Four Times Rejected: Stateless Lotshampa Refugees Appeal to Nepal’s Supreme Court

By Diwash Gahatraj Reprint | | Print |

百度 《条例》规定，省、市、县人民政府应当建立机构编制、人员工资与财政预算相互制约的机制，在设置机构、核定编制时应当充分考虑财政供养能力，机构实有人员不得突破规定的编制。

The Beldangi refugee camp in Nepal, where some of the four Bhutanese Lotshampa refugees evicted from the United States are living. Credit: Diwash Gahatraj/IPS

JHAPA, Nepal,, Jul 31 2025 (IPS) - Four Bhutanese Lotshampa refugees—Aasis Subedi, Santosh Darji, Roshan Tamang, and Ashok Gurung—filed an appeal in Nepal’s Supreme Court on July 27, challenging a government order that would deport them from Nepal.

After being resettled in the United States through a UN refugee program, the four were deported back to Bhutan in April this year only to be turned away at the border. Bhutan refused to recognize them as citizens.

They entered Nepal without a visa and were imprisoned for 28 days. They were released in June only after Aasis Subedi’s father, Narayan Subedi, filed a writ petition in the Supreme Court of Nepal. The court then issued an interim order stopping their deportation.

The order instructed the government to release the men from prison and let them stay in the refugee camps in Jhapa district—Pathri and Beldangi. It also required them to report to the local police station once a week and asked the Immigration Department to complete its investigation within 60 days.

That deadline passed on June 20. Three days later, the family received a letter from Nepal’s Immigration Department.

“I was shocked to see the verdict. I felt sad and helpless,” said 36-year-old Aasis Subedi, reading the letter aloud. It stated that the Department had decided to deport the four men—either back to the U.S., or to Bhutan—after fining them NPR 5,000 (about USD 36.4) each. They were also told to pay visa fees and an additional USD 8 per day as an overstay penalty.

“This deportation order is deeply flawed,” said senior advocate Satish Krishna Kharel, who will represent the four men in court. “They were resettled to the U.S. from Nepal under a formal international program. Sending them away now, without any country ready to take them, violates basic legal and humanitarian principles.”

Kharel and the legal team argue that the decision by the Immigration Department disregards their history and undermines the credibility of the international resettlement process itself. With both the U.S. and Bhutan denying them citizenship, the four men are effectively stateless—caught in a legal no-man’s-land. Their fate now rests with Nepal’s highest court, which could set an important legal precedent on how stateless individuals are treated in the country.

Department of Immigration (DoI) spokesperson Tikaram Dhakal told a Nepali daily, “Even though they came from the US, they are Bhutanese. The sooner they arrange their travel documents, the sooner we can deport them. If they can’t go back to the US, Bhutan is the easier option for us. They will also have to cover the cost of their airfare.”

Until their travel documents are ready, they will remain in the camp.

Aasis’s father, Narayan Subedi, feels helpless about his son’s statelessness. “Last time, I filed a habeas corpus petition in the Supreme Court after my son and three others were arrested. We’re filing another petition now, still holding on to hope that a solution can be found for their future,” he says, before leaving for Kathmandu for the appeal.

“Money is always a challenge for refugees living in the camp,” says Narayan Subedi, father of one of the deportees. “Both last time and again now, we’ve only been able to cover travel and legal expenses in Kathmandu because of help from a few well-wishers—like Dilli Adhikari, a fellow Lhotshampa refugee now living in the U.S.”

Now 55, Narayan has no formal job. He supports himself by running a small grocery shop from his home within the refugee camp. Much like his son’s situation today, Narayan himself has lived as a stateless refugee since the early 1990s. Unlike his wife and children, he didn’t qualify for third-country resettlement when the U.S.-led program was active.

Similarly, refugee rights activist and head of INHURED International, Dr. Gopal Krishna Siwakoti, explains that the deportation order for the four individuals was made strictly by following the letter of Nepal’s Immigration Act, without considering the larger human and legal issues involved. He says the authorities seem confused and uncertain about how to find a fair and lasting solution to this complicated situation.

Normally, Nepal’s Immigration Department charges a heavy fine—NPR 50,000 plus USD 8 per day—for entering the country without proper documents or overstaying a visa. But in this case, the four deportees were treated with some compassion. They were asked to pay just NPR 5,000 each. However, they will still need to pay the USD 8 per day overstay fine once they get their travel documents and are ready to leave the country.

A Grim Outlook

The future for the four men deported from the U.S., and others like them, remains highly uncertain. Most possible outcomes offer little hope. Without strong international pressure or a shift in regional diplomacy, these individuals could remain trapped in a legal and humanitarian dead end.

Repatriation to Bhutan may seem like the most direct solution, but it is highly unlikely. Bhutan has consistently refused to take back Lhotshampa refugees—even those who were verified as citizens in past screenings.

Another option is permanent settlement in Nepal. But this, too, remains uncertain. Nepal is not a signatory to the 1951 Refugee Convention and offers no legal path to citizenship for refugees, making long-term integration nearly impossible.

Third-country resettlement is also improbable. The UNHCR-led program has officially ended, and most countries are unwilling to accept individuals with unresolved legal or criminal records.

According to Dr. Gopal Krishna Siwakoti, the most likely outcome is “prolonged area detention or legal limbo.” This has happened before. Thousands of refugees have spent decades in camps in Nepal without any durable solution. Nearly 7,000 Lhotshampas still live in the two camps in eastern Nepal. The newly deported face the same grim reality—stateless, stuck, and with no clear path ahead.

Way Ahead

For the deportees, this marks a return to statelessness. No country is willing to accept them, leaving them without citizenship, protection, or a clear future. Their deportation goes against international laws, including the right to seek asylum and protection from torture.

Nepal and Bhutan do not have formal diplomatic relations, and their talks to resolve the refugee issue have been stuck since the 15th round of negotiations. India has remained silent, and the United States has not acted beyond deporting the individuals.

Experts like Siwakoti say that the way forward now depends on international pressure.

“Support from the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR), global human rights organizations, and Bhutanese diaspora groups could help push for a humane and lasting solution.”

“On the legal front, the upcoming appeal in Nepal’s Supreme Court could become a key moment—setting a precedent for how stateless individuals are treated in Nepal going forward,” he adds.

Regional diplomacy may also help if Nepal raises the issue at global forums like the UN Human Rights Council, the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR), or the European Union. That could increase pressure on Bhutan to respond and engage in resolving the crisis.

IPS UN Bureau Report

Follow @IPSNewsUNBureau
??