Refugees International logo
donate now

Lives on Hold: Asia

stateless

GLOBAL REVIEW OF STATELESSNESS

Azerbaijan

There are an estimated 270,000-290,000 Meskhetians living in the former USSR, with 80,000-100,000 in Kazakhstan, 50,000-70,000 in Russia, 40,000-60,000 in Azerbaijan, 25,000-30,000 in Kyrgyzstan, 15,000-20,000 in Uzbekistan, and 5,000-10,000 in the Ukraine.  There are also estimated to be 20,000 Meskhetians in Turkey.   While no one country considers deported Meskhetians to be their nationals, efforts to repatriate Meskhetians and provide citizenship in Azerbaijan and Turkey have taken root over the last decade. 

The Meskhetian (also Meshketian) Turks originally lived in the Meskhetian Range region (also known as the Akhalsikhe Region) in southern Republic of Georgia located along the Turkish border.  Although Meskhetian Turks had been subject to repression and violence in the 19th and 20th centuries, they had no clear sense of ethnic identity or unity until the 1940’s.  At that time between 115,000 and 200,000 Meskhetian Turks were deported to Central Asia because the group proved resistant to Soviet assimilation and because the group lived in a strategic border with Turkey.  Under Stalin’s leadership in 1945, another 40,000 Meskhetians were deported from Georgia.  Unlike other populations deported under Stalin’s reign, the Meskhetian people were not allowed to return home in the 1950’s. 

In 1999, Georgia promised the Council of Europe to have the Meskhtian Turk population repatriated within twelve years as a condition of membership into the Council.  Fewer than a thousand Meskhetians have been repatriated due to Georgian popular and governmental resistance.  Many Meskhetian Turks cannot speak, read or write the Georgian language, presenting another major barrier to repatriation. 

Turkey and Azerbaijan have allowed Meskhetian Turks to gain citizenship.  Turkey opened its doors to the Meskhetian Turk population in 1990, and about 20,000 Meskhetians have immigrated since then.  In Azerbaijan, UNHCR helped implement a 1998 citizenship law.  Some Meskhetian men, however, do not apply for citizenship until after they turn 29 and are no longer compelled to serve in the Azerbaijan army.  This delay puts them at increased risk for statelessness because Azerbaijan considers such evasion a criminal offense, and those who put it off are not granted citizenship.  

Bangladesh

Stateless populations in Bangladesh include Bihari, Rohingya, and individuals of Indian origin.

Bihari.  The Bihari have ties with Pakistan and Bangladesh, but both countries have refused to offer full protection and citizenship to these people.  For the past two decades, 250,000-300,000 Biharis have lived in 66 camps throughout Bangladesh where they have suffered discrimination, severe demographic stress, poor conditions, and lack of basic amenities. 

During the East Pakistani struggle for independence in the 1970s, the Biharis sided with western Pakistanis. However, following India’s military intervention, which helped in creating Bangladesh, violence between the Biharis and Bangladeshis flared. The Biharis were stripped of their properties and several thousand were jailed.

Over the decades, the Biharis have tried to draw international attention to their plight by means including street demonstrations and hunger strikes. Yet not much has been done to change their conditions, and there has been no headway toward a durable solution.

Rohingya.  The Arakan State of Burma which borders Bangladesh, is inhabited by two ethnic communities, the Rakhine Buddhists and the Rohingya Muslims. The Rakhine Buddhists are the majority group and is

to the Burman in terms of religion and language, while the minority group, the Rohingya, is ethnically and religiously related to the people from the region of Chittagong in southern Bangladesh.

Around the time of World War II, communal riots erupted between the two ethnic groups and after Burma’s independence in 1948, Muslims carried out an unsuccessful armed rebellion, demanding an independent state. This resulted in a backlash against the Muslims that led to their removal from civil posts, restrictions on their movement, and confiscation of their property.

Under the military regime of General Ne Win, beginning in 1962, Muslim residents of Arakan were labeled illegal immigrants.  The 1974 Emergency Immigration Act took Burmese nationality from the Rohingyas, making them foreigners in their own country.

Following the takeover of the country by the military in 1988, there has been increased army presence in Arakan state, more human rights abuses, and discrimination.  Individuals need authorization to travel outside of their villages, their land is confiscated by the government for use by Buddhist settlers, their mosques are destroyed by the military and they are routinely subjected to forced labor.

