasties
holding sway in the north. The earlier one, a Candra dynasty, seems to have
been founded in the middle of the 4th century AD. Its capital was known by the
Indian name of Vaisali and it maintained close connections with India. Thirteen
kings of this dynasty are said to have reigned for a total period of 230 years.
The second dynasty was founded in the 8th century by a ruler referred to as Sri
Dharmavijaya, who was of pure Kshatriya descent. His grandson married a
daughter of the Pyu king of Sri Ksetra[186].
Hindu statues and inscriptions were found in Wesali. The
ruins of old capital of Arakan - Wesali show Hindu statues and inscriptions of
the 8th century. Although the Chandras usually held Buddhistic doctrines, there
is reason to believe that Brahmanism and Buddhism flourished side by side in
the capital.
"The Burmese do not seem to have settled in Arakan
until possibly as late as the tenth century AD. Hence earlier dynasties are
thought to have been Indian, ruling over a population similar to that of
Bengal. All the capitals known to history have been in the north near modern
Akyab"[187].[188]”
“Vesali, by San Tha Aung
Anandacandra inscriptions on Shitethaung Pillar in Mrauk-U
describe King Dven Candra as the father founder of Vesali. Not only nine Candra
Kings but also sixteen kings descended from Dven Candra and other kings ruled
over the country with Vesali as the Capital.
Situation and
Structure
Vesali was the Capital when Candra dynasty reigned over the
country. It lies five miles north of Mrauk-U. The city walls and palace site
can be clearly observed in photographs taken from aerial view. By studying
these photographs and the article 'Rakhine Capital' written by Prof. Daw Thin
Kyi (Journal of Myanmar Research Society Vol 52 Part 2, 1970, December) and
through field-works, the structure of Vesali will be described as follow.
To the west of Vesali runs Rann-Chaung, a tributary of
Kaladan River. Lying east to the city is the mountain range extending from
Kaladan to Lemro River. The old palace city wall forms an irregular square with
a narrow and curved part. The walls are almost straight in east and north but
are curved in the west and south. A Rann-chaung tributary runs across the city.
The widest distance between the north and south walls is
about 1000 feet and between the east and west walls about 6500 feet.
These walls are the outer walls and there is another inside,
the inner wall. The inner wall is encircled by a moat. Inside these walls is
the palace site. The extent of the palace site is about 1500 feet from north to
south and about 1000 feet from east to west.
There are so many wells for drinking water inside the city
and even a large lake in the east. During the golden days of this city,
majority of the population lived within the outer city, whose walls enclosed
the fields in which they worked.
Vesali Stone Stair
Vesali can be completely called Vesali Stone Stair City or
Vesali Stone Pier City. Some remnants of Stone Stair can be still found close
to the northwest of the palace city on the Rann-chaung tributary. At present,
only the lower part of the Stone Stair can be seen at low tide as the stones
from upper part have been taken away by the villagers nearby for their uses. At
Vesali Period, the Stone Stair would serve as an important pier for sea-going
sailing-ships. The city would be crowded with sailing ships from Vesali and
other countries travelling to and fro for trading purposes.
Thaunggyat-taw or
Frontlet Relic Pagoda
The road to Mahamuni from Mrauk-U passes through and halves
Vesali. Taking this road, the south wall of Vesali can be seen at the distance
of four and half miles from Mrauk-U. Just in front of the wall is a hill on
which Thaunggyat-taw pagoda stands. At the top of the ridge extending the
southwest of Thaunggyat-taw pagoda is a stupa from where a stone inscription
containing Ye Dhamma verse was found in May, 1965. In 1957, the stone
inscription of Niticandra's queen was recovered from a ruined stupa at
Unhissaka hill north of Thaunggyat-taw pagoda. In that year, Viracandra's
inscription was found at a ruined stupa on a hill north of Unhissaka hill. The
letters in these inscriptions closely resemble to those used before
six-century. The names of Niticandra and Viracandra are inscribed on
Anandacandra inscriptions.
Thalla-waddy Village
Pauktawbrung village is situated closed to the inner side of
the south wall of Vesali. Now a day it is called Thalla-waddy Village. Forty
years ago, an inscribed copper plate was obtained at a mound near the city wall
at a distance of two furlongs from this village. It is a land grant record of a
Vesali king. The second inscribed bronze bell was recovered from a pagoda on
Aboungdawdatt Hill south of Thallawaddy village ten years ago. The scripts of
the two inscriptions are identical and written with letters used before six
century. The monastery of the village is situated on a small mound. It is said
that the Anandawdaya monastery built by Anandacandra was once situated on that
mound. There is a well dug during Vesali period in the monastery compound. When
a place was cleared for building a Sima, a collection of stones were found.
They are base slabs used for erecting the stupas and stone status after
carving. It is suggested that there would be a grotto beneath the mound.
Vesali Village
The palace site serves as the settlement grounds of Vesali
Village. Some ancient ruined cetiyas, broken Buddha images, broken stone
statues and carvings are found to be scattered on the hills lying along the
road from Thallawaddy to Vesali Village.
On going to the north, there is a large lake, the former
moat of the palace site. After the lake, one will reach the Vesali village. The
village monastery lies on a hill now called Lak-khat Taung. Some Nat statues
and Bodhisattva figures are found on the hill. This believed to be the
origional site of Anandacandra Inscription Piller which was moved to
Shitethaung Temple by King Mong Ba Gree. It is said that Lakkhat Taung or loom
batten hillock gets its name as there is a stone slab used to set up the
statues and it looks like the frame of the reed in the loom. Adjacent to
Lakkhat Taung is the palace site. At one place of palace site, there is a
headless statue with four arms and a child figure on each side. It is Vishnu
statue. On its back, there is a conch shell motif also seen on the stone slab
capping the Anandacandra Piller. King Mong Ba Gree made the statue with four
arms like this be carved in the gallery of Shitethaung temple.
Memorable inscription
for building a pagoda
The palace site is encircled by a moat. A stone inscription
with the same script as the Anandacandra Inscriptions was recovered from the
moat. The difference is the way of writing of "Ra" alphabet.
"Ra" is written as the English alphabet "J". Now the
inscription is observed in Mrauk-U Museum.
The Great Image of
Vesali
Lying north to the Vesali village is the Sanghayana or
Buddhist synod hill. The great image of Vesali believed to be built by Maha
Taing Candra's queen, rests on a hill near it. The image was carved of a large
single block of sandstone. It is praiseworthy how such large stone could be
carried to the top of the hill. Now some ancient styles of the image are
disappeared as some monks changed the eyes of the image with the false eyes
from foreign countries. Other than the eyes, the frontlet of the image is also
richly ornamented.
In 1959, Vesali monastery Sayadaw found an inscription
containing Ye Dhamma Verse in Pali, used before six century on cleaning the
walls of the campus.
Vesali free from
protection
Vesali palace city and the ruined pagodas near by have
turned into fond of treasure-trove hunters. Brick rubbles and broken stone
statues and images are scattered here and there. Stone stair, arch-ways, city
walls and palace site are almost completely destroyed. There is no one to take
care or protect the city so they all are in great disorder. As it is not in the
same condition as the ancient Rakhine capitals viz Parein, Laungret which were
washed away by the mighty Lemro currents, some precious things may still stay
in the soil. If the old city is systematically excavated it is sure that some
evidences invaluable to the study of Rakhine history will appear.
Civilization
The presence of the pier for the sea-going sailing-ships
indicates that Vesali would have dealings with foreign countries. Vesali had
cultural relations especially with the northeast India. Communications with the
area were made not only by sea but also by land.
The various of silvers coins bearing the inscriptions and a
bull motif have been being discovered around Vesali. These coins indicate that
the trade relationships of Rakhine with foreign countries were flourished
during Vesali period (4 to 8 centuries AD). It is evident; therefore, that
Rakhine does not tag behind the time. The civilization of Vesali would be at
the highest level in the world at that time.
The decorated carvings of stone and metal images, stupas,
statues and lamps were discovered from Vesali. They unmistakably point out the
high level of art that Vesali had attained.
The materials used in stone carving are very hard
sandstones. So the tolls used must be much more harder. Therefore, it is known
that Vesali people could produce and use the metals with high hardness.
Moving the huge stones from a distant place, carrying these
stones to the top of the steep hills, making circular stone plates and casting
the coins indicates the level of technology that Vesali had attained.
Bronze bells and copper plates were to be inscribed. Besides
them other substances may also be used. Bell, copper plate and stone
inscriptions in Sanskrit give an indication that Sanskrit would be popularly
used in Vesali. As the language was used only by higher standard people, the
Sanskrit scholars would invent a language for public use.
Household utensils such as stone plates, pots, golden sash,
rings, bracelets and ear-plugs were also discovered around Vesali.
In Vesali period, Ye Dhamma verse would be inscribed at all
pagodas built. Stone inscriptions containing Ye Dhamma verse were abundantly
found at many ruined pagoda in Vesali and the area nearby. The meaning of Ye
Dhamma verse is as follow.
Of these dhammas
which arise from causes
The Tathagata has declared causes
Lord Buddha preached about the causes
And the effects gained by the causes
And that which is the ceasing of them, Nirawda Thitesa
This the great ascetic declares.
The verse, which is considered as the essence of Theravada
spirit, bears testimony to the fact that Buddhism flourished to an utmost
degree in Vesali. The relationship of Vesali with foreign countries especially
Ceylon would be established for Buddhism.
Unability to go
against Sankara
Deciphering Anandacandra inscription and studying
paleography of inscription on the coins, Johnston and Sircar suggested the date
of the founding of Vesali to be 320 AD or 350 AD. Rakhine chronicles record
that Vesali declined in 957 AD.
The golden days of this city were contemporary to the days
of Thayekhitaya. It had been the capital of Rakhine Kingdom where the Rakhine
culture had its full bloom for about 600 years before Pagan came into
existence. At present, Vesali is in ruin in accordance with Sankhara. It has
been for about 1000 years that Vesali came to an end. But we have been
discovering the workmanships of Vesali people till now.
