Approximately 6,500 Bhutanese refugees remain in Nepal as of the mid-2020s, having declined third-country resettlement. They face statelessness, limited legal rights, and an uncertain future as negotiations over repatriation and local integration continue.
As of the mid-2020s, approximately 6,500 Lhotshampa (ethnic Nepali-speaking Bhutanese) refugees remain in Nepal, the residual population of a community that once numbered over 108,000 across seven camps in southeastern Nepal. While the vast majority of Bhutanese refugees accepted third-country resettlement between 2007 and the early 2020s — with over 113,000 departing for the United States, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, and European countries — this remaining group declined resettlement, was ineligible for the program, or continues to hold out for repatriation to Bhutan. Their situation represents one of the world's most intractable cases of protracted statelessness.[1]
The remaining population is concentrated in Beldangi and Sanischare in Jhapa and Morang districts, the last of the original seven camps to remain partially operational. These individuals live in a legal and political limbo — unable to return to Bhutan, lacking citizenship in Nepal, and having foregone the resettlement option that the international community offered as the primary durable solution to the Bhutanese refugee crisis.[2]
Reasons for Remaining
The refugees who remain in Nepal constitute a diverse group with varied motivations for declining resettlement. The most frequently cited reasons include:
Commitment to Repatriation: A significant portion of the remaining population consists of political activists and supporters of organizations such as the Bhutan People's Party (BPP), the Druk National Congress (DNC), and the Human Rights Organisation of Bhutan (HUROB), who view repatriation to Bhutan as an inalienable right that should not be traded for resettlement in a third country. For these individuals, accepting resettlement was tantamount to legitimizing the expulsion and permanently surrendering any claim to their homeland, property, and citizenship. This principled stance, maintained over more than three decades, reflects a deep connection to Bhutanese identity and the conviction that the international community has a responsibility to pressure Bhutan to accept the return of its expelled citizens.[3]
Elderly and Infirm: Some remaining refugees are elderly individuals for whom the prospect of starting life in a distant, unfamiliar country was overwhelming. Cultural and linguistic barriers, the cold climates of many resettlement destinations, and separation from the familiar social networks of the camps made resettlement unappealing despite the material benefits it offered. Some elderly refugees explicitly stated that they preferred to remain in the region where they could at least see the mountains of their homeland from a distance.
Family Separation Concerns: In some cases, family members were divided between those who wished to resettle and those who wished to remain, creating painful choices. Some individuals stayed behind to care for elderly relatives who refused to move, while others were separated from family members who had already departed.
Ineligibility: A smaller number of individuals were unable to resettle due to medical conditions, security concerns flagged during the vetting process, or unresolved legal issues. Some individuals had criminal records within the camp justice system that complicated their resettlement processing.
Legal Status and Statelessness
The remaining refugees exist in a state of legal statelessness. Bhutan has not restored their citizenship, and the Government of Nepal has not granted them Nepali citizenship or permanent residency. They hold UNHCR-issued refugee identity documents that provide a measure of recognition but do not confer the rights associated with citizenship — including the right to own property, access formal employment, vote, or travel freely.
Nepal is not a signatory to the 1951 Refugee Convention or its 1967 Protocol, and has no domestic refugee legislation. The status of Bhutanese refugees in Nepal has been governed by ad hoc arrangements between the Government of Nepal and UNHCR rather than by any formal legal framework. This leaves the remaining population in a precarious position, dependent on the continued willingness of the Nepali government to tolerate their presence and the continued engagement of UNHCR to provide protection and basic services.[1]
Living Conditions
Living conditions for the remaining population have deteriorated as the camps have depopulated and humanitarian funding has declined. The comprehensive service delivery system that once operated across seven camps — with dedicated health posts, schools, water systems, and community services staffed by hundreds of refugee and international workers — has been scaled back dramatically. Ration distributions, health services, and educational programs have been reduced in scope, and some services have been discontinued entirely.
The remaining refugees are consolidated in reduced areas of the Beldangi and Sanischare camps. Infrastructure that was designed for much larger populations now serves a fraction of its original users, and maintenance has declined. Some refugees have moved to informal settlements outside the formal camp boundaries, seeking better economic opportunities or living with host community members, though their legal right to do so is ambiguous.