The Rohingya escaped to Bangladesh in large numbers, with the biggest influx in 1991-1992, when about 250,000 crossed the border.  Although many of these refugees have since then been repatriated to Burma, there are still just under 20,000 refugees living in two camps in southern Bangladesh.  The refugees are completely dependent on UN and aid agencies for food.  At first, the Bangladesh government welcomed the Rohingyas and made efforts to accommodate them.  Since 1995, new arrivals have been denied camp access. There are an estimated 100,000-200,000 Rohingya living illegally outside without access to protection or humanitarian assistance. 

The Government of Bangladesh, in order to improve relations and economic ties with Burma, declared that the remaining Rohingya refugees in the camps should be repatriated.  Those who are forcibly returned or refouled often have no choice but to re-enter Bangladesh.

Indian Enclaves. Nearly 200,000 people living in Indian enclaves along the Bangladeshi border have no voting rights because of a dispute between the two countries over carrying out a census there.   Many residents feel they are stateless and belong to neither country.   They say they risk their lives if they try to cross over into India, and are often harassed by the security forces of both countries.

Brunei

There are a number of stateless persons, mostly ethnic Chinese, who are not automatically given citizenship and its attendant rights, including the right to own land.  Stateless persons and permanent residents are entitled to free education at government schools, but they are not entitled to subsidized medical care.  One reform to the nationality law allows some older stateless persons over age 50 to acquire citizenship by passing an oral, rather than a written, nationality test.

Also, under the Brunei Nationality Act, citizenship is transmitted through males only.  Female citizens who are married to foreigners or bear children by foreign fathers cannot transmit citizenship to their children, even when such children are born in the country.  This has resulted in the creation of a large population of stateless children, estimated at some 5,000.  In October 2002, a reformed nationality law was passed that now allows women to pass their nationality to their children.

Burma

There are at least three groups of stateless persons in Burma, the Rohingya (see also Bangladesh and Malaysia), people of Indian origin, and children of Burmese parents born in Thailand. 

Rohingya.  Rohingya Muslims are denied citizenship rights by the Citizenship Act of 1982, and subject to forced labor, relocation, rape, and plunder by the military.  After UNHCR intervened in the 1990’s, they were issued temporary registration cards that state the cards themselves are not evidence of citizenship.

As a direct consequence of their lack of legal status, the Rohingyas are deprived of freedom of movement.  Traveling outside villages requires several passes, which they have to pay for and generally cannot afford.  Lack of movement denies access to health facilities, higher education, employment opportunities, and markets.  Added to forced labor, land confiscation, rape and other abuses, the Rohingyas’ statelessness creates intolerable and dehumanizing conditions that lead to forced migrations.

Persons of Indian Origin.  There are thousands of persons of Indian origin (PIOs) who have been living in Burma for over four generations and yet do not belong either to India or Burma.   The last official census in Burma was held in 1983, and the results published in 1986.  At that time, there were approximately 428,000 persons of Indian origin in Burma.  The current population is estimated to be about 600,000.  However, according to a report commissioned by the Indian government, there could be 2.5 million PIOs living in Burma.  It is estimated that only about 2,000 of such persons hold Indian passports.  In other words, an essentially unknown number of people (between 500,000-2,500,000) are stateless, possessing no citizenship documents. 

Though they have been living in the country for more than four generations, speak Burmese fluently, and have adopted local customs, they are still not Burma’s citizens due to lack of documents required by the Burmese citizenship law of 1982. They cannot travel outside the country and face low economic status.

In addition, the Burmese government refuses to give citizenship to the children of Burmese parents born in Thailand.  The reasons for refusing Burmese citizenship are:  1) the children do not have birth certificates; 2) the parents left Burma illegally; and/or 3) the parents themselves were never provided with proper citizenship papers.  Neither recognized by the Burmese government nor wanted by the Thai government, many of the children are stateless and live their lives in limbo.

Cambodia

Several groups of people are affected by statelessness in Cambodia.  For example, a law defining Khmer nationals as people whose parents are Khmer nationals, makes it difficult for persons belonging to minority groups, in particular ethnic Vietnamese and indigenous people, to establish their citizenship.

A problem also arises among victims of trafficking.  Believed to number in the thousands, some 80 percent of people trafficked in Cambodia are Vietnamese women and girls.  One report noted the role of statelessness in trafficking in which a 15-year old Vietnamese girl was sold into prostitution in Cambodia, then passed to Hong Kong and Macau, where she saved money and returned to Cambodia to pursue her case in court.  When the alleged trafficker was acquitted, the girl fled back to Vietnam, but the situation got more complicated yet.  Her father never registered her at birth, so she is stateless and the Vietnamese government does not recognize her.