Note: The related figures of stone inscriptions, copper
plate inscriptions, bronze bells and Vesali coins described in this articles
can be seen in the book, "Scripts of Rakhine, 6th century and before"
written by U San Tha Aung.
SAN THA AUNG
Translated by - Kyaw Soe Naing 2nd M.B.B.S I.M (2), Source:
The Rakhaing Tha-Ha-Ya Athong Megazine No.3[189]”
9.4.3.2.
The Chandra dynasty of the vesali period and its
non-Mongolian bengali nature
9.4.3.3.
The Anandachandra script in Switwell
9.4.3.4.
King Dharmavijaya of the City of Vesali and his
conquest of Chittagong in 8th century CE.
9.4.3.5.
Consequences of the amalgamation of south east
Bengal with Arakan.- migration of the Bengali people to the Arakan and the
Rakhine to parts of Bengal. (When the Rakhine arrived in Potuakhali and other
areas in Bangladesh?)
9.4.3.6.
The Kingdom of Harikela in south east Bengal-
its various similarities with the Kingdom of Vesali in Arakan.
9.4.3.6.1.
First Similarity- Chandra dynasty in both the
Kingdoms.
9.4.3.6.2.
Second similarity- similarity of the coinage in
the two kingdoms.
A comparison between
Chandra Dynasty of Arakan Coins and Harikela Coins
Figure 2 (right): Harikela coins, issued during the
kingdom's short existence[191]
Figure 1 (left): Silver coin of king Nitichandra of Arakan in
8th century (British Museum). Most Arakan coins had the name of the ruling king
on one side and the logo of the sun and moon and srivatsa on the other side. [192]
Figure 1: Eastern Bengal, Arakan Region, Silver Unit,
"Harikela" Type
“Eastern Bengal, Arakan Region, Silver Unit,
"Harikela" Type, Obv: bull seated facing left, legend harikela above,
crude figure of sankha shell behind the bull's rump, Rev: ornate shrivatsa
symbol, surrounded by beaded garlands, crescent moon and sun above, 8.20g,
30.60mm”[193].
HARIKELA: Deva period, 8th century, AR 60 ratti (6.61g),
Mitch-218, humped bull seated left / yupa in temple, Very Fine to Extremely
Fine, ex. Eck Prud'homme collection[194].
9.4.3.7.
Are Harikela Chandras breakaway descendants of
the Vesali Chandras? Harikela appears to be a later kingdom.
9.4.3.8.
(Are ) these two names for one single kingdom.
When the Mongol
invasion drove the Chandras away from the City of Vesali, in 8/9th century they
fled to the Bengal side of their Vesali kingdom. Chittagong region of Bengal
was already a part of their Kingdom. They advanced from their Chittagong base
towards the middle part of the lower Bengal comprising the current districts of
Comilla, Noakhali, Lower Dhaka, etc. This part of Bengal was under another
independent small Kingdom called Samatata. North of which was the greater Pala
empire and later Sena empire of Bengal. In their advance for survival the
Vesali Chandras conquered Samatata. They setup their capital at Lalmai hills in
Comilla, which was also the capital of the Samatata kingdom and once
consolidated flourished again using the name Harikela. The usual association of
the Harikela kingdom with only the south east Bengal or Chittagong region is
reasonable as they were initially based in Arakan including Chittagong and in
their second phase, i.e. after being evicted from the City of Vesali they first
perhaps settled in Chittagong before starting their campaign to conquer
Samatata. The Chadras remained a trading dynasty encouraging trade in Harikela
as they did in Vesali. This part of the lower Bengal has always been
independent and that is since written history of this area is found. In the
beginning this land was known as Banga and the epic Mahabharata tells that the
two kings from Bengal that took part in the great Kurukhetra war were the king
of Poundro (present day north Bengal with its capital in Bogura) and the King
of Banga. The king of Banga died in the war. Later Samatata kingdom became
prominent in the same land, and lastly it was the Harikela Kingdom which lasted
until 11th century CE. Of course Harikela and Samatata existed concurrently for
some period before Harikela conquered Samatata.
9.4.3.9.
Consequences.
10. Second wave in the 8th century CE of the
Muslim Arab and Persian shipwrecked traders when the Arab Muslim traders were
in great numbers in the Bay of Bengal.
10.1.
Abdul Karim
The Rohingya people are
Muslims. The earliest records of Muslims settling in Arakan comes from the 8th
century CE. Prominent Bangladeshi historian Abdul Karim stated that the Arab
Muslim traders were conducting trade in the coasts of the Bay of Bengal in the
8th century CE (Common Era)[195]. the
first to settle in the region. The Arakan royal saga Radja-tuye states that
during the reign of king Mottoingot Chondoyot, who is the descendant of
kan-ra-dja-gi in the 788-810 CE few Ku-lo, i.e. foreign ships were broken down
in collision with the 'Ronbi' island. The Muslim passengers of the ships were
taken to Arakan. There they started living in the rural area[196].
“Arabs were the earliest
people to travel to the east by sea. They were in contact with Arakan even
during the pre-Islamic days. The Arakanese first received the message of Islam
from the ship wracked Arabs in 788 A.D. Such ship-wrecks were occurred over and
over in the coasts of Arakan and Chittagong.
This Arab presence, with the
message of Islam, made up the nucleus of Muslim society in Arakan. Thus in
Wesali the Arakanese practiced Hinduism, Mahayanist form of Buddhism and Islam”[197].
“The Burmese military regime
affirmed in its official book Sasana Ronwas Htunzepho, published in 1997,
“Islam spread and deeply rooted in Arakan since 8th century from where it
further spread into interior Burma”.[198]”
A number of architecture named
'Bodor Mokam' or Buddha's Mokam, i.e. Buddha's adobe, are still seen in the
Arakan coast. Some historians think that these are the influences of the
Muslims in the 9th and 10th century CE[199]. For
example Dr. Enamul Haq and late Abdul Karim Sahitto Bisharod stated that this
type of strange mosques named ‘Buddher Mokam’ started to appear in the coastal
areas from Asam to Malaya peninsula in 9th-10th century[200].
Recently Mr. Siddiq Khan shed new light on the matter of 'Bodor Mokam'[201].
11. Third wave of possible migrants following
the second conquest of Chittagong in the 9th century by the Mongolian rulers of
the Arakan.
11.1.
Abdul Karim
The same Saga states that in
953 CE Arakan's king Sulot Ing Chondoy-o conquered 'Surton' and erected a
victory obelisk there. According to the King's statement, the place was named
'Chetta Goung' meaning war is inappropriate[202].
Some modern historians believe
that 'Surton' is the Arakani variant of the word Sultan and accordingly they
maintain that the Muslims established an Arab State in Chittagong in that time[203].
12. Fourth wave of migration in the 16th
– 17th century CE in the era of Mrauk U
The Mughal conquest of West
and Central Bengal in 1576 left East Bengal for decades in the hands of local
Muslim or Hindu lords, the so-called Baro
Arakan occupation of Swandip and Bakla chandradwip of lower Bengal in
1603. Although the Swandip Island in the south eastern Bengal was dejure
part of the Mughal Empire, the Mughals did not have effective control over it.
In their absence in and around the year 1602 CE the King of Arakan and the
Portuguese in the Bay of Bengal were in constant battle over the ownership of
the island[204].
The Moghs of Arakan conquered Swandip and parts of Bakla-Chandradwip around
1602. In 1603, a large fleet of the Maghs of Arakan invaded the Dhaka waters,
and launched a severe attack on the Mughal fort at Trimohani[205]. But
they were chased by a Mughal force with heavy casualties[206]. Kedar
Rai, zamindar of Vikrampur and one of the renowned Bara-bhuyans of Bengal,
joined the Maghs with his own fleet and attacked the Mughal outpost of Srinagar[207]. The
south and east of Bengal suffered the barbarism of the Arakan Moghs for a long
period as much as that a proverb, Mogher Muluk- meaning the lawlessness of a
country as it was under the Moghs, emerged in Bengali describing the state of
the country[208].
Chittagong of south east Bengal was a part of the Kingdom of Arakan in and
around the year 1610 CE[209]. Moghs
ravaged the entire countryside of south Bengal and abducted Bengalies to be
sold as slaves in Hoogley, Tamluk and Chittagong in Bengal. Bengali slaves were
often carried to markets outside the contemporary Bengal such as Pipli (in
present day Orissa) and Arakan (in Myanmar)[210].
According to the diary of Sir Streynsham Master, dated 30th November
1676, “there stands an old fort of mud walls, which was built to prevent the
incursions of Arakanese, for it seems about ten or twelve years since they were
so bold that none durst live lower than this place, Arakanese usually taking
the people of the shore to sell them at Pipley”[211].
Arakan king Min Khamoungo or
Hossen Shah Rokhongo attacked Bengal from his capital Mrohong or Roshango in
the rainy season of 1620 CE[212].
An administrative
correspondence issued by the the
Chief of the British East India Company at Chittagong (then Islamabad) in 1777
CE reported to the Governor General of the Company at Fort William that the
natives of Bengal resident there exceed the number of Mogh Arakanese, although
he found that to be doubtful. The
correspondence states “(’t)is said that there are no Europeans in the Country
[the Kingdom of Arracan, currently spelled
Arakan] & that the Natives of Bengal Resident there, exceed the
Number of Muggs [Arakanese] [213]; This
latter assertion appears doubtful[214].”
Chittagong is situated just across the border of Arakan, but we need to keep in
mind that the Company in 1777 CE still did not have effective communication or
representatives in Arakan and these reports are derived from individuals who travelled
from Arakan and came in contact with the Company Chief in Chittagong. However,
the above report was communication among the highest level of relevant Company
administration and supposed to contain the best possible information at the
time concerned since the Company acted on these reports. Taking in to account
the doubt expressed by the Chief of Company at Chittagong, we assume that the
number of the Bengali people living in Arakan in 1777 CE, if not more than the
number of the Mogh or Rakhine Arakanese living there as reported, was at least
equal.
