Stateless Refugees Appeal Deportation in Nepal's Top Court

The Beldangi refugee camp in Nepal, where some of the four Bhutanese Lotshampa refugees evicted from the United States are living.

Four Bhutanese Lhotshampa 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 the country.

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

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

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

That deadline passed on 20 June. 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 36.40) each. They were also instructed 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 in the U.S. from Nepal under a formal international programme. Sending them away now, without any country willing to receive them, violates basic legal and humanitarian principles.”

Kharel and the legal team argue that the Immigration Department’s decision ignores their history and undermines the credibility of the international resettlement process. 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 a significant legal precedent regarding the treatment of stateless individuals.

Department of Immigration (DoI) spokesperson Tikaram Dhakal told a Nepali daily, “Even though they came from the U.S., they are Bhutanese. The sooner they arrange their travel documents, the sooner we can deport them. If they can’t return to the U.S., 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 refugee 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 said before leaving for Kathmandu to submit the appeal.

“Money is always a challenge for refugees living in the camp,” said Narayan. “Both last time and again now, we’ve only been able to cover travel and legal expenses in Kathmandu with 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 in the refugee camp. Like his son, Narayan 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 programme was active.

Refugee rights activist and INHURED International head Dr Gopal Krishna Siwakoti explained that the deportation order was issued strictly in accordance with Nepal’s Immigration Act, without consideration for the broader legal and humanitarian implications. He added that authorities seem confused and uncertain about how to find a fair and lasting solution.

Typically, Nepal’s Immigration Department imposes a heavy fine—NPR 50,000 plus USD 8 per day—for entering the country without proper documents or overstaying a visa. In this case, however, the four were treated with some leniency, fined only NPR 5,000 each. They must still pay the daily overstay penalty once travel documents are secured.

The future of the four men deported from the U.S., and others in similar situations, remains highly uncertain. Without strong international pressure or a diplomatic breakthrough, they risk remaining trapped in legal and humanitarian limbo.

Repatriation to Bhutan appears unlikely. The country has consistently refused to accept Lhotshampa refugees—even those verified as citizens during past screenings.

Permanent settlement in Nepal is also doubtful. Nepal is not a signatory to the 1951 Refugee Convention and provides no legal pathway to citizenship for refugees.

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

According to Dr Siwakoti, the most likely outcome is “prolonged area detention or legal limbo.” Thousands of refugees have spent decades in Nepali camps with no lasting solution. Nearly 7,000 Lhotshampas still reside in two camps in eastern Nepal. The newly deported men face the same bleak reality—stateless, stuck, and without a clear path 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 defies international laws, including the right to seek asylum and protection from torture.

Nepal and Bhutan have no formal diplomatic ties, and bilateral talks have stalled since the 15th round of negotiations. India has remained silent, and the U.S. has taken no further steps beyond the deportation.

Experts like Dr Siwakoti believe that international pressure is now the only way forward.

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

On the legal front, the appeal to Nepal’s Supreme Court could become a landmark case, setting a precedent for how stateless individuals are treated in Nepal.

Regional diplomacy may also play a role if Nepal raises the issue in global forums like the UN Human Rights Council, the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR), or the European Union—possibly compelling Bhutan to engage in resolving the crisis.