Deportee from the U.S., Aasis Subedi, with his father, Narayan Kumar Subedi. Credit: Diwash Gahatraj/IPS
By Diwash Gahatraj
JHAPA, Nepal, May 16 2025 – Sitting in his small hut in the Beldangi refugee camp in Jhapa district, Nepal, Narayan Kumar Subedi feels relieved that his son, Aasis Subedi, is safe.
Aasis is one of four United States deportees who were the subject of Nepal’s Supreme Court landmark ruling on April 24, which directed the government not to deport four Bhutanese refugees who entered Nepal in March of this year after being disowned by Bhutan. U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) deported the four after they had lived in various parts of the United States for nearly a decade.
The Apex body ordered that “Aasis Subedi, Santosh Darji, Roshan Tamang, and Ashok Gurung should not remain in police custody. Instead, they should be housed in the Bhutanese refugee camps in eastern Nepal, where they lived before moving to the United States.” The ruling came in response to a habeas corpus petition filed by Narayan, father of Aasis.
“It was a mixed feeling that night when my son and two other deported men—Santosh and Roshan—came to my house. I was thrilled to see my son after ten years but was equally sad that he was escaping like a stateless homeless person,” says the 55-year-old.
On March 27, the morning after their deportation, Nepali immigration authorities arrested the three men for entering the country without visas. The fourth refugee, Ashok Gurung, was detained separately in Bahundangi, a village on the Indo-Nepal border, two days later.
The Department of Immigration investigated their case for nearly a month while they remained in police custody until the country’s highest court granted them a second chance to live in Nepal. However, this decision will be reviewed after 60 days. Until then, the four men must remain within the camp premises and report to the local police station once a week, adds Narayan.
The four men have found themselves in legal and diplomatic limbo after Bhutan refused to accept them back. Now sheltered in Nepal’s refugee camps under a temporary court order, their case highlights the ongoing crisis of statelessness among the Lhotshampa community and exposes the fragile nature of third-country resettlement solutions.
Cruel Connection
Aasis Subedi photographed with his wife while in the United States.
The four men in their mid-thirties—Aasis, Santosh, Roshan, and Ashok—share a bitter connection of multiple displacements and statelessness.
They belong to the Bhutanese Lhotshampa community, a Nepali-speaking ethnic group that settled in southern Bhutan. The Lhotshampas (“southerners” in Bhutan’s Dzongkha language) migrated to Bhutan in the late 19th and early 20th centuries during the reign of King Ugyen Wangchuck, encouraged to develop the sparsely populated southern lowlands.
Initially granted citizenship in the 1950s and 1970s, the status of Lhotshampas changed when Bhutan introduced the “One Nation, One People” policy in the late 1980s. The policy promoted Drukpa cultural norms, which included mandatory dress codes and language use, resulting in protests from Lhotshampas who felt marginalized.
The government subsequently revoked citizenship for many Lhotshampas, labeling them “illegal immigrants.” Between 1990 and 1993, persecution and mass arrests forced over 100,000 Lhotshampas to flee—a situation many consider ethnic cleansing. Most ended up in refugee camps in eastern Nepal.
A few decades ago, the families of the four deported individuals also came to Nepal as expelled citizens of Bhutan, and they lived as refugees in the camps until a decade ago, when they became part of a third-country resettlement program.
After years of unsuccessful attempts to return to Bhutan through numerous petitions to the king and internal organizations, as well as appeals for help from nations like India and Nepal, the refugees’ hopes for repatriation dimmed.
A turning point came in 2007 when the UN refugee agency (UNHCR) launched a third-country resettlement program, offering the displaced Bhutanese both a ray of hope and a path to citizenship elsewhere. By 2019, more than 113,500 refugees had relocated to eight different countries, with the majority settling in the United States, Canada, and the United Kingdom. Approximately 96,000 Bhutanese resettled in the United States.