East India Company
administrative records show that Arakanese Moghs raided south east Bengal, the
Chittagong area, on a regular basis. The primary purpose of these raids was
abduction of Bengali people in order to sell them as slaves. We noted above
that these Arakanese so aptly named ‘slave raids’ began much earlier, records
going as far back as 1600 CE. An East India Company administrative
correspondence sent to Tho’ Kelsall, Chief of Dacca (Dhaka) Council of the
Company on 13 January 1769 states “(A)rakanese raids increased recently. Light
boats fit for pursuing then wanted”[215]. Six
years later on 2 September 1775 another report to the Governor General Warren
Hastings states “Mugs are preparing to launch their usual attack on the
province [Chittagong in Bangladesh][216]. A 15
December 1776 correspondence reports to the Governor General of the Company
that “(T)o resist the mug incursions, the measure of consistant[217]
cruising off the Arakan coast is taken”[218], and
on 19 December 1776 another “recommended to build eight or ten boats after the
fashion of the Mug boats, to guard the coast”[219]. Soon
the “Dacca (Dhaka) Council sent a number of boats suitable for chasing the mugs”[220]. The
following year the recipient, a Salt Agent, was “(A)sked to help the party of
sepoys [members of the armed forces] stationed in the coast to drive out the mugs”[221], and
the Dhaka Company Chief was assured that the “(A)rmament against the mugs
prepared”[222].
The purpose of these raids, or incursions as they were referred to in those
days, becomes clear from the next administrative correspondence which reports
to the Governor General of the Company that “(t)he mugs returned 48 persons
they took away from this province before as prisoners”[223].
It also appears that a lot of
Arakanese Mogh (Rakhine) migrated to Bengal (now Banglaesh) and settled there.
An East India Company administrative correspondence dated 17 November 1775 CE
reports that “about two thousand Arakaneese “have deserted their country and
come to settle in this Province [Chittagong, Bangladesh]”. Favourable treatment
may induce more people to come and cultivate the under populated province”[224].
“In the eighteenth century
some 50,000 Arakanese refugees fled to Chittagong during a prolonged rebellion
against the Burmese throne”[225].
13.
Fourth wave of migration following the British
conquest of Burma in the 19th century.
14.
Fifth wave of migration in the second world war
period, mostly as economic migrants as agricultural and forest labourers.
“The total
population of Arakan Division, which includes members of various indigenous
ethnic groups as well as a substantial number of Pakistanis, was 1,847,000 at
the start of 1969. As in the past, Arakan Division had the highest
concentration of Muslim inhabitants in Burma. The 1931 census (the last
complete Burmese census) showed Muslums as constituting 4 percent of the total
population; 41 percent lived in Arakan Division, and most of the others lived
in the delta and central districts of Burma. At that time 68 percent of the
Muslims in Burma were Indians (now Pakistanis), and only 30 percent were
indigenous Muslims, A student of the Muslim community in Burma has suggested
that these proportions were probably still approximately the same in 1962”[226].
Notes:
Find and review
28.05.2017:
‘J. J. A. Campos, History of
the Portuguese in Bengal’, Patna, 1979.
29.05.2017
D.G.E. Hall 1955 History of
Southeast Asia—for many years a standard reference book on South-East Asian
history
Stephan van Galen ‘Arakan and
Bengal: The Rise and Decline of the Mrauk U kingdom (Burma) from the fifteenth
to the seventeenth century ad’ (Leiden, 2008) entirely based
on yet unpublished Dutch
archival documents
07.09.2017
The Forgotten Rohingya: Their
Struggle for Human Rights in Burma,
Dr. Habib Siddiqui (Author), Publication
Date: August 29, 2008: https://www.amazon.com/Forgotten-Rohingya-Their-Struggle-Rights-ebook/dp/B001F0RUE8
RohingyasInsecurity and
Citizenship in Myanmar: Insecurity and Citizenship in Myanmar,
Editors Trevor Gibson, Helen James & Lindsay Falvey, Publisher Thaksin University Press, 2016: https://goo.gl/Nzzf1b
A History of Chittagong:
From ancient times down to 1761, Volume 1, Sunīti Bhūshaṇa Kānunago, Publisher:
Dipankar Qanungo, 1988
[1]
Unpublished. 2017.03.22.
[4]
http://www.kofiannanfoundation.org/news-releases/advisory-commission-rakhine-state/
[5]
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/asia/rohingya-muslims-burma-video-shows-alleged-site-of-mass-murder-soldiers-a7458326.html
[6]
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/12/01/world/asia/myanmars-leader-faulted-for-silence-as-army-campaigns-against-rohingya.html
[7]
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-38168917
[8]
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-38168917
[9]
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-38168917
[15]
https://www.un.org/sg/en/content/sg/note-correspondents/2016-12-08/note-correspondents-statement-mr-vijay-nambiar-special
[16]
http://www.thedailystar.net/world/intensify-pressure-myanmar-british-mps-1328170
[17]
http://www.economist.com/news/asia/21654124-myanmars-muslim-minority-have-been-attacked-impunity-stripped-vote-and-driven
[18]
YouTube location link: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gMZnYHkY-wY&list=PLpQuE2JhW1Jdhaq7jg5VKThvXNQB1VjfH;
LinkedIn location link: https://www.linkedin.com/hp/update/6228519910461534208
[29]
https://www.facebook.com/raihan11/posts/10209681068196935?pnref=story
[30] https://www.facebook.com/raihan11/posts/10209681078357189
[31]
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gMZnYHkY-wY
[32]
http://www.ohchr.org/en/NewsEvents/Pages/DisplayNews.aspx?NewsID=21042&LangID=E
[33]
http://edition.cnn.com/2016/11/24/asia/myanmar-rohingya-refugees-bangladesh/
[34]
http://time.com/4596937/burma-myanmar-rohingya-bangladesh-refugees-crimes-against-humanity/
[35]
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-38345006
[36]
http://www.unhcr.org/
[37]
http://www.iom.int/
[38]
https://www.facebook.com/raihan11/posts/10209682349428965
[49]
https://www.hrw.org/news/2016/11/21/burma-new-wave-destruction-rohingya-villages
[50]
January 10, 2017, https://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/10/world/asia/rohingya-violence-myanmar.html?_r=0
[51]
http://www.iom.int/about-iom
[52]
http://www.iom.org.bd/
[53]
http://www.iom.org.bd/pages/iom-regional-director-for-asia-and-pacific-visit-coxs-bazar/
[54]
http://www.iom.org.bd/search/?keywd=Myanmar&search=
[55]
http://iom.org.bd/images/files/pdf/iom_Bangladesh_Newsletter_Issue2_2014.pdf
[56]
http://iom.org.bd/ftp.iom.org.bd/IOM-UNDP Programme on Mainstreaming Migration
into National Development Strategies.pdf
[57]
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-38091816
[58]
http://www.aljazeera.com/news/2016/12/myanmar-ethnic-cleansing-rohingya-161203104609449.html
[59]
http://www.irinnews.org/report/100609/briefing-myanmar-s-rohingya-what-s-in-a-name
[60]
http://www.irrawaddy.org/burma/arakan-state-govt-condemns-un-rohingya-statement.html
[61]
http://www.irinnews.org/report/100882/bangladeshs-rohingya-camps-promise-or-peril
[62]
International Organization for Migration, https://www.iom.int/
[63]
Sida - Swedish International Development Cooperation Agency,
http://www.sida.se/English/
[64]
United States of America,
[65]
SHED, the “Society for Health Extension and Development” is a Bangladeshi NGO, http://www.shedbd.org/
[66]
Google Maps, https://www.google.com/maps/place/Kutupalong+Station/@21.2101793,92.1005979,9449m/data=!3m1!1e3!4m5!3m4!1s0x30ade7750a13a409:0xdc2cb8b23368dcd1!8m2!3d21.2212512!4d92.1622673
[70]
http://reliefweb.int/report/bangladesh/refugees-die-lack-proper-treatment-leda-camp
[73]
http://www.kaladanpress.org/index.php/news/333-news-2013/august-2013/4313-local-bengali-kills-a-rohingya-refugee-in-kutupalong.html
[74]
http://www.rvisiontv.com/15504-2/
[75]
http://www.irinnews.org/report/100882/bangladeshs-rohingya-camps-promise-or-peril
[76]
https://youtu.be/HZyWMTnGwds
[84]
See below for further
discussion on this matter.
[85] 2014
Year-End report, UNHCR, The UN Refugee Agency, Global Focus, UNHCR Operations
worldwide, Operation: Bangladesh, available online at http://reporting.unhcr.org/sites/default/files/pdfsummaries/GR2014-Bangladesh-eng.pdf,
accessed on 23.04.2017.
[86] Project Background and Overview, ‘IOM
Programme Brief- Humanitarian Assistance for Undocumented Myanmar Nationals and
Host Communities in Cox’s Bazar’, published by IOM Bangladesh, House: 13/A,
Road – 136, Gulshan – 1, Dhaka, Bangladesh in January 2017 (hereinafter
referred to as ‘IOM Programme Brief, January 2017’). We have searched the web using Google.com on
11.05.2017 and again on 13.05.2017 but could not locate an electronic copy of this
document. We have also explored the IOM Bangladesh website http://iom.org.bd on the said dates and could not
locate a copy of this document there.
[87]
In the sections ‘Overview’ in
the first page, and section ‘Key Achievements-WASH’ in the second page; ‘IOM
Programme Brief, January 2017’, ibid.
[88] See for example UNHCR News dated 10
December 2008 ‘Protracted Refugee Situations: Bangladesh camp life improves,
but home is best’ at http://www.unhcr.org/news/latest/2008/12/493fd0f24/protracted-refugee-situations-bangladesh-camp-life-improves-home-best.html,
and UNHCR News dated 28 January 2013 ‘Two camps of thought on helping Rohingya
in Bangladesh’ at http://www.unhcr.org/news/latest/2013/1/5106a7609/camps-thought-helping-rohingya-bangladesh.html,
and the latest UNHCR News dated 10 April 2017 ‘Rohingya orphans seek safe space
to heal’ at http://www.unhcr.org/news/latest/2017/4/58e4eac94/rohingya-orphans-seek-safe-space-heal.html?query=kutupalong,
all accessed on 13.05.2017.