Small numbers of Ameriasians in Cambodia also face statelessness.  According to a bill presented in the U.S. House of Representatives in 2003, Amerasians born in five Asian countries, including Cambodia, between December 21, 1950 and October 22, 1982, can be eligible for American citizenship under the Amerasian Immigration Act of 1982.  The bill has been referred to the Subcommittee on Immigration, Border Security, and Claims.  It is expected to be reintroduced to the House in the upcoming session.

China

Anecdotal evidence suggests that trafficking of North Korean women is widespread and appears to pervade villages in Jilin province.  In one village, a North Korean woman said she knows of fifteen other North Korean women living nearby with their Chinese husbands.  Out of these fifteen, seven or eight of them were trafficked.  Most of them now have children with their Chinese husbands.  Since the Chinese Government will not give legal residency to the North Korean wives of Chinese men, this has engendered another social problem: lack of legal rights for their children.  Thus a growing number of children in Jilin province are stateless and have no access to formal education. 

Hong Kong

There is little contemporary information about the situation of children of Indochinese refugees in Hong Kong.  The original refugees entered Hong Kong after the 1979 China-Vietnam war, when Vietnam expelled thousands of ethnic Chinese.  Many of them ultimately migrated to Hong Kong.  Under Hong Kong law at the time, if a migrant settled in China before coming to Hong Kong they were regarded as an illegal immigrant and would be repatriated to China.  China, meanwhile, refused to accept many of these migrants because they were viewed as Vietnamese or Republic of China nationals, although Taiwan and Vietnam refused to recognize these migrants as nationals.

India/Pakistan

Tens of thousands of people, including Chakmas, Hajongs, Kashmiris, and Punjabis are deprived of the right of nationality.  In addition, a recent amendment to India’s nationality law in 2003 means that children born to an Indian parent in India with one foreign "illegal" parent will not receive citizenship, increasing the risk of statelessness as they might not receive anything else either.

Chakmas and Hajongs.  About 30,000 Chakmas and Hajongs from the Chittagong Hill Tracts of then East Pakistan (now Bangladesh) migrated to India and were settled in Aruanchal Pradesh.  Children of these migrants have not been granted the right to nationality.  Now numbering some 65,000, many Chakmas have the right to citizenship and to vote, but the government has systematically denied them access to social, economic, and political rights to which they are entitled.

Kashmiris and Punjabis.  The area of Kashmir has been at the center of a territorial dispute between India and Pakistan since the two nations gained their independence in 1947. Under the partition plan provided by the Indian Independence Act of 1947, Kashmir was free to accede to India or Pakistan. The Maharaja, Hari Singh, wanted to stay independent but eventually decided to accede to India, signing over key powers to the Indian Government, in return for military aid.  In addition to the rival claims of Delhi and Islamabad to the territory, there has been a growing and often violent separatist movement against Indian rule in Kashmir since 1989.

There are approximately 1.5 million displaced Kashmiris.  Under Indian law, Kashmiris are entitled to the same rights as citizens.  Some 20,000 Hindu families from Pakistan who went to the Indian side after the partition riots are still stateless.  India has reportedly amended its Citizenship Act of 1955 and Citizen Rule of 1965 authorizing the district magistrate of Jaisalmer to grant Indian citizenship to Pakistanis who have been living in the border district for the last five years.  These individuals may acquire citizenship soon.  Kashmiri Pandits represented approximately 12 percent of the population in the Valley in 1947.  Since 1989, at the beginning of the more recent 15-year conflict, about 300,000 families have been forced out.  In addition, over a hundred thousand Punjabi refugees fled to Jammu and Kashmir from neighboring Sialkot district of Punjab province (now in Pakistan) in 1947 during the partition.  Until now, they have not been granted citizenship.  The descendents of these stateless people continue to be denied the right to nationality.

Indonesia

Several stateless populations are recognized in Indonesia, including Afghans, Chinese, and East Timorese.

Afghans.  In 2001, many people fled the fighting in Afghanistan, including a number that fled by boat.  When the Australian Navy found vessels carrying Afghans, they were deported to Indonesia because
 Indonesia was often the last stop before Australia.  Indonesian authorities permitted asylum seekers to remain until UNHCR processed their claims.  The asylum seekers were sometimes detained in refugee camps or ‘quarantined’ in other places.  Many Afghans simply walked out of the camps and integrated themselves into Indonesian society.  There is little information about their location, situation, or numbers. 