Following the resettlement program, only two of the original seven refugee camps—Beldangi and Pathri in Jhapa district—remain operational, housing around 6,300 residents. These individuals either declined third-country resettlement in the hope of returning to their homeland, Bhutan, or missed the opportunity due to a lack of valid documentation.
Now, the four men have rejoined camp life. All four had U.S. Green Cards—despite this, the Trump administration deported them. Officials suspected them of criminal acts. Some had finished long jail terms. Then ICE took them for deportation. After days in custody, they were taken to Paro, Bhutan, via New Delhi.
At Paro Airport, Bhutanese officials interrogated them but refused to recognize them as citizens. Authorities escorted them out through the Phuentsholing-Jaigaon border. Each received INR 30,000 (about USD 350).
“With nowhere to go, my son and the others decided to come to Nepal. They had no documents to show at the border, so they had to cross illegally with help from an Indian fixer,” explains Narayan.
Bhutan’s refusal to recognize the deportees as citizens has resulted in a diplomatic impasse between the two Himalayan countries.
“The order from the Supreme Court of Nepal to stop deportation gives these men temporary relief but doesn’t solve the bigger problem,” said Dr. Gopal Krishna Siwakoti, President of INHURED International, a human rights organization. “The court only directed the government to finish its investigation within 60 days, leaving their future uncertain after that period.”
“Nobody seems to have clear answers in this complex situation,” Siwakoti noted, describing it as a “bureaucratic black hole.”
“We had hoped the Supreme Court would direct the government to start diplomatic talks with Bhutan, India, and the USA at the same time, considering these men were essentially made stateless and moved between countries against their will. Unfortunately, the issue wasn’t mentioned in the ruling,” Siwakoti added.
So far, America has deported 24 Bhutanese refugees. Besides the four men in Nepal, there are no official records on the whereabouts of the others.
United States Travel Ban
Bhutan, known for promoting the Gross National Happiness Index, has traditionally maintained favorable diplomatic relations with the United States. However, since early this year, Bhutan has been included in a draft “Red List” proposed by the United States government.
This list suggested a complete travel ban for citizens of certain countries, including Bhutan, due to concerns over national security and irregular migration patterns. The U.S. Department of Homeland Security reported a 37 percent increase in visa violations. Reportedly, over 200 Bhutanese nationals were found to be residing illegally in the United States between 2013 and 2022.
This policy shift appears to have been influenced in part by the unresolved issue of Bhutanese refugees. Sivakoti, a long-time advocate for resolving the Bhutanese refugee crisis, stated, “We understand that the United States administration had discussions with the Bhutanese government prior to the deportations. The United States presented documentation showing that while these individuals had refugee status in Nepal, their country of origin was Bhutan.”
On this basis, the United States contended that Bhutan should assume responsibility for these people. Bhutan, however, remained reluctant.
“The U.S. administration then took strict action and placed Bhutan in the ‘red zone.’ After such a move by the United States, Bhutan hesitated and was forced to evacuate these refugees,” Siwakoti said in an interview with Sethopathi, a Nepali news outlet.
Meanwhile, the Bhutanese government has reportedly requested a review of this decision, asserting that their citizens do not pose a significant security threat. As of now, the draft travel ban has not been officially implemented.
Meanwhile, the future looks uncertain for the four men stuck in the Beldangi camp and others who may face deportation in the coming days. Sivakoti says, “The complex legal and immigration challenges surrounding their cases make it unlikely that any country would accept them.”
“Today, resettlement opportunities have shrunk worldwide. There might be a small chance through family or institutional sponsorship in another country, but even that requires proper documents—like a refugee registration card or a travel document—which are nearly impossible to get now or anytime soon.”
IPS UN Bureau Report
!function(d,s,id){var js,fjs=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0],p=/^http:/.test(d.location)?’http’:’https’;if(!d.getElementById(id)){js=d.createElement(s);js.id=id;js.src=p+’://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js’;fjs.parentNode.insertBefore(js,fjs);}}(document, ‘script’, ‘twitter-wjs’);