[89] For
earlier instances of categorising Kutupalong and Nayapara as ‘Refugee Camps’ see for example page no. 231, UNHCR Global
Report 1999, Myanmar/Bangladesh Repatriation and Reintegration Operation.
Special Programme, available on line at www.unhcr.org/3e2d4d617.pdf,
accessed last on 14.05.2017 for Kutupalong and Nayapara Refugee camps. See also
Table 3. Refugee population by country of asylum, location, sex and age,
end-2000, Women, Children And Older Refugees, The Sex and Age Distribution of
Refugee Populations With A Special Emphasis on UNHCR Policy Priorities, Population
Data Unit, Population And Geographic Data Section, United Nations High
Commissioner For Refugees, Geneva, 19 July 2001, available at http://www.unhcr.org/protection/children/3bb318ac7/women-children-older-refugees-sex-age-distribution-refugee-populations.html?query=women,
accessed last on 14.05.2017 where Kutupalong and Nayapara are categorized as CAM,
meaning “Camps/centers”. See also Table III.4. Refugee population by
country/territory of asylum, location, sex and age, end-2000 of the ‘Refugees
and Others of Concern To UNHCR, 2000 Statistical Overview United Nations High
Commissioner For Refugees (UNHCR), Geneva, June 2002 Compiled by UNHCR, Geneva
(Population Data Unit, PGDS/DOS) where again Kutupalong and Nayapara are
categorized as CAM, meaning “Camps/centers”. Available online at http://www.unhcr.org/3d4e7bec5.pdf,
accessed last on 14.05.2017. See also UNHCR Global Report 2000 – Bangladesh,
available at http://www.unhcr.org/3e23eb4da.pdf,
accessed last on 14.05.2017 which similarly refers to the Kutupalong and Nayapara
as ‘Camp’ of refugees. For recent instances of such usage see for example UNHCR
News dated 10 April 2017 ‘Rohingya orphans seek safe space to heal’ at http://www.unhcr.org/news/latest/2017/4/58e4eac94/rohingya-orphans-seek-safe-space-heal.html?query=kutupalong,
accessed last on 14.05.2017 where again
Kutupalong and Nayapara are referred to as ‘Refugee Camps’.
[90]
Emphasis by author. The
document makes a distinction between Myanmar Refugees and Undocumented Myanmar
National (UMN)
[91]
Background and Strategy, ‘IOM
Bangladesh FACT SHEET’, dated August 2016, IOM.OIM.
[92]
IOM acronym for ‘Undocumented
Myanmar National’.
[93]
Background and Strategy, ‘IOM
Bangladesh FACT SHEET’, dated August 2016, IOM.OIM.
[94]
The Project is supported by the USA, Sida, Humanitarian Aid and Civil
Protection of the EU, UKaid and CERF.
[95] Background and Strategy, ‘IOM
Bangladesh fact Sheet- Health care Services for Undocumented Myanmar Nationals
and Host Communities in Cox’s Bazar’ dated August 2016. One of the 13 documents
handed to the author by IOM Dhaka Office during a meeting on 30.01.2017. We have searched the web for electronic
copies of this document but a Google.com search using the title of the document
on 11.05.2017 returned no result. We have explored the IOM Dhaka website http://iom.org.bd on 11.05.2017 but none of these
12 documents given to me during the meeting on 30.01.2017 is available online.
[96] They are “(T)he United Nations High Commissioner
for Refugees (UNHCR), the United Nations population Fund (UNFPA), the United
Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF), the World Food Programme (WFP), IOM,
International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) and Bangladesh Red Crescent
Society (BDRCS), Actin Contre la Faim (ACF), Handicap International (HI),
Medecins Sans Frontires (MSF), Save the Children, Solidarities International
(SI), Bangla German Somprit (BGS), Mukt Cox’s Bazar, NGO Forum (NGOF), Research
Training and Management International (RTMI), and Society for Health Extension
and Development (SHED)”, Bangladesh, Humanitarian Response to
Undocumented Myanmar Nationals in Cox’s Bazar; Situation Report 5 January - 28
February 2017, ibid.
[97]
They are “ACF, HI, IOM, SI, WFP,
MSF, UNFPA, UNHCR, Mukti and BGS”, Bangladesh, Humanitarian Response to
Undocumented Myanmar Nationals in Cox’s Bazar; Situation Report 5 January - 28
February 2017, ibid.
[98]
See the details of our meeting
at the IOM Dhaka office on 30.01.2017 supra.
[99]
See the image No…. supra.
[100] Later investigations into the matter
revealed that “in 2013 the Cabinet, in a meeting chaired by the Prime Minister,
approved a “National Strategic Paper on Refugees from Myanmar in Bangladesh and
Myanmar Citizens Who Have Breached Bangladesh’s Border,” under which new
measures to stop Rohingyas’ movement into the country are being implemented”, Analysis
of the Situation of Children and Women in Bangladesh 2015, United Nations
Children’s Fund (UNICEF), December 2015, Social Policy, Planning, Monitoring
and Evaluation Section (SPPME), United Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF),
Bangladesh, available at https://www.unicef.org/bangladesh/Analysis_of_the_Situation_of_Children_and_Women_in_Bangladesh_Low_23-06-2016.pdf,
accessed on 09.05.2017.
[101]
Published by Ministry of Environment and Forests, Government of the People's
Republic of Bangladesh. Available on line at Climate Change Cell, Department of
Environment, Ministry of Environment and Forests, Government of the People's
Republic of Bangladesh page: http://www.climatechangecell.org.bd/Documents/climate_change_strategy2009.pdf,
accessed on 26.04.2017.
[102] https://www.google.com/search?client=opera&q=National+Strategy+on+Myanmar+Refugees+and+Undocumented+Myanmar+nationals%2C+Government+of+Bangladesh’&sourceid=opera&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8#newwindow=1&q=%22National+Strategy+on+Myanmar+Refugees+and+Undocumented+Myanmar+nationals,+Government+of+Bangladesh%22,
date of search 25.04.2017.
[103] http://cxbcoordination.org/Policy/English/National%20StrategyRohingya_UMNs_leaflet_English.pdf
[106] This is pursuant to a visit by a “three-member
delegation of the Parliamentary Standing Committee on the Ministry of Foreign
Affairs (along with the Hon’ble Foreign Minister)” to the “Sadar, Ukhiya,
Teknaf and Ramu upazillas [sub-district] of Cox’s Bazar district” on 17 - 18
August 2013, paragraph 3, ‘Strategy Paper on Addressing the Issue of Myanmar Refugees and
Undocumented Myanmar Nationals in Bangladesh: A Summary Presentation’, ibid.
[107] This is in conflict with the general
narrative that informs us that the matter of the refugees is under the
supervision of the Ministry of Disaster Management and Relief. Several UNHCR
documents states that this Ministry of the Government …
[108] The
Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Government of The People's Republic of
Bangladesh Memorandum being UN-HR-5013/14/121, dated 31 March 2014 sent to the
OFFICE OF THE UNRC, UNHCR, WFP, UNFPA, ICRC, IFRC, IOM in DHAKA, available
online at https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/1363897/un-hr-bangladesh.txt,
last accessed on 10.05.2017.
[109] “Approximately 74,000 Rohingyas/Undocumented
Myanmar Nationals (UMNs) from Rakhine State have crossed the border into Cox’s
Bazar, Bangladesh as of 23 February, 2017”, Bangladesh, Humanitarian
Response to Undocumented Myanmar Nationals in Cox’s Bazar; Situation Report 5
January - 28 February 2017, Date of Publication: 03/29/17, available online at: https://www.iom.int/sitreps/bangladesh-humanitarian-response-undocumented-myanmar-nationals-coxs-bazar-5-january-28,
accessed on 27.04.2017.
[110] Situation
Overview, Bangladesh, Humanitarian Response to Undocumented Myanmar Nationals
in Cox’s Bazar; Situation Report 5 January - 28 February 2017, Date of
Publication: 03/29/17, available online
at:
https://www.iom.int/sitreps/bangladesh-humanitarian-response-undocumented-myanmar-nationals-coxs-bazar-5-january-28,
accessed on 27.04.2017. It is mentionable that this is a relatively recent
document that appeared in the period subsequent to my advocacy visit to IOM
Dhaka office on 30 January 2017.
[111] Situation
Overview, Bangladesh, Humanitarian Response to Undocumented Myanmar Nationals
in Cox’s Bazar; Situation Report 5 January - 28 February 2017, Date of
Publication: 03/29/17, ibid.
[112] Situation
Overview, Bangladesh, Humanitarian Response to Undocumented Myanmar Nationals
in Cox’s Bazar; Situation Report 5 January - 28 February 2017, Date of
Publication: 03/29/17, ibid
[113] The title of the instrument clearly
states that it is a ‘National Strategy on Myanmar
Refugees and Undocumented Myanmar nationals, Government of Bangladesh’
(italics by author).
[114]
Bangladesh, Humanitarian Response to Undocumented Myanmar Nationals in Cox’s
Bazar; Situation Report 5 January - 28 February 2017, ibid.
[115] https://search.un.org/results.php?ie=utf8&output=xml_no_dtd&oe=utf8&Submit=Search&__utma=84472006.754429373.1485576583.1485576583.1485576583.1&__utmz=84472006.1485576583.1.1.utmcsr%3D%28direct%29%7Cutmccn%3D%28direct%29%7Cutmcmd%3D%28none%29&query="undocumented+nationals"&tpl=un&lang=en&rows=10&page=1,
date of search 26.04.2017.
[116] UNHCR
Briefing Note, Dated 3 February 2017, http://www.unhcr.org/afr/news/briefing/2017/2/589453557/tough-choices-afghan-refugees-returning-home-years-exile.html,
accessed on 26.04.2017.
[117] UNHCR
Country Operations Plan for Romania, 2006, http://www.unhcr.org/en-us/433913112.pdf,
accessed on 26.04.2017.
