UNHCR should mind its own business

A Reuters’ news report that appeared in Republica on August 28 said that UN officials have warned that “up to two million children in the impoverished Himalayan nation of Nepal are at risk of becoming stateless” meaning that they will remain without citizenship of any country if the government approves strict citizenship criteria in its new constitution. It quotes a United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) official in Kathmandu saying that "it can be one or two million children from these hundreds of thousands of mixed marriages who would be stateless. But it would not just stop there ... the children of these people would also be stateless. It would continue like this for generations."

The report advocates that all those who are born out of wedlock between foreign and Nepali citizens be given nationality. It also states that the UNHCR is going to launch a campaign against the proposed provision. The reason for this kind of reaction and lobbying in favor of foreigners is due to the report of the High-Level Committee of Constituent Assembly, which has stated in one of the clauses that a Nepali citizenship certificate by descent can only be issued to those children both of whose parents are Nepali nationals. The UNHCR is advocating for citizenship to children even if just one of their parents is a Nepali citizen.

This comment of the UNHCR official speaks a lot about how the foreign agencies are working in Nepal and how much interference they openly make on the internal affairs of the country. Some time back, this scribe had pointed out in Republica (“ILO & its intrusive behavior,” February 23, 2010) the interfering ways of International Labor Organization in connection with a convention. There is a need now to really look into this kind of intrusiveness at this particular juncture when the country´s governance is weak and outsiders have a free hand.

First of all, UNHCR in this country is particularly concerned with refugees. Its role in Nepal is limited. Nepal is not a party to any of the Refugee Conventions. The UNHCR´s role is limited to look after the situation of those refugees that we have been having for quite some time and render, if there be any need, assistance for their well-being with the consent of the government. Nepal is not a party to the UN Convention on Reducing Statelessness and hence it does not carry any obligation in this regard. The UN is not authorized to meddle in the internal affairs of any country unless it is clearly mandated to do so. Since the issue of citizenship is entirely a domestic affair of the country, the untoward comments of UNHCR official were simply uncalled for.

Secondly, the issue that has been raised by UNHCR in regard to the children born out of mixed marriages is simply not true. The children who are born in Nepal out of such wedlock need not have to be stateless. They can have acquired citizenship. Two categories of citizenship have been proposed in the new constitution: Acquired citizenship and citizenship by descent. Moreover, a child born outside Nepal out of wedlock between a foreigner and a Nepali can also have Nepali citizenship under certain conditions including a residency of 15 years in Nepal.

Nepal has already had to bear the brunt of millions of people who have been leaving their homeland due to many reasons. In this context, it is just right that we should be strict in our citizenship requirement. The issue of citizenship is an internal affair and UNCHR must desist from making such comments.

Thirdly, the allegation that the situation of statelessness will continue for generations is equally erroneous. No proposed clause implies such a result even distantly. Therefore, it is not only surprising but also objectionable that a UN agency like UNHCR gives wrong information and advocates for something that is not simply true.

The reason for proposing such a clause is for an entirely different reason than to make children stateless. Therefore, the issue raised by the UN official is simply erroneous. The officials should bear in mind that Nepal is a small country sandwiched between two giants and populous countries of the world. Moreover, with India, the border is so open that any South Asian can simply walk into our country via the southern neighbor because of similar physical attributes between the people of Nepal and these countries.

Nepal has already had to bear the brunt of millions of such people who have been leaving their homeland due to many reasons be it the 1971 liberation movement of Bangladesh or forced eviction of Nepali-speaking population from Bhutan or the fleeing of Tibetans after the abdication of Dalai Lama from Tibet. In this context, it is just right that we should be strict in our citizenship requirement. The issue of citizenship is an internal affair and UNCHR must desist from making such comments.

The writer is former Chief Commissioner of Commission for the Investigation of Abuse of Authority

surya@upd.wlink.com.np