Economic opportunities remain extremely limited. While enforcement of restrictions on refugee employment has relaxed somewhat over the years, the remaining refugees lack the legal documentation required for formal employment. Many engage in informal labor — agricultural day work, small-scale trade, and domestic service — at wages typically below what Nepali workers receive for comparable work. Some refugees have established small businesses in and around the camps, but these operate without legal protection or access to credit.[2]
Prospects for Repatriation
The possibility of voluntary repatriation to Bhutan remains the stated preference of many in the remaining population, but prospects are exceedingly dim. Bilateral negotiations between Bhutan and Nepal, conducted intermittently since the early 1990s through a Joint Ministerial Committee, have never produced a repatriation agreement. The last substantive round of negotiations occurred in 2003, when a Joint Verification Team completed the screening of residents of Khudunabari camp and categorized only a small fraction as eligible for return under Bhutanese criteria — results the refugee community rejected as unjust.
Since the launch of the resettlement program in 2007, the international community's approach to the Bhutanese refugee situation has been oriented primarily around resettlement and, for the remaining population, local integration. Bhutan has shown no indication that it will accept the return of any significant number of refugees, and the geopolitical dynamics of the region — with India, the dominant external actor in both Bhutanese and Nepali affairs, showing no inclination to pressure Bhutan on the issue — suggest that repatriation is unlikely in the foreseeable future.[3]
Local Integration
Local integration — the process of granting refugees permanent legal status in their country of asylum — is the most discussed alternative to repatriation for the remaining population. UNHCR has engaged the Government of Nepal in discussions about pathways to local integration, which could include granting permanent residency, work permits, or eventually citizenship to remaining refugees.
Progress has been slow. The Government of Nepal has been reluctant to formalize the status of the remaining Bhutanese refugees for several reasons: concern about setting a precedent that could attract other refugee populations, political sensitivities in southeastern Nepal where the camps are located, and the absence of a domestic legal framework for refugee integration. Nonetheless, de facto integration has been occurring organically for years — remaining refugees have established social and economic ties with host communities, some have married Nepali citizens, and children born to refugee parents in Nepal have in some cases been registered in local government records.
International organizations have supported the de facto integration process through livelihood programs, skills training, and community development projects that benefit both refugees and host community members. These programs aim to reduce dependency on humanitarian assistance while building a foundation for eventual formal integration.[1]
Education and Youth
Children and young people in the remaining population face particular challenges. The comprehensive camp education system that once served 40,000 students has been scaled back as the population has shrunk. Remaining children attend reduced camp schools or, increasingly, nearby Nepali government schools. Access to higher education remains severely constrained by the refugees' undocumented status, though some students have obtained scholarships or enrolled in Nepali institutions through individual arrangements.
For young people raised in the camps who have come of age since the main resettlement wave, the future is particularly uncertain. They possess neither Bhutanese citizenship, Nepali citizenship, nor the prospect of third-country resettlement. This generation of stateless young people — educated but without legal identity or economic opportunity — represents the most urgent human dimension of the unresolved situation.
International Advocacy
Advocacy organizations, both within the remaining refugee community and in the diaspora, continue to press for a just resolution. Refugee political organizations maintain that Bhutan bears legal and moral responsibility for the crisis and should be held accountable. Diaspora communities, particularly in the United States, have engaged with congressional representatives and international human rights organizations to keep attention on the remaining population. UNHCR continues to classify the situation as a protracted refugee situation requiring durable solutions.[1]
The situation of the remaining Bhutanese refugees in Nepal stands as a sobering reminder that even one of the most successful refugee resettlement programs in history can leave behind a vulnerable population for whom no durable solution has been found. Their continued statelessness, more than three decades after the original expulsion, reflects the failure of the international community to hold Bhutan accountable for the denationalization and expulsion of its own citizens.
References
- UNHCR. "Bhutanese Refugees." https://www.unhcr.org/asia/bhutanese-refugees
- Human Rights Watch. "Trapped by Inequality: Bhutanese Refugee Women in Nepal." 2003. https://www.hrw.org/reports/2003/nepal0903/
- The Diplomat. "Bhutan's Dark Secret: The Lhotshampa Expulsion." September 2016. https://thediplomat.com/2016/09/bhutans-dark-secret-the-lhotshampa-expulsion/
Test Your Knowledge
Think you know about this topic? Try a quick quiz!
Help improve this article
Do you have personal knowledge about this topic? Were you there? Your experience matters. BhutanWiki is built by the community, for the community.
Anonymous contributions welcome. No account required.