[118] “As the largest group of undocumented nationals in the country
are Afghans these security operations did have a direct impact on many
undocumented Afghans living in Pakistan” (italics by author), UNHCR
Briefing Note, Dated 3 February 2017, ibid.
[119] “Urgent progress is needed to turn
these pledges into concrete, government-led programmes that benefit all
Afghans, including returning refugees, undocumented
returnees, and internally displaced people” (italics by author), UNHCR
Briefing Note, Dated 3 February 2017, ibid.
[120] Protection
and socio-economic operational environment, Part I: Overview, UNHCR Country
Operations Plan for Romania, 2006, ibid.
[121] ‘Update
No.9 on the humanitarian situation in Libya and the neighbouring countries’
dated 16 March 2011, UNHCR Headquarters, 94, Rue de Montbrillant, Geneva, 1202,
available on line at: http://www.unhcr.org/afr/protection/operations/4d81cb5c9/update-no9-humanitarian-situation-libya-neighbouring-countries.html?query=,
accessed on 26.04.2017.
[122] “ECHO
following its recent visit to the border, expressed serious concern for the
sub-Saharan and undocumented nationals who are not treated as well as the other
documented arrivals”, Country Updates, Algeria, ‘Update No.9 on the
humanitarian situation in Libya and the neighbouring countries’ dated 16 March
2011, UNHCR, ibid.
[123]
“Beyond regular migrants, Algeria hosts large numbers of Sub-Saharan irregular
foreign workers employed in a variety of sectors, for example in agriculture,
construction and tourism, in the northern part of the country – as well as in
garment industries and domestic service – in the south (Fargues, 2009)”, MPC
Migration Profile, Algeria, Migration Policy Centre, Villa Malafrasca - Via
Boccaccio 151, I-50133 Firenze – Italy, June, 2013, available on line at: http://www.migrationpolicycentre.eu/docs/migration_profiles/Algeria.pdf,
accessed on 26.04.2017.
[124] MPC
Migration Profile, Algeria, Migration Policy Centre, ibid.
[125] ‘Update
on UNHCR’s operations in Africa’, dated 21 February 2017, Executive Committee
of the High Commissioner’s Programme, Standing Committee, 68th meeting.
Available on line at: http://www.unhcr.org/afr/excom/standcom/58ca4a6d7/regional-update-africa.html?query=,
accessed on 26.04.2017.
[126] The statement in which the phrase is
used is as follow: “The Government of Burkina Faso was working with UNHCR to
implement a documentation project for undocumented nationals living in Côte
d’Ivoire who were at risk of becoming stateless”, Update on UNHCR’s
operations in Africa’, dated 21 February 2017, UNHCR, ibid.
[127]
“Migration patterns reveal that more than two million Burkinabe nationals
currently live in Côte d’Ivoire. Many of these migrants work on cocoa
planations, which have been known to contribute to child trafficking for forced
labor”, A Human Rights Report on Trafficking in Persons, Especially Women and
Children, Burkina Faso, The Protection Project, The Paul H. Nitze School of
Advanced, International Studies (SAIS), 1717 Massachusetts Avenue, NW #502,
Washington, DC 20036, available on line at: http://www.protectionproject.org/wp-content/uploads/2010/09/Burkina-Faso.pdf,
accessed on 26.04.2017.
[128] “Similar to Niger, the high rates of
unemployment (80 percent of population are subsistence farmers) force a large
number of men to live the country in search of work, making the number one
export from Burkina Faso labour. An estimated 3 million Barkinabe live in
neighboring Côte
d’Ivoire alone”, Condra,
Jill, Encyclopedia of National Dress: Traditional Clothing Around the World [2
Volumes], ABC-CLIO, 2013, Page 542. Accessed through books.google.com.bd, on
26.04.2017.
[129] Memorandum
from the London Detainee Support Group, Joint Committee on Human Right of the
Parliament of the United Kingdom publication, September 2006, The treatment of
asylum seekers: tenth report of session 2006-07, Vol. 2: Oral and written
evidence, Volume 2, Great Britain: Parliament: Joint Committee on Human Rights,
The Stationery Office, Mar 30, 2007. Also available online at https://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/jt200607/jtselect/jtrights/81/81we18.htm,
accessed on 25.04.2017.
[130] Audit
Report the Office of Inspector General, Department of Treasury, OIG-16-033,
dated February 1 2016, available online at https://www.treasury.gov/about/organizational-structure/ig/Audit%20Reports%20and%20Testimonies/oig16033%20(for%20web).pdf,
accessed on 25.04.2017.
[135] Al
Jazeera, ibid.
[136] First
Report on the progress made in the implementation of the EU-Turkey Statement,
EUROPEAN COMMISSION, Brussels, 20.4.2016 COM(2016) 231 final, available at https://ec.europa.eu/home-affairs/sites/homeaffairs/files/what-we-do/policies/european-agenda-migration/proposal-implementation-package/docs/20160420/report_implementation_eu-turkey_agreement_nr_01_en.pdf,
accessed on 06.05.2017.
[137]
EU-Turkey Joint Action Plan, Third implementation report, Reporting period: 1
February to 2 March, EUROPEAN COMMISSION, Brussels, 4.3.2016 COM (2016) 144
final, available on line at http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?qid=1485253487466&uri=CELEX:52016DC0144,
accessed on 06.05.2017.
[138] Article 1A(2), Convention Relating to
the Status of Refugees, Signed at Geneva, on 28 July 1951, 150 United Nations
Treaty Series 1954 as amended by the Protocol Relating to the Status of Refugees
done at New York, on 31 January 1967, No. 8791, 268 United Nations Treaty
Series 1967.
[139] The Convention relating to the
Status of Refugees 1951 has 19 Signatories and 145 Parties, Bangladesh is not a
party to the Convention, United Nations Treaty Collection, Convention relating
to the Status of Refugees 1951, STATUS AS AT : 03-05-2017 07:32:10 EDT, https://treaties.un.org/pages/ViewDetailsII.aspx?src=TREATY&mtdsg_no=V-2&chapter=5&Temp=mtdsg2&clang=_en,
accessed on 04.05.2017.
[140]
“Bangladesh is not a State party to the 1951 Convention Relating to the Status
of Refugees or its 1967 Protocol (hereinafter jointly referred to as the 1951
Convention). There is no provision for refugees in national legislation,
although a number of national laws and provisions in the Constitution cover all
persons on the territory. The regulation governing the presence of refugees is
the 1946 Foreigners Act, which supersedes all other legal provisions, as it
grants the Government the power and discretion to decide on the scope of the
Act’s application. Against this legal landscape, protection is extended to
refugees through administrative mechanisms”, UN High Commissioner for Refugees
(UNHCR), Submission by the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees for
the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights' Compilation Report -
Universal Periodic Review: the Peoples Republic of Bangladesh, September 2008,
available at: http://www.refworld.org/docid/4ae9acbc0.html [accessed 4 May
2017].
[141] “According
to National Geographic (Sept. 1972), the estimated number of Bangladeshi
refugees was 10.0 million”, Bangladesh Genocide Archive, An online archive of
chronology of events, documentations, audio, video, images, media reports and
eyewitness accounts of the 1971 Genocide in Bangladesh, http://www.genocidebangladesh.org/refugees/,
accessed on 04.05.2017. Another source puts the figure at 9,899,305 referring
to ‘Bangladesh Documents, Vol. – 81 – 82’, - “Since March 25, 1971, 9,899,305
refugees had sought refuge in India”, http://www.profilebengal.com/,
at http://www.profilebengal.com/1216_71_refugee_problem.htm,
accessed on 04.05.2017. See also Sean D. Murphy, Humanitarian Intervention: The
United Nations in an Evolving World Order, Volume 21 of Procedural Aspects of
International Law, University of Pennsylvania Press, 1996, page 98, accessed
through books.google.com.bd on 04.05.2017.
[142] www.statelesspeopleinbangladesh.net,
at page http://www.statelesspeopleinbangladesh.net/home.php,
accessed on 04.05.2017. “After the partition India went through a great
turmoil, and a huge transfer of population took place. At a time like this the
founders of the country [Pakistan] considered it necessary to direct the new
émigrés to go to areas of the country where their services could be best
utilized. As a consequence a large number of Biharis who worked for the Railway
in India proceeded to East Pakistan”. East Pakistan had declared herself the
independent state of “Bangladesh” in March 1971 with government in exile in
Calcutta. The Biharis, the Urdu speaking minority of East Pakistan, not only
stood for a united Pakistan, they also identified with language and culture of
West Pakistan. On December 15, 1971, ninty five thousand Pakistani armed forces
and other personnel surrendered in Dhaka, and were taken to India. The
minority, which cooperated with the Pakistani government, were now considered
traitors and were under assault by the Bengali majority for their language and
political views. For the protection of this population they were given
sanctuary by the International Red Cross in certain areas of the country, which
later came to be known as camps. There are still 70 camps in various parts of
Bangladesh with a population of more than 250-300,000 people. By this time
535,000 Pakistanis had registered with the International Committee of the Red
Cross in Bangladesh and had indicated their preference to move to West
Pakistan. In the end Pakistan accepted the return of only 173,000 Pakistanis.”
ibid, at page http://www.statelesspeopleinbangladesh.net/introduction_B_P.php,
accessed on 04.05.2017.
[143] “The ancestors of Urdu-speakers in
Bangladesh came largely, though not exclusively, from the Indian State of
Bihar. Historically favoured by the West Pakistani political elite due to the
shared Urdu heritage, “Biharis” remained “stranded” in Bangladesh after its
separation from Pakistan and the creation of an independent State in 1971. For
this reason, they have sometimes been referred to, or self-identified, as
“stranded Pakistanis”. For a detailed historical overview, see Eric Paulsen,
‘The Citizenship Status of the Urdu-speakers/Biharis in Bangladesh’, (2006) 25
Refugee Survey Quarterly, 54, 54-68, available at http://rsq.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/reprint/25/3/54.pdf”,
UN High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR), Note on the Nationality Status of
the Urdu-speaking Community in Bangladesh, 17 December 2009, available at:
http://www.refworld.org/docid/4b2b90c32.html [accessed 4 May 2017].