Chinese.  In 1958, the People’s Republic of China claimed that every Chinese person in the world was a Chinese citizen.  The Indonesian government responded by giving individuals of Chinese descent the option of choosing their citizenship.  Chinese ships were supposed to carry back those opting for Chinese citizenship, but the ships came only once and many were left with no citizenship at all. 
   
In 1965, relations with Beijing were frozen and the communist party, with which many Chinese in Indonesia were affiliated, was blamed for an attempted coup in Indonesia.  The Indonesian government then issued many citizenship-related regulations.  It became very difficult for those of Chinese descent to obtain legal documents, including ID cards which are necessary for legal marriage.  Furthermore, children born out of official wedlock were not recognized by the state. 

Suharto saw the ethnic Chinese as having a place in Indonesia’s development because he could use them without worrying that they would become a political threat because they are a minority group.  The elite ethnic Chinese became wealthier during the deregulation of the 1980’s.  However, many ethnic Chinese were still stateless, without ID cards or citizenship certificates unless they were obtained through bribes.  To correct this, Beijing announced in 1992 that it would issue passports by January 1993 for stateless Chinese.  The citizenship document requirement was abolished in 1996, but authorities still require the documents from ethnic Chinese in some instances, where ethnic Indonesians only need birth certificates.  In 1999, the Indonesian economy collapsed, and Chinese communities throughout the country, especially in Jakarta, were attacked.  Hundreds of people were killed, ethnic Chinese women were systematically raped, and thousands fled the country.
 
By 2000, Jakarta stated that out of the 208,820 registered stateless ethnic Chinese, 140,000 would receive Indonesian citizenship by the year’s end.  However, the stateless ethnic Chinese had to apply, and of those who did, over 8,000 were denied.  Discriminatory measures still affect both the stateless and citizen ethnic Chinese living in Indonesia; they are targets for extortion, and imprisonment is often a penalty if identity cards are not produced to police during raids.

It is possible for ethnic Chinese to obtain identity cards, but only if they pay about Rp 25,000 ($2.80) and have a Citizenship Certificate (also difficult to obtain).  There are more than 12 bureaucratic institutions involved in the process of issuing citizenship certificates and many seeking the certificates simply give up because of the process’s complexity.  Without citizenship certificates, it can be difficult or impossible to obtain business licenses, credit applications and university applications.  

East Timorese. After 450 years of rule by the Portuguese and a brief period of independence, East Timor was annexed by Indonesia at the end of 1975, resulting in a heavy Indonesian military presence in the region.  This recent period has been characterized by conflict, forced resettlement, and human rights violations.

The United Nations responded to the crisis in East Timor.  The United Nations Transitional Administration for East Timor (UNTAET) took up the administration of East Timor, including humanitarian assistance and emergency rehabilitation. Meanwhile, the Government of the Republic of Indonesia and UNHCR worked together to facilitate durable solutions for the estimated 250,000 East Timorese refugees living in West Timor and other parts of Indonesia.  Camps were established in several areas near the border in Indonesia, the largest of which were in Atambua and Kupang. Widespread malnutrition and disease, especially among children, were reported in the camps.  The population also suffered from high rates of domestic violence and rape.

After East Timor gained independence in May 2002, an estimated 220,000 East Timor refugees returned home. And in December 2002, the declaration of the cessation of refugee status for East Timorese refugees living in Indonesia resulted in a further trickle of returns.  The estimated 28,000 East Timorese who remained in Indonesia (mostly former militia, military, police, government officials and their families) after this declaration are no longer officially considered refugees.  

In September and October 2003, the Indonesian Directorate for Population Registration (Ministry of Home Affairs) conducted a registration of all East Timorese residing in Indonesia.  One of the main objectives of this registration was to reconfirm the Indonesian citizenship of those East Timorese who opted to remain in Indonesia as Indonesian citizens.  East Timorese could also opt for Timor-Leste citizenship and stay in Indonesia as aliens with a valid resident permit.  The vast majority of those who registered opted for Indonesian citizenship.  A minority chose not to be Indonesian citizens, but, in the absence of bilateral arrangements between Indonesia and Timor-Leste, the latter individuals were unable to apply for Timor-Leste citizenship, thus left in limbo in terms of citizenship.  If not rapidly resolved, this problem could lead to a potential situation of de facto statelessness.  UNHCR is supporting a project implemented by the Indonesian and Timor-Leste authorities who have agreed to verify all the cases of those East Timorese currently in Indonesia who opted not to Indonesian citizens.

