Annual Report, 1999 - Tibet: Tightening of Control
In 1981, China ratified the International Convention on
the Elimination of all Forms of Racial Discrimination
(CERD). This convention forbids any form of discrimination
in the exercise of one's political, civil, social,
economic, and cultural rights. Article 4 of the Chinese
Constitution reflects similar concerns wherein it
prohibits "discrimination against and oppression of
any nationality." Despite the existence of such legal
guarantees, discrimination against Tibetans is widespread.
In 1999 Tibetans continued to face unequal and unfair
treatment in the fields of public representation,
education, employment, housing, and health services.
Moreover, the deliberate policy of population transfer of
ethnic Chinese into Tibet is exacerbating discrimination
against Tibetans and constitutes a threat to the survival
of Tibetan culture and identity.
Every major international human rights instrument
dealing with the protection of human rights, either on
the universal or regional level, contains a provision
prohibiting racial discrimination.
Article 1 (I) of CERD defines racial discrimination as:
... any distinction, exclusion, restriction or preference
based on race, colour, descent, or national or ethnic
origin which has the purpose or effect of nullifying or
impairing the recognition, enjoyment or exercise, on an
equal footing, of human rights and fundamental freedoms
in the political, economic, social, cultural or any other
field of public life.
Article 5 of the CERD declares that the State Parties
undertake to prohibit and eliminate racial discrimination
and guarantee the right of everyone to the enjoyment of
political, civil, economic, social and cultural rights.
These rights are also guaranteed in the International
Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR)
and the International Covenant on Civil and Political
Rights (ICCPR), signed by China in 1997 and 1998
respectively.
The Chinese government's White Paper on Minorities
Policy, issued on September 27, 1999, states that China
has "conscientiously performed the duties prescribed"
in CERD and other international conventions. Testimonies
from Tibetan refugees, however show that China continues
to violate its obligations under international law.
China's White Paper on Minorities Policy emphasises
that special policies have been adopted by the Chinese
government to guarantee the right to equality amongst all
ethnic groups in social life and government activities:
In China, equality among ethnic groups means
that, regardless of their population size, their level of
economic and social development, the difference of their
folkways, customs and religious beliefs, every ethnic group
is a part of the Chinese nation, having equal status,
enjoying the same rights and performing the same duties
in every aspect of political and social life according to
law, and ethnic oppression or discrimination of any form
is firmly opposed.
Article 4 of the Chinese Constitution states that,
"[d]iscrimination against and oppression of any ethnic
group are prohibited." The Tibetan people are also
guaranteed the right to regional autonomy by the
Constitution and the Law on Regional National Autonomy.
The denial of the Tibetan people's right to autonomy, and
discriminatory policies on education, employment, housing,
and health provide evidence of the Chinese government's
violation of its avowed norms.
Article 5(c) of CERD states that State Parties should
guarantee the right of everyone, without distinction as
to race, colour, or national or ethnic origin, to enjoy:
Political rights, in particular the rights to participate
in elections - to vote and to stand for election - on the
basis of universal and equal suffrage, to take part in the
Government as well as in the conduct of public affairs at
any level ...
China's Constitution and the Law on Regional National
Autonomy guarantees the political rights of the Tibetan
people, including the right to vote and stand for election
on a non-discriminatory basis, and the right to autonomy:
"[o]rgans of self-government are established for the
exercise of autonomy and for people of ethnic minorities to
become masters of their own areas and manage the internal
affairs of their own regions." The Chinese government
claims that "the minority and Han peoples participate
as equals in the management of affairs of the state
and local government at various levels." These rights
enshrined on paper seem facile if one considers the fact
that discrimination of the Tibetan people in the field of
public representation continues.
While one may see a number of Tibetans holding positions
of authority at the regional, prefectural and county
level they are merely nominal. All significant decisions
are taken by the Chinese Communist Party (CCP). This is
evidenced by the integral role of the National Forums
on Work in Tibet. These Work Forums consist of senior
Party leaders and has been the major policy organ for
Tibet since 1980. The situation for the Chinese in Tibet
is complex; the CCP's problem is "how to make it appear
that Tibetans rather than Chinese are running the system,
when that system has already been made more complicated by
the need to make it appear that it is run by a government
and a legislature rather than by a political party."
The appointment of Tibetans to government positions is a
highly selective process resulting more often than not in
the appointment of officials who are politically "pure" and
loyal to the policies of the Communist Party. In February
1999 a campaign was launched in Tibet which aimed at
enhancing the "ideological and political quality" of cadres
in the "TAR". Cadres are not allowed to sympathise with
the Dalai Lama or support any pro-independence activities.