[144] www.statelesspeopleinbangladesh.net,
at page http://www.statelesspeopleinbangladesh.net/introduction_B_P.php,
accessed on 04.05.2017. A recent Supreme Court of Bangladesh decision in a
judicial review in a Writ Petition, writ petition No. 3831 of 2001, filed by “ten Urdu speaking citizen of Bangladesh [i.e. Biharis,]
permanent residents of the Mohammadpur area residing at the Geneva camp pleaded
that “in the electoral rolls prepared and published
on 27.5.2001 by Election Commission, they were not included”. “They also
personally approached respondents Nos.2 and 4 [Government of Bangladesh Administration]
who verbally informed that the Geneva Camp residents are not entitled to be
voters”. The High Court Division of the Supreme Court of Bangladesh held “(O)n
consideration of the above facts and decisions cited above, it is found that
the petitioners are citizens of Bangladesh”, per Mr. Justice Zinat Ara, ‘Md.
Abid Khan and others Vs. The Govt. of Bangladesh and others’ 55 DLR (2003) 318,
available online at:
http://www.refworld.org/cases,BAN_SC,4a54bbcf0.html [accessed 4 May 2017];
and at www.lawyersnjurists.com at
page: http://www.lawyersnjurists.com/Cases/714/md-abid-khan-and-others-vs-government-of-bangladesh-and-others-55-dlr-2003-318.html,
accessed on 04.05.2017. The troubles of the Biharies, however, did not end there.
In another judicial review case before the Supreme Court of Bangladesh, Md.
Sadaqat Khan (Fakku) and 10 others Vs. The Chief Election Commissioner,
Bangladesh Election Commission, Block – 6, Sher-e-Bangla Nagar, Dhaka and Others’,
WRIT PETITION NO: 10129 OF 2007, the petitioner submitted that “registration of
voters was completed in the Districts of Rajshahi Rangpur, Khulna and
Mymensingh but none of the Urdu-speaking people living in the camps of those
Districts was enrolled in the Electoral Rolls of 2007” the High Court Division
of the Supreme Court stated “(B)ut the election commission was facing
difficulties to register the Urdu-speaking people living inside the camps as
voters due to complications relations to the citizenship of Bangladesh”. Md. Sadaqat
Khan (Fakku) and Others v. Chief Election Commissioner, Bangladesh Election
Commission, Writ Petition No. 10129 of 2007, Bangladesh: Supreme Court, 18 May
2008, available at: http://www.refworld.org/cases,BAN_SC,4a7c0c352.html
[accessed 4 May 2017]
[145] The
Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Government of The People's Republic of
Bangladesh Memorandum being UN-HR-5013/14/121, dated 31 March 2014 sent to the
OFFICE OF THE UNRC, UNHCR, WFP, UNFPA, ICRC, IFRC, IOM in DHAKA, available
online at https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/1363897/un-hr-bangladesh.txt
[146] UN
Committee on the Rights of the Child (CRC), UN Committee on the Rights of the
Child: State Party report: Bangladesh, 14 March 2003, CRC/C/65/Add.22,
available at: http://www.refworld.org/docid/3f2593b77.html [accessed 9 May
2017]. “A model national law for refugees (for use in five South Asian
countries) was drafted in 1997 by an Eminent Persons Group sponsored by UNHCR.
This proposed establishing the office of Commissioner for Refugees and a three-person
Refugee Committee. The Government is considering the idea of such a law” (para
288).
[147] Title of the Government of
Bangladesh Strategy ‘National
Strategy on Myanmar Refugees and Undocumented Myanmar nationals, Government of
Bangladesh’ admits the existence of refugees of Myanmar origin. See note … supra for details.
[148] Paragraph
290, and at paragraph 293UN Committee on the Rights of the Child (CRC), UN
Committee on the Rights of the Child: State Party report: Bangladesh, 14 March
2003, CRC/C/65/Add.22, available at:
http://www.refworld.org/docid/3f2593b77.html [accessed 9 May 2017].
[149] The
determination of refugee status, although mentioned in the 1951 Convention (cf.
Article 9), is not specifically regulated. In particular, the Convention does
not indicate what type of procedures are to be adopted for the determination of
refugee status, Paragraph 189, UNHCR, Handbook And Guidelines On Procedures And
Criteria For Determining Refugee Status Under The 1951 Convention And The 1967
Protocol Relating To The Status Of Refugees, 1979, HCR/1P/4/ENG/REV.3, Reissued
Geneva, December 2011.
[150] Foreword,
UNHCR, Handbook And Guidelines, ibid.
[151] Foreword,
UNHCR, Handbook And Guidelines On Procedures And Criteria For Determining
Refugee Status Under The 1951 Convention And The 1967 Protocol Relating To The
Status Of Refugees, 1979, HCR/1P/4/ENG/REV.3, Reissued Geneva,
December 2011.
[152] Foreword,
UNHCR, Handbook And Guidelines On Procedures And Criteria For Determining
Refugee Status Under The 1951 Convention And The 1967 Protocol Relating To The
Status Of Refugees, 1979, HCR/1P/4/ENG/REV.3, Reissued Geneva,
December 2011. “The Handbook and Guidelines are issued pursuant to
unHCR’s supervisory responsibility contained in paragraph 8 of the 1950 statute
of unHCR in conjunction with articles 35 and 36 of the 1951 Convention and
article ii of the 1967 Protocol”. “The Handbook was first issued in September
1979 at the request of Member States of the executive Committee of the High
Commissioner’s Programme. a second edition was released in January 1992, which
updated information concerning accessions to the international refugee
instruments. To preserve its integrity, the Handbook remains unchanged also in
the present edition, although the annexes have again been updated”, Foreword,
UNHCR, Handbook And Guidelines On Procedures And Criteria For Determining
Refugee Status Under The 1951 Convention And The 1967 Protocol Relating To The
Status Of Refugees, 1979, ibid.
[153] UNHCR, Handbook on Procedures and Criteria for
Determining Refugee Status, 1979, Reedited Geneva 1992, para. 28.
[154] UNHCR Guidelines
on International Protection No. 11: Prima Facie Recognition of Refugee Status, HCR/GIP/15/11 5 June 201 5. “UNHCR issues these Guidelines
pursuant to its mandate, as contained in the Office’s Statute, in conjunction
with Article 35 of the 1951 Convention relating to the Status of Refugees and
Article II of its 1967 Protocol. These Guidelines complement the UNHCR Handbook
on Procedures and Criteria for Determining Refugee Status under the 1951
Convention and the 1967 Protocol relating to the Status of Refugees (1979,
reissued, Geneva, 2011 ) and the other Guidelines on International Protection.
These Guidelines, having benefited from broad consultation, are intended to
provide legal interpretative guidance for governments, legal practitioners,
decision-makers, as well as UNHCR staff carrying out refugee status
determination under its mandate and/or advising governments on the application
of a prima facie approach”, ibid.
[155] Foot Note 15, UNHCR Guidelines on
International Protection No. 11: Prima Facie Recognition of Refugee Status.
[156] Advisory
Opinion on the Extraterritorial Application of Non-Refoulement Obligations
under the 1951 Convention relating to the Status of Refugees and its 1967 Protocol,
UNHCR, Geneva 26 January 2007.
[157]
Paragraph 2, Advisory Opinion on the Extraterritorial Application of
Non-Refoulement Obligations under the 1951 Convention relating to the Status of
Refugees and its 1967 Protocol, UNHCR, ibid.
[158] States
of denial, A review of UNHCR’s response to the protracted situation of
stateless Rohingya refugees in Bangladesh, Policy Development and Evaluation
Service, United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees, Case Postale 2500, 1211
Geneva 2, Switzerland (PDES), PDES/2011/13, December 2011.
[159] Background
Paper for the 7th Five Year Plan of the Government of Bangladesh: Governance
and Justice, Final Draft, February 21, 2015, Background Study conducted by the General
Economics Division (GED) of the Planning Commission, Ministry of Planning,
Bangladesh for the preparation of the 7th Five Year Plan (2015-16 to 2019-20), available at http://www.plancomm.gov.bd/wp-content/uploads/2015/02/12_Governance-and-Justice-_Final-Draft.pdf,
accessed on 04.05.2017.
[160] Analysis
of the Situation of Children and Women in Bangladesh 2015, United Nations
Children’s Fund (UNICEF), December 2015, Social Policy, Planning, Monitoring
and Evaluation Section (SPPME), United Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF),
Bangladesh, available at https://www.unicef.org/bangladesh/Analysis_of_the_Situation_of_Children_and_Women_in_Bangladesh_Low_23-06-2016.pdf,
accessed on 09.05.2017.
[161]
Committee on the Rights of the Child. Concluding Observations of the Committee
on the Rights of the Child: Bangladesh. New York, June 2009 (hereafter CRC
Concluding Observations), paragraph 78, 79, available at http://repository.un.org/handle/11176/278676,
accessed on 09.05.2017.
[162] CRC
Concluding Observations, supra,
paragraph 40 and 41. It is important to note that the CRC in 2003 expressed the
same concern stating that it “is very concerned about the difficult conditions
under which some refugee children, especially children belonging to the
Rohingya population from Myanmar, are living, and that many of these children
and their families do not have access to legal procedures that could grant them
legal status. Furthermore, the Committee is concerned at the lack of a national
refugee policy and that refugee children are not registered at birth” (para
67), and recommended that the State party:
(a) Adopt a national refugee legislation and accede to the Convention
relating to the Status of Refugees of 1951 and its Protocol of 1967; (b) Grant all refugee children and their
families immediate access to relevant procedures determining refugee
status; (c) In collaboration with and
with support from international agencies, undertake effective measures to
improve the living conditions of refugee families and children, particularly
with regard to educational and health-care services; (d) Provide unaccompanied refugee children
with adequate care, education and protection;
(e) Register all refugee children born in Bangladesh (para 68), UN
Committee on the Rights of the Child (CRC), UN Committee on the Rights of the
Child: Concluding Observations: Bangladesh, 27 October 2003, CRC/C/15/Add.221,
available at: http://www.refworld.org/docid/403a215c8.html [accessed 9 May
2017].