Japan

Koreans living in Japan today are descended from a population that entered the country during its 1910 to 1945 colonial rule.  Many of these Koreans were brought over to work in mines, factories, and other jobs.  Japanese colonists kidnapped women and girls to become “comfort women,” or sex slaves.  During this time, there were about 2.3 million Koreans living and working in Japan as citizens. However, after World War II the Japanese government stripped Koreans of their Japanese citizenship and repatriated them to Korea.  In 1952, the Korean population was declared to be resident aliens, but nationality laws perpetuating jus sanguinis prevented Koreans from fully integrating into Japanese society.  Even Koreans born in Japan did not qualify for Japanese citizenship.  To become a Japanese citizen, Koreans often had to give up their Korean names and, in effect, their Korean identities.  As a result of these government policies, only 30 percent of the Korean population has been naturalized in the past forty years. 

In the late 1970’s the Japanese government enacted reforms that made the legal status of Korean residents more secure and gave them social welfare benefits such as social security and health insurance based on the rights and obligations the Koreans filled as tax-paying citizens.  In 1984, children from inter-marriages between Japanese and Koreans could obtain Japanese citizenship through either their father or mother.  In 1991, all former colonial subjects and descendents were given more options to become Japanese Nationals with more rights than other foreigners living in Japan.  In 1995, the Japanese Supreme Court ruled that local and regional governments could allow Korean permanent residents to vote.  So far, 15 percent of the governments have done so. 

Although the standing of Koreans in Japan has improved greatly since the Second World War, Koreans still do not receive the full benefits that Japanese citizens enjoy.  Korean children attending Japanese schools are often taunted and those attending Korean schools must take the same university entrance exams as drop-outs because the education in Korean schools, although often identical to that received in Japanese schools, is not recognized by the Japanese Ministry of Education.  Furthermore, if a Korean is not a Japanese national, they cannot serve in most levels of the civil service and cannot vote where the 1995 Supreme Court decision is not implemented.

In 2000, Tokyo put into effect programs to protect the welfare of stateless children, whose births their mothers refused to register for fear of forcible repatriation. According to Justice Ministry statistics, 720 stateless minors under the age of five were in the country in 2000.

Kazakhstan

Kazakhs were forced to flee political turmoil and repression, forced collectivization, and a hunger crisis in the 1920s and 1930s.  During this period, the population dropped from 3.63 million to 2.31 million.  Many Kazakhs did not return to their homeland until it received independence from Soviet rule in 1991.  At this point, Kazakhstan initiated a program of "Kazakhization" to improve the percentage of ethnic Kazakhs and to offset the large-scale emigration of ethnic Russians and Germans.  Ethnic Kazakhs were promoted in the government bureaucracy, educated in their language, and invited to return home.  They are referred to by the government as oralman.

While many ethnic Kazakhs did return home, only about half received Kazakh citizenship by 2002, and the rest remain stateless.  This occurred because the government implemented a quota system that limited the number of ethnic Kazakhs allowed to repatriate each year.  The unregistered families are at risk for employer abuse, arrest, poverty, poor education and social exclusion. 

It is believed that the plight of the stateless oralman is improving.  In 2002, UNHCR reported 100,000 stateless ethnic Kazakhs at the beginning of the year with 35,000 new arrivals and a decrease of 51,800 stateless oralman.  By the beginning of 2003, UNHCR reported only 83,200 stateless ethnic Kazakhs, a number that decreased by 78 percent by the year’s end, when the group numbered 18,594.

Korea, Republic of

The Republic of Korea faces several issues related to citizenship.

There are approximately 20,000 ethnic Chinese in Korea. They cannot obtain citizenship or become public servants, and may have difficulty being hired by some major corporations. Due to legal, as well as societal discrimination, many ethnic Chinese have emigrated from Korea to other countries since the 1970's.

In June 1998, the Government passed legislation to allow a female citizen to transmit citizenship to her child regardless of the citizenship of the child's father.  Amerasians face no legal discrimination but informal discrimination is prevalent, making it more difficult for them to succeed in academia, business, or government.  A bill to grant automatic American citizenship to some Amerasians was presented to the U.S. House of Representatives in 2003.  According to the bill, Amerasians, who were born in five Asian countries, including South Korea, will be eligible for automatic American citizenship under the Amerasian Immigration Act of 1982 (applies only to those who were born in these five countries between December 31, 1950, and October 22, 1982). The bill clearly stipulates that Amerasians are also American citizens, so they are entitled to have all the rights, privileges and responsibilities as such.  It has been referred to the Subcommittee on Immigration, Border Security, and Claims.  It is expected to be reintroduced to the Congress in the upcoming session.