The campaign also stresses that cadres are required to take
a positive stand on the economic reform and "opening up"
policies, which involve influx of a huge number of economic
migrants from China. Previous campaigns have included
inspection of the homes of cadres for pictures of the Dalai
Lama and other religious articles, and the requirement to
withdraw their children from Tibetan schools in India.
This selective process is evident even in elections at the
village and county level. Testimonies of Tibetan refugees
indicate that these elections are merely an attempt at
legitimising the Chinese claim that the Tibetan people
enjoy democratic rights and autonomy. The candidates
standing for election are selected by deputies at the
higher level (county or prefecture) for their "political
purity" and loyalty to the Party.
An anonymous 29 year-old
from Sotson township in Chamdo Prefecture, "TAR", reported
in November 1999 that there is a voting system in his
village, but that the elections are just a "show." Even
if a Tibetan stand for election and the majority vote for
him, another person, selected by the Chinese authorities,
will be "elected." According to Soepa, a monk from Pelbar
County in Chamdo Prefecture who fled Tibet in October
1999: "There is a voting system in my village but it is
all predetermined. The Chinese authorities determine who
is friendly with China and select them."
Kunsang Gyal,
a 23 year-old from Themchen County in the Tsonub "TAP",
Qinghai Province arrived in exile in August 1999. Gyal
explained that according to the election laws of China, no
person has the authority to dismiss a leader of any county
who has been elected by the People's Congress of that
county. However, in Themchen, many Tibetans who had been
elected have been removed by the higher-level prefecture
authorities for no justifiable reason. The elected Chinese
officials are retained for the full term. The Tibetans who
are either dismissed or transferred, are often replaced
by Chinese. Gyal further described how all candidates in
a county election are nominated by the higher prefecture
leaders. The Tibetans have no choice but to elect a
candidate from the list provided. The composition of
political leaders in Kunsang's county demonstrates the
disproportionate representation of the Tibetan population
that occurs with such an unfair election system. Amongst
the four deputy governors in Themchen, two are Tibetan and
two are Chinese, although the vast majority of inhabitants
are Tibetan.
Article 5 (e) (v) of the CERD guarantees, without
discrimination of any kind:
The right to education and training.
The Chinese government's Education Law reiterates this,
stipulating that:
Every citizen shall enjoy equal educational opportunities
regardless of race, nationality, sex, occupation, financial
status and religion.
In China's White Paper on Minorities Policy, education of
minorities is stressed as being "of paramount importance to
the improvement of the quality of the minority population
and to the promotion of economic and cultural development
in ethnic minority areas." Despite these guarantees,
discriminatory policies and practices in the field of
education continue to marginalise Tibetan students.
Information from Tibet highlights the absence of equality
in the educational sector. The structure and funding of
the educational system itself is discriminatory and serves
to impede rather than promote Tibetans' participation
in the development of their own country. The Chinese
government has made large investments in education
in the last two decades, but priority is given to the
more affluent areas in the east of China rather than the
poorer minority areas in the west. In Tibet, construction
and funding of schools in urban areas is prioritised over
rural and poor areas. More than 80 per cent of Tibetans in
Tibet live in rural areas while the majority of Chinese
settlers live in towns and cities. It is the Chinese who
primarily benefit from the government's investment in the
educational sector.
In its White Paper on Minorities Policy, the Chinese
government claims that about 81.3 per cent of school-age
children now attend school in the "TAR". This high
figure is questionable. A study on education in the "TAR"
estimates that at least 30 percent of Tibetan children do
not receive any education at all. In rural areas, if at all
the children attend school, it is for a maximum of one to
three years. The majority of Tibetan children drop out of
the education system before the start of secondary school -
in 1995 only 12.3 percent of junior secondary school-age
children were enrolled in schools. The explanation for the
low school attendance and high drop-out rate appears to
be the irrelevance of school curricula, language problems
and financial constraints.
It is claimed by the Chinese government that the "organs
of self-government of autonomous areas may decide their
own local education programmes." Contrary to this, the
actual decision-making power lies with Communist Party
officials. The Chinese policy for education in minority
areas lay more emphasis on patriotism than academic
achievements. The course content in the majority of
schools is centralised and uniform with focus on Communist
ideology and Chinese history, language and culture. Many
Tibetan children report that they have been subject to such
indoctrination in class and Tibetan teachers fleeing Tibet
report that the students and themselves were prohibited
to talk about topics such as Tibetan history and the
Dalai Lama. Many parents, particularly in rural areas,
consider it futile to send their children to school, as
the curriculum taught will not have any utility in their
daily life or lead to any social advancement.