[163] Paragraph 8, UN Committee on the
Rights of the Child (CRC), Written replies by the Government of Bangladesh to
the list of issues (CRC/C/BGD/Q/4) prepared by the Committee on the Rights of
the Child in connection with the consideration of the 3rd and 4th periodic
reports of Bangladesh (CRC/C/BGD/4), 29 May 2009, CRC/C/BGD/Q/4/Add.1, available
at: http://www.refworld.org/docid/4a8e77ea0.html [accessed 9 May 2017]
[164] UN
Committee on the Rights of the Child (CRC), UN Committee on the Rights of the
Child: Concluding Observations, Bangladesh, 5 July 2007, CRC/C/OPSC/BGD/CO/1,
available at: http://www.refworld.org/docid/46b9c4c32.html [accessed 9 May
2017]
[165] UN
Committee on the Rights of the Child (CRC), UN Committee on the Rights of the
Child: Concluding Observations, Bangladesh, 5 July 2007, ibid.
[166] It is mentionable that the
Government of Bangladesh stated in a Report submitted to the UN that “(T)he
Rohingya refugees do not have the right to settle permanently in Bangladesh, to
work or to use local educational and health services. They do, however, enjoy
certain basic rights under the Constitution, including the right to life and
personal liberty, to freedom of thought and conscience, to safeguards regarding
arrest/detention and trial/punishment and to protection against forced labour”,
para 293, UN Committee on the Rights of the Child (CRC), UN Committee on the
Rights of the Child: State Party report: Bangladesh, 14 March 2003,
CRC/C/65/Add.22, available at: http://www.refworld.org/docid/3f2593b77.html
[accessed 9 May 2017]
[167] CRC
Concluding Observations, supra,
paragraph 32 and 33.
[168] Analysis
of the Situation of Children and Women in Bangladesh 2015, United Nations
Children’s Fund (UNICEF), December 2015, Social Policy, Planning, Monitoring
and Evaluation Section (SPPME), United Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF),
Bangladesh, available at https://www.unicef.org/bangladesh/Analysis_of_the_Situation_of_Children_and_Women_in_Bangladesh_Low_23-06-2016.pdf,
accessed on 09.05.2017.
[169] Comment
dated · 26 April 2016 to a special Facebook page of the United Nations
Refugee Agency - Cox's Bazar, Bangladesh on the activities by one user of the
Page Islam
Arakanese Rohingya to
a UNHCR post dated 25 April 2016 relating to the inauguration of “the
newly built Primary Health Care Centers in Nayapara and Kutupalong refugee
camps”, <iframesrc="https://www.facebook.com/plugins/post.php?href=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.facebook.com%2Funhcrcox%2Fposts%2F1048094435250322&width=500"
width="500" height="866"
style="border:none;overflow:hidden" scrolling="no"
frameborder="0" allowTransparency="true"></iframe>, accessed on 09.05.2017.
[170] <iframe
src="https://www.facebook.com/plugins/comment_embed.php?href=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.facebook.com%2Funhcrcox%2Fposts%2F1048094435250322%3Fcomment_id%3D1048872081839224&include_parent=false"
width="560" height="141"
style="border:none;overflow:hidden" scrolling="no"
frameborder="0" allowTransparency="true"></iframe>,
accessed on 09.05.2017.
[171] Also available at: http://www.unhcr.org/protection/idps/43ce1cff2/guiding-principles-internal-displacement.html,
accessed on 29.04.2017.
[172] The
King of Arakan; referred to as “King of Racan, or Mog” at page 109. ‘Rakan’ is
used as synonym for “Arakan or Magh, the Rakhang of Khafi Khan”; see footnote
No. 2 at page 109. Also as “The King [of
Arakan]” at page 109, Bernier,
Francois, Travels in the Mogul Empire, A. D 1656-1668, A revised and improved
edition based on Irving Brock’s translation, Archibald Constable and Company,
11 Parliament Street, S. W, MDCCCXCI (1891?),
Page 111.
[173] A
heathen or a non-Muslim. The term is stated to mean “(I)n the original
'Gentils,' which throughout this edition will be rendered by the word Gentiles,
in preference to using the old Anglo-Indian slang word 'Gentoo,' derived from
the Portuguese Gentio, a gentile, a heathen, a term which was applied to the
Hindoos in contradistinction to the Moros. (old Anglo-Indian 'Moors '), or
Muhammadans”, at footnote No. 4 at page 3, Bernier, Francois, Travels in the Mogul Empire, A. D 1656-1668, ibid, Page 3.
[174] A
corruption of Mohammedans, meaning Muslims; followers of the religion of Islam.
[175]
Bernier stated at 109 that there were Portuguese and other Europeans were at
the service of the King of Arakan at that time. In his words- “fugitive
Portuguese, and other wandering Christians, who had entered into the King's
service, and whose chief occupation was to ravage this part of the lower
Bengale”, Bernier, Francois, Travels
in the Mogul Empire, A. D 1656-1668, ibid,
Page 109. “There was also a substantial Portuguese presence further east, in
Chittagong and Arakan — 2500 including their descendants in 1598”, Page 84,
[176] These neighboring coasts would be
the coasts of south eastern Bengal which shares border with Arakan.
[177] Bernier, Francois, Travels in the
Mogul Empire, A. D 1656-1668, ibid,
Page 111.
[178] See page No. 109 where Bernier
stated that “the chief occupation [of the Portuguese and other Europeans
at the service of the King of Arakan] was to ravage this part of the lower
Bengale”. Bernier, Francois,
Travels in the Mogul Empire, A. D 1656-1668,
ibid, Page 109. Independent Portuguese stationed in and around Chittagong
also raided Bengal in the said period, i.e. 17th Century CE. Portuguese
pirate Sebastiao Gonsalves Tibao and other Portuguese pirates operating in the
Bay of Bengal coasts “carried off the booty to the King of Bakla’s ports” who
was a friend of the Portuguese, Campos, J. J. A., History of the Portuguese in
Bengal, Butterworth & Co, London, 1919, Page 81. The Kingdom of Bakla
mentioned by Campos is the Zemindari of the Zemindar Pratapadittyo (?), one of
the twelve rebel Zemindars of lower Bengal collectively famous in the history
as the ‘Baro Bhuiyans’ who rebelled against the Mughol Empire in the 16-17th
century CE. The King of Bakala joined the Portuguese with “some ships and two
hundred horse” in 1609 CE in the Portuguese campaign for the second conquest of
Swandip in 1610 with Gonsalves, the leader of the Portuguese in Swandip island
in the mouth of River Ganges who promised to give him “half the revenue of the
island”, Campos, J. J. A., ibid, page 83. “The Hindu inhabitants of the island,
who were already accustomed to the Portuguese rule during the time of Manoel de
Mattos welcomed the entry of Gonsalves”. According to Portuguese condition that
they “brought to him every moor in the island”, they “brought to him about a
thousand Moors who were all murdered in cold blood”, Campos, J. J. A., ibid,
pages 83-84. It is noted that this good relationship between the Hindus and the
Portuguese are seen elsewhere as well as Campos reports that the Portuguese,
after settling in Dhaka in 1580 CE, “had grown in to traders of much importance
especially in Sripur”, Campos, J. J. A., ibid, page 88, which was also the
capital of another of the Hindu Bhuiyan of the Twelve Bhuiyans, the brothers
Chand Rai and Kedar Rai. We may remember that this Kedar Rai joined the king of
Arakan in a raid against the Mughol in the year 1603 CE, please see Section … supra. Also in the kingdom of another of
the Baro Bhuiyans in Bhulua “the Prince’s guard (in Bhulua) consists wholly of
Christians which are there in great esteem; … subjects to the King of Portugal”
in 17th century CE, Campos, J. J. A., ibid, at page 93, referring
Glanius, A Voyage to the Kingdom of Bengal, P 138-139. “The Portuguese
influence was so completely established in Bhulua that many of the people spoke
Portuguese”, Campos, J. J. A., ibid, at page 93, referring Glanius, ibid, P 136. In
1665 “the Mughals took Chittagong and established a military regime in the far
east of Bengal”, apparently bringing an end to this matter, Evidence of H.
Verelst, 4th Report, Secret Committee, 1773, Reports from Committees of the
House of Commons (12 vols., 1803-6), IV, 9 quoted and referred to in Marshall, P.J. (Peter James) Bengal: the British
bridgehead, (The New Cambridge History of India), Cambridge University Press 1987, page 21.
“Many were the marriage relations contracted between the Portuguese and the
Royal family of Arakan” in 1610 CE and the years to follow. Sebastiao
Gonsalves, now the independent ruler of Swandip island married the daughter of
Anaporan, the heir-apparent of the kingdom of Arakan and several other
Portuguese including a son of Gonsalves also married in to the royal family of
Arakan, see Campos, J. J. A., ibid, pages 85-86.
[179] The
narrative is from the year 1660-1661 CE when Sultan Suja, son of Emperor Shah
Jahan of India fled to the Kingdom of Arakan from Bengal fleeing possible
destruction by the forces of his brother Aurangjeb in order to secure a see
worthy ship for naval passage to Mecca in the present day Saudi Arabia or to Turkey.
According to Bernier the relevant period was“(f)rom about the year 1655 to the
year 1660 or 1661”, when the four brother contenders of the Moghol throne
fought bloody wars between themselves in order to extinguish others’ claim to
the throne. Towards the end of this warring period Shah Suja or Sultan Suja
arrived in Arakan. See Bernier,
Francois, Travels in the Mogul Empire, A. D 1656-1668, ibid, Page 115 and for an account of this war among the
four brothers for the Moghol throne ‘The History of the Late Rebellion in the
States of the Great Mogol’, Bernier, Francois, Travels in the
Mogul Empire, A. D 1656-1668, ibid,
Pages 1 – 115.
