The office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) in New Delhi office acted disgracefully in the case of Than Mang, a Burmese refugee of Chin descent.  Instead of providing him with protection from persecution, it reported him to the Indian police and sought to have him deported to the place he fears most.  UNHCR’s behaviour—exacerbated by India’s instrumental and ad hoc approach to dealing with refugees based on their political usefulness—has left Than Mang sitting in a New Delhi jail cell. 

There are an estimated 50,000 ethnic Chin refugees from Burma in India, most of whom fled Burma after 1988 to escape the violent crackdown by the Burmese military regime against the Chin National Front (CNF). Any person suspected of being connected with the rebels faces arbitrary arrest and detention as well as torture. The majority of these refugees live in the Indian state of Mizoram, which borders Burma. After 1992, India withdrew all humanitarian assistance it had previously provided to Burmese refugees, preferring instead to build friendly relations with Burma by seeking to deport refugees fleeing that country. 

India has not ratified either the 1951 Refugees Convention or the 1967 Refugees Protocol. India also does not have its own domestic refugee law. As a result, obtaining “refugee status” in India is an arbitrary process subject to the discretion of executive authorities that bestow such status only on politically favored refugee groups such as Tamil refugees from Sri Lanka or Tibetan refugees from China. UNHCR, which is mandated “to safeguard the rights and well-being of refugees”, “to protect refugees”, and find “lasting solutions” to refugee problems, is thus of particular importance as a haven of last resort for politically unpopular refugees in India. Even if a state is not party to the Refugee Convention or the Refugee Protocol, any person meeting the definition of a “refugee”—namely someone who has left a country due to a “well-founded fear of persecution by reason of his race, religion, nationality or political opinion”—is entitled to the protection of the High Commissioner. 

Because UNHCR has no offices close to the India-Burma border, only the few refugees who make it to Delhi—a distance of over 2,500 kilometres from the border—have any chance of benefiting from UNHCR’s legal protection. UNHCR currently recognises some one thousand Burmese as “urban refugees”, but many more have been refused refugee status, and have made credible allegations of arbitrariness and insensitivity in the handling of their applications. UNHCR-New Delhi staff behavior has even driven some asylum seekers to take a huge risk and protest against their brusque treatment and the rejection of their applications by UNHCR staff. In response to these protests, UNHCR-New Delhi officials have called the local Delhi police and asked them to remove the protestors from outside the organisation’s premises.  

Than Mang’s Story 

Than Mang is an ethnic Chin refugee from Tlangpi, a village in Burma 10 kilometres east of the Indian border. His father, Zion Chum, is a Christian pastor and headmaster of a primary school. On 10 December 2002, Than Mang crossed the international border to Farkawn village in the Indian state of Mizoram to collect a number of Bibles, which are considered contraband by the Burmese government. 

While inside Indian territory, he encountered a member of the Indian army whose family lives in Than Mang’s home village. Than Mang agreed to deliver a package to them on the soldier’s behalf. On re-crossing the border, Than Mang was stopped and searched by the Burmese Army, who found the contraband Bibles and the package, which contained a photograph of the Indian serviceman in military uniform. The Burmese soldiers mistook the Indian soldier in the photograph for a member of the Chin National Army (CNA, the armed wing of the Chin National Front) and arrested Than Mang on suspicion of being a rebel. The contraband Bibles provided further basis for the arrest. However, on the way to the Lungler Army Camp where he was to be detained, the group encountered members of the CNA. Both sides opened fire on one another, and in the confusion Than Mang managed to escape and flee back over the border into the Indian state of Mizoram. 

While there, he received a package from his father and also a letter, in which his father warned him that the Burmese authorities were looking for him, and that were he to return he would be detained and face possible torture or other ill-treatment. There was also a letter from the Burmese Government to Than Mang’s father, stating that if his son was not surrendered to the security forces, Than Mang’s father himself would be arrested. Nonetheless his father advised Than Mang to stay in India and seek asylum. Than Mang fled to Delhi in early 2003, not expecting to be given asylum by the Indian Government in Mizoram in light of its unfavourable attitude towards Chin refugees, but hoping to appeal to UNHCR in Delhi for help. 

Well-founded fear of persecution 

As support for his well-founded fear of persecution, Than Mang included in his UNHCR application a copy of the threatening letter from the Burmese authorities to his father. He was told by UNHCR officials that the letter would be copied and returned to him, but when he later requested his letter, he was told that it had been lost and that no record had been kept of its contents. Several months later, he was informed that his application had been denied. 

Than Mang remained in Delhi for the next two years without legal status, unable to work and without UNHCR protection. Because he had no additional evidence to substantiate his story, he was unable to reapply for refugee status. In 2005, however, he received another package from his family in Tlangpi. His father had been arrested and the Burmese Government had sent a letter threatening to arrest other family members if Than Mang did not return to Burma. With this new evidence, Than Mang was able to secure another interview with UNHCR officials, who nonetheless failed to consider this new evidence. His application was once again rejected on the basis of insufficient evidence, and Than Mang was advised that his case had been permanently closed.  

Than Mang wrote a number of letters to UNHCR asking that his file be reopened and due consideration given to the new evidence, but his letters remained unanswered. Against the advice of UNHCR officials and members of the Chin community, on 27 November 2006, Than Mang launched a protest against his treatment by UNHCR. He camped outside UNHCR’s New Delhi office and vowed not to eat until his case was reopened. He had now been in Delhi for four years without any legal rights and at the mercy of the Indian authorities who could arrest him at any time for being in the country without a permit. 

Four days after Than Mang began his hunger strike, a senior UNHCR official in the New Delhi office complained to the Lodhi Road Police Station in New Delhi of his presence, and requested that “action as appropriate” be taken to remove him. Though addressed to the police, UNHCR’s request was framed as prioritising Than Mang’s health; his removal was urged as a measure to prevent him from becoming weaker and unconscious. Than Mang was arrested on 4 December 2006 for engaging in an illegal political protest. He was taken briefly to a hospital before being brought by the police to the Burmese Embassy.  However, because the embassy lacked the resources to deport him, it refused to take him into custody. The Lodhi Road Police therefore placed him in lockup and registered a case under the Foreigners Act, 1946 against him. At present Than Mang is in custody at New Delhi’s Tihar Jail, facing a possible five-year prison sentence and/or deportation for being in India without a valid permit. 

The only way Than Mang can avoid conviction at this point is if UNHCR withdraws its complaint against him. The agency, however, has so far declined even to support Than Mang’s applications for bail, which have now been refused twice. UNHCR’s mandate to protect refugees should necessarily preclude it from prosecuting bona fide asylum seekers, whose application for refugee status they have mishandled with gross indifference. And it should certainly preclude UNHCR from callously allowing its actions to form the basis for criminal charges against an asylum seeker under India’s Foreigners Act, which is outdated, draconian and discriminatory. Than Mang has the evidence to prove that he faces certain arrest and possible torture if returned to Myanmar.  Urgent action is needed to prevent this from happening. 

The UNHCR-New Delhi office appears increasingly reluctant to perform its core mandate of refugee protection. Indeed, the agency’s willingness to expose asylum seekers to prosecution and deportation defeats the very purpose for which it was established, and instead makes it complicit in persecution. 

UNHCR-New Delhi has lost its way.  Its shameful behaviour in the case of Than Mang betrays everything the agency should stand for.

 Human Rights Features