Kyrgyzstan

Ethnic Kyrgyz fled Tajikistan during the five-year civil war that erupted following the country’s independence from the Soviet Union in 1991. Between 6,000 and 7,000 have since repatriated, and some 4,000 have been naturalized.  More recently, others have been naturalized (89 men and women – the actual number of people who obtained Kyrgyzstan nationality was much higher as children obtain citizenship through their parents.  Thus, the total of newly naturalized individuals may be several hundred persons) leaving some 6,000.  The naturalization of Tajik refugees in Kyrgyzstan is the first time any country in the region has offered citizenship to significant numbers in response to a refugee influx.

Laos

As is true in many countries in the region, children born to one national parent and an American in Laos do not enjoy the rights provided for by the constitution.  To help change this, a bill was introduced into the U.S. House of Representatives in 2003, under which Amerasians in five countries including Laos will be eligible for automatic American citizenship under the Amerasian Immigration Act of 1982 December 31, 1950, and October 22, 1982.  The bill has been referred to the Subcommittee on Immigration, Border Security, and Claims.  It is expected to be reintroduced to the Congress in the upcoming session.

Malaysia

Rohingya and Acehnese are two of the groups facing statelessness in Malaysia.

Rohingya. Approximately10,000 to 15,000 Rohingya who fled to Malaysia because of persecution by the Burmese military are stateless and at risk for deportation, bribes, and abuse.  Upon entering Malaysia, the Burmese Rohingya find themselves in a no less precarious situation. 
In 1999, an estimated 1,473 Rohingya applied for refugee status in Malaysia.  Only 43 were granted this status and are thus eligible for resettlement in a third country.   External monitors, such as the UNHCR, are not allowed inside the camps to monitor conditions.  Former detainees report difficult conditions within the camps, a lack of food, poor sanitation facilities, and prisoner abuse. 

If the Rohingya manage to avoid arrest, detention, and deportation, they are still at risk within Malaysia.  Although Malaysia’s constitution provides citizenship to children born on its territory who would otherwise be stateless, it does not extend this provision to Rohinya children.  Because they do not have permission to live legally in Malaysia, their children cannot attend school, families are at risk of arrest and detention, and the population is impoverished.  Jobs available to them are low-wage, and they put themselves at increased risk for arrest and deportation by working. 

In November 2004, the Malaysian government decided to grant temporary stay permits to the Rohingya.

Acehnese.  Acehnese arrive in Malaysia each year seeking refuge from an ongoing secession battle in their home province.  The government chooses to view any incoming refugees or asylum seekers as illegal immigrants, places them in detention camps, and eventually deports them.  The Acehnese, because they are involved in a secession movement from Indonesia, believe that they are stateless.

Nepal

Individuals from Tibet and Bhutan are stateless in Nepal. 

Tibetans.  An estimated 20,000 Tibetan refugees are in Nepal, many of whom live in Kathmandu and surrounding areas, have no defined legal status, and are generally divided into two classes: (1) residents who entered Nepal before 1989 and their children, and (2) new arrivals with no right to remain in Nepal. Tibetans cannot travel to certain restricted regions of Nepal, typically those near the border with China. Nonetheless, an estimated 3,000 refugees travel back to Tibet each year.

While Nepal’s Citizenship Act makes many Tibetan residents theoretically eligible for citizenship, the government does not view citizenship as a viable option for Tibetans. Candidates for citizenship must also demonstrate that they have made or can make a substantial contribution to science, philosophy, art, literature, and world peace. Other officials argue Tibetans never relinquished their prior citizenship.

Bhutanese.  Over 100,000 individuals of ethnic Nepali origin were stripped of their citizenship and forcibly expelled from Bhutan in the early 1990s, and their right to return has been systematically obstructed by the Bhutanese government.  They are also refused citizenship in Nepal.

The stateless Bhutanese in Nepal are predominantly Hindus from southern Bhutan, ethnically and culturally distinct from the majority ethnic group and ruling elite, the Buddist Ngalongs from northern Bhutan.  Most of the individuals sought safety in Nepal where they now live in camps administered by UNHCR.  After many rounds of joint ministerial talks between Nepal and Bhutan, the refugees are no closer to returning to their homes in Bhutan.  Bhutanese in Nepal are currently under consideration for the U.S. resettlement program.