[180] About
Mrauk U, http://myanmartravelinformation.com/about-mrauk-u.html,
accessed on 23.05.2017.
[182] FROM A
to Z SERIES, MYANMAR, 10/31//99, http://www.anythinganywhere.com/info/a2z/azmyanmar.htm,
accessed on 23.05.2017.
[183] The
Chandra dynasty were a family who ruled over the kingdom of Harikela in eastern
Bengal (comprising the ancient lands of Harikela, Vanga and Samatala) for
roughly 150 years from the beginning of the 10th century CE. Their empire also
encompassed Vanga and Samatala, with Srichandra expanding his domain to include
parts of Kamarupa. Their empire was ruled from their capital, Vikrampur (modern
Munshiganj) and was powerful enough to militarily withstand the Pala Empire to
the north-west. They were replaced later by the Varman dynasty as rulers of
Harikela. (Ray, Niharranjan (1994). History
of the Bengali People. Calcutta: Orient Longman Ltd. p. 84.),
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chandra_dynasty, accessed on 23.05.2017
[185] M.S.
Collis, "Arakan's place in the civilization of the Bay", Journal of
the Burma Research Society, 50th Anniversary publications No.2, Rangoon, 1960,
P. 486.
[186] BURMA, D. G . E. HALL, M.A., D.LIT.,
F.R.HIST.S.Professor Emeritus of the University of London and formerly
Professor of History in the University of Rangoon, Burma. Third edition 1960.
Page 8-9
[187] D. G.
E Hall, A History of South East Asia, New York, 1968, P. 389.
[188] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Migration_period_of_ancient_Burma#cite_note-28,
accessed on 23.05.2017
[190]
Mukherjee, Rila, (edited) Pelagic Passageways: The Northern Bay of Bengal
Before Colonialism, Primus Books, 2011, https://books.google.com.bd/books?id=7xeqhnYtrKcC&pg=PA270&lpg=PA270&dq=chandra+dynasty+of+arakan&source=bl&ots=ufDQSccZ1l&sig=Nd4m5AyCAx6CrCs6MT1SVjB6oYo&hl=en&sa=X&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q=chandra%20dynasty%20of%20arakan&f=false
[191] http://www.historyfiles.co.uk/KingListsFarEast/IndiaSamatata.htm,
accessed on 23.05.2017. Also see http://en.banglapedia.org/index.php?title=Harikela_Coins,
accessed on 23.05.2017.
[192] By
Uploadalt - Own work, photographed in the British Museum, CC BY-SA 3.0,
https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=12268559
[194] http://db.stevealbum.com/php/lot_auc.php?site=1&sale=10&lot=1145&lang=1,
accessed on 23.05.2017
[195] Karim,
Abdul, Banglar Itihas (Sultani Amal) [History of Bengal (Sultani Period)],
published by Jatiya Grontha Prokashan, 67 Pyari Das Road, Dhaka-1000, 1999, Page 72.
[196]
J.A.S.B., 1844, page 36, quoted at Page 72, Abdul Karim, Banglar Itihas
(Sultani Amal) [History of Bengal (Sultani Period)], ibid.
[197] Ullah,
Aman, Arakan Before 1000 AD, http://www.kaladanpress.org/index.php/scholar-column-mainmenu-36/arakan/4955-arakan-before-1000-ad.html,
published on 13 April 2016, accessed on 23.05.2017.
[198] Ullah,
Aman, Arakan Before 1000 AD, ibid.
[199] Page
77, Abdul Karim, Banglar Itihas (Sultani Amal), Jatiya Grontha Prokashan, 67
Pyari Das Road, Dhaka-1000, 1999.
[200] Enamul
Haq and Abdul Karim, Arakan Rajshovay Bangla Sahitto, Kolkata, 1935, page 4,
quoted at Page 72, Abdul Karim, Banglar Itihas (Sultani Amal) [History of
Bengal (Sultani Period)], ibid.
[201] J. A.
S. P., vol. 7, No. 1, page 17-46, quoted at Page 77, Abdul Karim, Banglar
Itihas (Sultani Amal) [History of Bengal (Sultani Period)], ibid.
[202] J.A.S.B.,
1844, page 36, Ibid.
[203] Enamul
Haq and Abdul Karim, Arakan Rajshovay Bangla Sahitto, Kolkata, 1935, page 4,
quoted at Page 72, Abdul Karim, Banglar Itihas (Sultani Amal) [History of
Bengal (Sultani Period)], ibid.
[204] Purchas
Pilgrims, 4th part, Book V, referred to by Bandapadhyay,
Kaliprasanna, Madhyayuge Bangla (Bengal in the Middle Ages, in Bengali), Dey’s Publishing
Kolkata 2015, Page 86.
[205] Khan, Muazzam
Hussain, Kedar Rai, Banglapedia - the National Encyclopedia of Bangladesh, revised
Second Edition (2012), available online at http://en.banglapedia.org/index.php?title=Kedar_Rai,
accessed on 29.05.2017.
[206] Khan,
Muazzam Hussain, Kedar Rai, Banglapedia, ibid.
[207] “In
the encounter that followed near Vikrampur, Kedar Rai was wounded and captured.
He was carried to Raja Mansingh when he breathed his last”, Khan, Muazzam
Hussain, Kedar Rai, Banglapedia, ibid; Elliot’s India Vol. VI, quoted in
Moddhojuge Bangala (Bengal in the Middle Ages, in Bengali), ibid, Page 87.
[208] See generally DATTA, ANSU, From
Bengal to the Cape: Bengali Slaves in South Africa from 17th to 19th Century,
Xlibris Corporation, 2013.
[209] Campos, J. J. A., ibid, pages 86-87.
[210] DATTA, ANSU, From Bengal to the
Cape: Bengali Slaves in South Africa from 17th to 19th Century, bid, at pages
89-90.
[211] O’Malley,
L.S.S., and Chakravarti, Manmohan, Bengal District Gazetteers, Howrah, Bengal
Secretariat Book Depot, Calcutta, 1909, History, Chapter II, Pages 20, 21.
[212]
Bahristan, page 2nd, 632-33, quoted at page 428, Karim, Abdul, Banglar Itihas
Mogle Amal [History of Bengal- Mogol Period], Jatiya Grontha Prokashan, 67
Pyari Das Road, Dhaka-1100, 3rd edition, 2011. Compare A. P. Fair, History of
Burma, 177.
[213] Inhabitants of Arakan, currently
referred to as Rakhine.
[214] Quoted
verbatim. Correspondence dated
18 June 1777 to Warren Hastings Esqr., Governor General & ca. at Fort
William sent from Islamabad [currently Chittagong, Bangladesh], at page 79 and
80, Bangladesh District Records, Chittagong, Volume 1, 1760-1787, Edited by
Sirajul Islam, published by The University of Dacca [currently spelled ‘Dhaka’]
1978. This statement is part of an official correspondence between the head of
the East India Company at Islamabad, currently Chittagong in south east
Bangladesh. This is the neighboring area of Arakan which is now part of
Myanmar. In this particular piece of correspondence written on June 18th
1777 CE the Chief of the Company at Chittagong (then Islamabad) is reporting of
“a revolution that has very lately happened at Arracan” where the son of the
king imprisoned the king in order to take control of the throne. The dethroned
king of Arakan and many of his followers are perhaps on their way to
Chittagong, into the Company’s territory, and the Chief is apprehensive of such
turmoil and reports further that the military weapons that they have at
Chittagong shall not be sufficient for the possible upcoming situations. He
makes a request for more troops and weaponry. He made the quoted comments in
the correspondence to provide a background scenario to the Governor General at
Fort Williams. The Company gained control of the Chittagong region, then known
as Islamabad, in 1760 when “Nawab Mir Qusim ceded this district to the East
India Company along with two other Bengal Districts- Burdwan and Mindnapur. The
Company’s Chittagong Council controlled the affairs of the Company in the whole
region east of the Meghna [River Meghna] uptill 1777”. “W.K. Firminger was
deputed by the Government of Bengal in 1911 to prepare a calendar of Chittagong
district records. His selections were published by Government in 1923 under the
title, Bengal District Records: Chittagong, vol. 1 (1760-1773). The project was
dropped after the publication of the first volume”. The current volume repeated
only a few records of the Firminger’s Chittagong vol. 1 considered to be
extremely important for historical research,
Preface by editor Sirajul Islam dated 1.8.1978, Bangladesh District
Records, Chittagong, ibid, page
(viii).
[215] East
India Company administrative correspondence sent to Tho’ Kelsall, Chief of
Dacca (Dhaka) Council of the Company on 13 January 1769, Bangladesh District Records, Chittagong, Volume
1, 1760-1787, ibid, page 4.
[216] East
India Company administrative correspondence sent to Governor General Warren
Hastings of the Company on 2 September 1775, Bangladesh District Records, Chittagong, Volume 1, 1760-1787, ibid, page 4.
[217] Produced verbatim.
[218] East
India Company administrative correspondence sent to Governor General Warren
Hastings of the Company on 15 December 1776, Bangladesh District Records, Chittagong, Volume 1, 1760-1787, ibid, page 5.
[219] Document
Number 1.24 dated 19 December 1776, Ibid, at page 5.
[220]
Document Number 1.25 dated 31 December 1776, Ibid, at page 5.
[221]
Document Number 1.26 dated 2 January 1777, Ibid, at page 5.
[222] Document
Number 1.27 dated 4 January 1777, Ibid, at page 5.
[223]
Document Number 1.28 dated 13 February 1778, Ibid, at page 6.
[224] East
India Company administrative correspondence sent to Governor General Warren
Hastings of the Company on 17 November 1775, Bangladesh District Records, Chittagong, Volume 1, 1760-1787, ibid, page 5.
[225] Page 77, Henderson, John W.; And
Others, Area Handbook for Burma, Foreign Area Studies (FAS) of The American
University, 1971.
[226] Page 77, Henderson, John W.; And
Others, Area Handbook for Burma, Foreign Area Studies (FAS) of The American
University, 1971.
কোন মন্তব্য নেই:
একটি মন্তব্য পোস্ট করুন