The Law on Regional National Autonomy stipulates that
schools where most of the students come from minority
nationalities should "use textbooks in their own languages
and use these languages as the media of instruction."
Most Tibetan children do receive their primary education
in Tibetan language. However, secondary schools use
Chinese as medium of instruction thereby disadvantaging
Tibetans. Entrance exams for secondary schools are
generally in Chinese language and Tibetans thus face
problems being admitted into schools. The widespread use
of Chinese in the education system in Tibet discriminates
Tibetan students and contradicts the Chinese national
legislation and as the government's claim that when
minority students are a majority in an educational
institution, the language of this ethnic group is used to
teach.
According to the Convention on the Rights of the Child,
primary education should be free and available to all. In
1994 a process of making primary education compulsory in
the "TAR" began. Article 10 of China's Compulsory Education
Act states: "The State shall not charge tuition fees
for students attending compulsory education." Contrary
to this, reports from Tibet indicate that Tibetan
children are charged high school fees and various fees
for stationary and uniforms for primary, secondary and
higher education. Moreover, Chinese children often attend
the same schools at less or no charge. Considering that a
great number of Tibetans face financial strains, such fees
prohibit children from entering primary school, or from
continuing their education after primary school. Tibetan
refugees also report the widespread corruption in the
admission procedures and of discriminatory enrolment
procedures.
Dukar Kyi,
a 30 year-old semi-nomad from Ngaba County, Ngaba "TAP"
in Sichuan Province arrived in exile in March 1999. She
told TCHRD that she sent her eldest daughter to school
in the village for two months, but due to high school
fees she discontinued her schooling. A fee of 500 yuan
was annually collected from the parents. Furthermore,
if parents did not send their "aged" children to school,
they would be fined 500 yuan.
Twenty-two year-old
Gonpo Sonam
from Dzoge County, Ngaba "TAP", Sichuan Province who
arrived in India in June 1999, stated that school fees were
charged on a discriminatory basis during his studies at
Nubjang Higher Nationalities School from 1993 to 1996. The
Tibetan students were required to pay 700 yuan for each
semester, the Chinese students attended at no charge. From
August 1996 to December 1998, Sonam worked as a teacher at
Ngaba Middle School, teaching Tibetan grammar and books
written by Mao and other Chinese leaders. The teachers
were instructed not to make any "counter-revolutionary"
statements to the students. Despite the prohibition,
Sonam once spoke of the importance of national identity and
language. He was removed from his post as a class teacher,
and later lost his seat at a teacher-training course in
Lhasa.
A
17 year-old boy
from Lhasa City,
who prefers to be anonymous, attended Lobdring Nyiba
middle school for three years. All of the students were
Tibetan and he described his middle school to be the worst
in Lhasa when it came to both facilities and quality of
teachers. Every three months he had to pay 560 yuan as
school fees. No concessions were given to poor children,
and those who could not afford to pay were expelled. The
better schools were more expensive, but still the poor
Chinese children were admitted into these schools. If his
parents could have afforded it, they would have chosen a
better school. The boy reported that they were not allowed
to learn Tibetan history in school; if they talked about
Tibetan history or the Dalai Lama, the teacher would call
the student's parents and interrogate them. Some of the
Chinese teachers would report the case to the police and
then the student would be beaten.
Kunsang Gyal,
a 23 year-old from Themchen County in the Tsonub Mongolian
and "TAP", Qinghai Province, arrived in Dharamsala
in August 1999. Gyal studied at the Tsonub "TAP's"
Nationalities Teacher Training School for three years.
In this school there were 380 students, of which 240 were
Chinese, 60 Tibetan and 60 Mongolian. The remaining 20
were from other ethnic minorities. Although the school was
established for minority groups, the school admits more
Chinese students than all minority groups combined. In
fact, the school has established a quota system that
limits admission for Tibetans to 60 students and the same
for Mongolians. Gyal stated that accepting more Chinese
students is a direct contradiction of the purpose of the
school.
Nyima,
15 years old from Bathang County, Kandze "TAP" in Sichuan
Province arrived in Nepal in November 1999. He attended the
Mimang Lobchung (primary school) in Bathang County from
the age of seven to 14. The students were divided into
a Tibetan and a Chinese section. The Tibetan section had
200 students, while the Chinese section had 350 students
of which 10 were Tibetan. The medium of instruction in
most classes was Chinese, and Nyima told TCHRD that he was
once beaten by a Chinese teacher for speaking Tibetan in
a Chinese class. Due to his lack of fluency in Chinese,
Nyima had problems following the lessons. Chinese classes
included the teaching of socialism and the history of
the Chinese nation, while no Tibetan culture, history or
religion was taught in Tibetan classes. All the cleaning
and manual work around the school were done by the Tibetan
section students. The Chinese section was exempted from
this work. Nyima discontinued his education because
his parents were unable to pay the high fees for middle
school. In 1998, around 60 students graduated from his
primary school, only 15 of them were Tibetan. Three of
these Tibetan students could afford to study further in
middle school, because their parents were working at the
school.