Pakistan

Pakistan has challenges of statelessness related to Kashmiris (see India/Pakistan) and Afghans.  The UNHCR estimates that at one point there were about 1.1 million Afghan refugees in the 200 camps in Pakistan.  The number of Afghan children born in Pakistan since the crisis began a quarter a century ago many number in the millions.  UNHCR initiated a program to issue birth certificates to newborn Afghans in the North West Frontier Province.  It is uncertain whether the UNHCR will have the resources to extend the program to the older camps or to cover any child born before 2003.  Issuing birth certificates to Afghan children born outside the camps in Pakistan would be even more difficult.  The government of Pakistan and the UNHCR have recently agreed to undertake a census of all Afghan citizens living in Pakistan.

Philippines

At the end of the Vietnam War, 1.5 million people fled the country. Many of them set out in the South China Sea on rickety boats to avoid political persecution in their home country and reached neighboring countries in the region, including the Philippines. To slow the massive movements, 74 countries signed the UNHCR-sponsored Comprehensive Plan of Action.  Vietnamese boat people had been granted automatic refugee status, but under the 1989 agreement they would be required to go through status evaluations. The screening process was slow and corrupt, leaving thousands stateless in the Philippines.

In 1996, UNHCR withdrew its support and resources.  As many still fear persecution in Vietnam and no repatriation program currently exists, it is difficult for the Vietnamese to return. Without permanent residency status in the Philippines refugees are not permitted to travel, own property, or to work, and they do not have access to social and health resources.  In 2004, the United States agreed to consider the permanent resettlement for most of the 1,855 stateless Vietnamese in the Philippines. The U.S. has said there will be an interview process for the nearly 700 families.

Sri Lanka

Stateless groups in Sri Lanka include Estate Tamils and some individuals of Chinese heritage.

Estate Tamils.  British colonialists brought Estate Tamils, now about 5.5 percent of the population, from India in the 19th century to work on the tea and rubber plantations.  When the former colony gained independence in 1947 and passed the 1948 Ceylon Citizenship Act, Estate Tamils in Sri Lankan were denied nationality and stripped of all civil rights.  From 1954 various agreements were concluded between the two countries. Under these agreements 506,000 person applied for Indian citizenship and 470,000 persons applied for Ceylon citizenship.  Ceylon citizenship was granted in the proportion of 4 to 7, linked to repatriation. Out of the persons that applied for Indian citizenship about 330,000 had been repatriated by1983, while the remainder expressed their interest to stay in Sri Lanka.  In 1988, under pressure from civil strife in the north, Sri Lanka enacted legislation granting citizenship to all Up Country Tamils. Although problems persisted for those whose parents or grandparents may have applied for Indian citizenship under former agreements with India, but who never repatriated to India. Officially included on an application for Indian citizenship, they were not entitled to Sri Lankan citizenship despite being born on the island.  Reports of discrimination and hostility in India against the repatriated Estate Tamils led to a stalemate of the process.

In October 2003, a bill was unanimously passed by the Sri Lankan parliament, and in December of the same year, a registration campaign was undertaken by the government of Sri Lanka and UNHCR.  The bill provides for the granting of citizenship to all persons of Indian origin who had lived in Sri Lanka since October 30, 1964, and their decendents.  So far citizenship was granted to approximately 190,000 heads of households.  The total number of stateless persons was anticipated to be 300,000, but it is now estimated that the real number may be almost 700,000 persons.

Chinese.  Sri Lanka also has Chinese Sri Lankans who left China in the 1930’s to get away from the hardships and avoid prosecution from the civil conflict in that country.  The population was largely ignored due to their small number at the time (estimated to be around 300).

None were granted citizenship because Sri Lanka's citizenship laws state that a grandparent has to be born in Sri Lanka in order to be a citizen. They currently have travel Identity Certificates (IC) which are generally accepted by most countries (though not all), but these have limited use as they have to be renewed every two years and only for a maximum period of four years. Multiple entry visas are all but impossible.

Chinese individuals in Sri Lanka do not have the right to buy land (without a 100 percent tax and then only on a 99-year lease), some have intermarried with Sri Lankans, some have gone to other countries whenever possible, and others remain stateless. The last attempt by the Chinese society in Sri Lanka to submit a petition to the government asking to be made citizens was refused.

Thailand

In Thailand, hill tribes, children of Burmese refugees, and Amerasians may lack nationality.

Thailand’s hill tribe people, who include members of the Akna, Lanu, Lisu, Yao, Hmong, and Karen ethnic communities, number around two million.  Despite being born in Thailand, almost half of them lack Thai citizenship, and are unable to vote, buy land, seek legal employment, or travel freely.  Since an influx of refugees and migrants into Thailand in the 1980s, the Thailans has denied hill tribe people citizenship. 

