Tibetans asked to give up benefits for Indian passport
DHARAMSALA: Tibetans seeking an Indian passport will need to leave their settlements and forfeit privileges and benefits from the Central Tibetan Administration (CTA), which is the Tibetan government-in-exile headquartered in McLeodganj near Dharamsala in Himachal Pradesh, the external affairs ministry has said in its recent order.
A letter by the Bengaluru regional passport office on June 6 listed four conditions for Tibetans seeking an Indian passport.
“Registration/refugee certificate (RC) and identity certificate should be cancelled; the applicant should not be staying in designated Tibetan refugee settlements; an undertaking that he/ she no longer enjoys CTA benefits; and a declaration that he/she no longer enjoys any privileges, including subsidies by being an RC holder.”
India is home to an estimated 1.5 lakh Tibetans, most of who live in 35 settlements across the country from Himachal Pradesh to Karnataka.
“The CTA has clarified that to apply for an Indian passport is a personal choice. So we can’t say anything about the new rules,” a Tibetan government-in-exile official said.
In September 2016, the Delhi high court ruled that Tibetans born in India between January 26, 1950, to July 1, 1987, are Indian citizens by birth and should be issued passports.
The order was passed on a PIL by Lobsang Wangyal. “The MEA’s riders have put Tibetans in a dilemma. Getting a passport may make us homeless. This is like asking a Tibetan to become homeless for a second time. ..” says Wangyal.
“The rules are ambiguous when they say that an applicant can no longer enjoy CTA benefits,” Wangyal says.
He says the CTA is an independent entity run by exiled Tibetans to work for a free Tibet and the welfare of the community. The order means that Tibetans, after getting an Indian passport, are no longer a part of the CTA.
Wangyal says quoting a lawyer, Simarpal Sawhney, that the new MEA rules for Tibetans violate Article 14 (equality before law) and Article 21 (right to life and personal liberty) of the Constitution and can be challenged in court.