Article 5(e) (i) of the CERD states that everyone, without
discrimination, should enjoy:
... the rights to work, to free choice of employment,
to just and favourable conditions of work, to protection
against unemployment, to equal pay for equal work to just
and favourable remuneration.
Throughout 1999, TCHRD received reports on widespread
discrimination against Tibetans in the field of
employment.
The "TAR" authorities have introduced a number of
preferential policies, mostly of a financial nature, to
attract individuals to Tibet. Following the Third Work
Forum on Tibet in 1994 the "TAR" authorities stressed
that the Tibetan people "...should encourage traders,
investment, economic units, and individuals to enter our
region to run different sorts of enterprises." This was
reiterated by Legchog, chairman of the "TAR" People's
Government, in 1999 when he emphasised that "Tibetan
Party and government cadres in the"TAR" ... are required
to welcome ever more economic migrants from outside the
region setting up businesses in the 'TAR'" The influx of
an increasing number of Chinese officials, workers and
businessmen aggravates discrimination of Tibetans in the
employment sector.
It has been claimed that in Tibet, "[s]peakers of different
languages are treated equally in the recruitment of
workers, cadres and students, with priority always given to
Tibetan speakers." Contrary to this, refugees who arrived
in exile during 1999 reported that the dominance of Chinese
people and Chinese language in the field of employment
has made it difficult for Tibetans to obtain jobs, as the
employers require fluency in Chinese. Even in traditional
Tibetan businesses like sewing aprons and traditional
dresses and producing and selling khatas (silk scarves)
Chinese immigrants are becoming dominant, thus taking job
opportunities away from Tibetans. Refugees report that it
is easier for Chinese to obtain the necessary permits and
loans for doing business, further marginalising Tibetans
in the economic sector. Some of the refugees, who have
been dismissed from their jobs, feel that the dismissal
was discriminatory in nature. It has been alleged by
Tibetan workers in various sectors, like factories and
construction, that they are generally allocated the
hard manual work and that they are underpaid compared to
Chinese workers, even accounting for the skill difference.
Tibetans widely report that local authorities require
families to contribute free work for the construction and
maintenance of roads and buildings as a "contribution to
the community."
Luthar Gyal,
a 22 year-old from Malho "TAP" in Qinghai Province worked
at the Tongren County Gold Refinery in Mapa village from
1996 to 1998. The refinery employed a total of 170 workers,
out of which 20 were Tibetan. The Chinese workers were paid
around 500 to 800 yuan per month, while the Tibetans were
paid 200 to 400 per month. Gyal reported that the Tibetan
workers had to do the manual and physically risky jobs. In
September 1998, Gyal went to Lhasa on pilgrimage and stayed
for 10 days; when he returned to work, authorities told
him that he had been dismissed for having attempted to
escape to India.
A
38 year-old Tibetan man
from Shigatse Prefecture in "TAR" fled Tibet in October
1999. Trained as a mechanic in the army, he worked in
an electric army factory close to Drepung Monastery
from 1985 to 1993. He was paid 400 yuan per month, while
Chinese workers who worked at a lower level and who had no
professional knowledge were paid a minimum of 1400 yuan
per month. If a Tibetan made a mistake he would lose his
job. If a Chinese worker made the same mistake he would
not be punished. In 1993, he was requested to join a "spy
office", to go to India to gather information. When he
refused to join the office, he was dismissed. After being
dismissed from his work in the factory, he worked in a
Chinese-owned garage for two months. The Chinese mechanics
working in the garage received housing at no charge,
while he had to pay for his room. One day he talked to
his Chinese boss about there being no human rights for
the Tibetans, and his boss dismissed him from his job
for "not working on the Chinese' side." He described how
the Chinese take job opportunities away from Tibetans;
"The Chinese are copying everything in Tibet. If some
poor Tibetans try to make a living out of stitching,
then Chinese will take a photograph of the pattern, and
make the same thing in better quality. They do this to
disgrace the Tibetans and to take their work. The only
thing they have not copied is the sky burial."