In 2001, the Thai Cabinet granted temporary residency rights for one year to those who had previously taken part in government survey and others lacking identification.  To secure citizenship they had to show that they, and at least one of their parents, had been born in Thailand.  This had been difficult for those born in remote mountain areas.

The government extended the deadline to 2003.  Following expiry of the most recent filing deadline, many Hill Tribe people, considered illegal migrants and/or stateless, have lived under threat of expulsion, and been denied access to many economic and social benefits.  In December 2004, the Thai Government admitted that up to 2 to 2.5 million people live in Thailand without citizenship. An inter-ministerial taskforce was created to propose solutions for acquisition of Thai nationality and systematic birth registration.

In addition, families fleeing arbitrary arrest, forced labor, rape, and killing by the Burmese military arrive at the border of Thailand with hopes of leading a life free of human rights abuses, but they are prohibited from gaining refugee status due to Thailand’s narrow definition of refugee. Only an estimated 150,000 refugees have been allowed to register to live in refugee camps, leaving more than two million others to live illegally both inside, but primarily outside, the refugee camps. 

There are no accurate estimates of stateless children in Thailand.  Because Thai law does not recognize the children as citizens, they are subject to hazardous or exploitive labor conditions, sexual and other abuse, denial of education and healthcare, and other violations of their basic human rights.  As grim as the current situation for children is, the future looks even worse.

The Thai Ministry of Education is expected to issue the Regulation on Evidence of a Child’s Birth for School Admission in honor of Article 29 of the Convention of the Rights of the Child, but not all of the children receive this document. When children can attend Thai schools, they are unable to attain an official degree or certificate to pursue further education or to find a job.

Amerasians in Thailand may also face statelessness.  A bill to grant automatic American citizenship to some Amerasians was presented to the U.S. House of Representatives in 2003.  According to the bill, Amerasians, who were born in five Asian countries, including Thailand, will be eligible for automatic American citizenship under the Amerasian Immigration Act of 1982. The bill clearly stipulates that Amerasians are also American citizens, so they are entitled to have all the rights, privileges and responsibilities as such.  It has been referred to the Subcommittee on Immigration.  The bill is expected to be reintroduced.

Turkmenistan

More than 12,000 of the approximately 14,000 Tajik individuals in Turkmenistan are of Turkmen ethnicity and arrived between 1992 and 1997 during the civil war. Most of them have been able to obtain land and to build or buy houses.  Their children attend, and graduate from, Turkmen schools. The problem these individuals face today is their lack of nationality and problems with respect to freedom of movement, registration of marriages and new births, access to employment and higher education.  The UNHCR office in Ashgabat has been advocating for the naturalization of Tajiks of Turkmen origin who qualify for nationality under the criteria established in Article 18 of the 1992 Turkmen Nationality law.


Approximately 1,200 Afghan refugees who fled their country during the Soviet occupation, but are of Turkmen ethnicity, also reside in the country.  These people resettled from Iran to Turkmenistan in 1994.  Most of them were issued residence permits as stateless persons in 1999, and live in rural areas.

Uzbekistan

In 1991, Uzbekistan hosted an estimated 38,000 refugees. Relations between Tajikistan and Uzbekistan were strained following the deportation of Uzbeks by Tajikistan, and Uzbekistan’s retaliatory deportation of 56 people. Of this number, 39 people were stranded at the border. UNHCR has insisted these people were not refugees but Uzbeks with Tajik passports who have left Tajikistan.  It has been reported that Uzbek authorities have granted 10,000 Tajiks citizenship in Uzbekistan.   

Vietnam

One situation of statelessness in Vietnam relates to Amerasians.  The Fourteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution makes the United States a jus soli jurisdiction. Thus while everyone born in the U.S. is an American citizen, not everyone born to citizen parents abroad can claim the same status.  As a result, children who are born of an American parent abroad in the territories of jus sanguinis countries, where citizenship is conferred through descent, face a possible risk of having no country recognize them as citizens.  A bill to grant automatic American citizenship to some Amerasians was presented to the U.S. House of Representatives 2003.  According to the bill, Amerasians will be eligible for automatic American citizenship under the Amerasian Immigration Act of 1982. It was referred to the Subcommittee on Immigration, Border Security, and Claims and is expected to be reintroduced in the House in the upcoming session.
Table of Contents

Search

Stay Informed

Sign up for our Email updates

Resources

What I can do to help

Photo Gallery

Act Now!

Donate to Iraq Fund

Join us on Facebook