Thupten,
a 28 year-old from Lhasa City, worked as a tourist guide in
Lhasa for a total of three years, between 1994 and 1999. To
work as a guide he had to obtain a permit which had to be
renewed annually. There are many tourist agencies in Lhasa,
all run by the government, and the total number of tourist
guides is around 300. An increasing number of the guides
are Chinese, and according to Thupten their work conditions
are very different from the Tibetans'. The Chinese are
provided with all the facilities, included housing,
and do not have to renew their permits every year. The
Tibetan guides are generally instructed to refrain from
talking about Tibetan freedom or human rights, and are at
times followed by a spy in plain clothes. The guides only
realise this when they later are interrogated for having
said a particular thing at a particular place. In 1997, the
Tourism Bureau of "TAR" dismissed 69 tour guides as they
felt there was a need for improvement in the "political
behaviour" of tour guides. According to Thupten, six
other tour guides were placed on a list of guides who were
considered to be too political in their outlook. Thupten
was among these. He believes this is the reason why he was
unable to renew his permit in 1999. According to Thupten,
there are plans to introduce an exam in Chinese which must
be passed to receive a permit as a tourist guide. This
means that many of the Tibetans will face problems with
getting and renewing their permits.
Chakmo Tso
(30),
a journalist from Themchen County in the Tsonub "TAP",
Tsongon Province (Qinghai), arrived in India in December
1998. In Tibet, she worked for a newspaper, "Tsongon Mimang
Nyin-re Tsakpar", where the staff is mainly Chinese. Out
of the 500 employees only 38 were Tibetan. The newspaper
was established in 1958 and publishes in both Tibetan and
Chinese. However, the negligence towards the Tibetan paper
is evident from the allocation of funds in the office. The
Chinese paper is published every day while the Tibetan
paper is published on alternate days. To collect news or
write an article on farmers or nomads in Tibet, a Tibetan
journalist has to get special permission from the Chinese
editorial section. Most of the news is either translated
from Chinese or collected by Chinese journalists, and
there is no editorial freedom. The Tibetan journalists
are required to begin their articles praising the Chinese
government, otherwise their reports are not accepted by
the Chinese editors.
Nyima Tsering,
a 26 year-old from Lhasa Municipality, arrived in exile
in May 1999. In 1996 he applied for and received a job
in a "TAR" insurance company. The company conducted the
job selection test in Chinese and the applicants who were
not fluent in Chinese were rejected. There were many young
Tibetan applicants who were well educated and had completed
middle school; however, they were all rejected as their
knowledge of Chinese was not good enough. Tsering reported
that in Lhasa most of the job selections are based on the
applicant's knowledge of Chinese.
Soepa,
a 38 year-old monk from Pelbar County in Chamdo Prefecture,
"TAR", arrived in exile in October 1999. He reported that
in 1999 a number of monks in his monastery were called
for compulsory labour without pay for one month. If they
did not comply, they would be fined 100 yuan. The Tibetan
workers were given a time limit to finish their work,
and therefore had to work very hard. All the difficult
manual labour was given to Tibetans. The Chinese workers
were given the light work and they were paid. According
to Soepa, no Chinese had to do forced-labour. The Chinese
said that since the construction was done for the Tibetans,
they should contribute through their labour. In reality
the construction project was a residence building for
Chinese officials.
An
anonymous 20 year-old male
from Kandze County, Kandze "TAP", Sichuan Province reported
in March 1999 that there was a hydroelectric project at
Mira Dotse, close to Derge Monastery, where the building
contract was given to a Chinese who hired both Chinese
and Tibetan labourers. The Chinese workers were paid 20
yuan per day, while Tibetans were paid 10 yuan per day.
Dawa Dorjee,
a 25 year-old gold miner from Nagartse County in Lhokha
Prefecture, "TAR", testified in February 1999 that his
county's gold mine paid Chinese workers 1,000 yuan per
month for operating machinery and Tibetans 300 yuan per
month as unskilled labourers.
Tenpa Chophue,
an 18 year-old from Lithang County in Kandze "TAP",
Sichuan Province described in February 1999: "Once we
built a school and then a house for one of the heads of
our district; 40 people were collected and transported to
the construction site. The youngest workers were 7 and 8
years old and the oldest were 40. We got no salary and had
to bring vegetables from our farm for our food. If somebody
did not work, he or she had to pay 10 to 15 yuan per day as
a fine. We had to carry stones and do the digging. There
were also Chinese workers who built the walls. They were
paid about 25 yuan per day."
Under article 5(e) (iii) of CERD State Parties undertake
to guarantee the right of everyone to equal enjoyment of:
The right to housing.
The Chinese Constitution does not contain any explicit
right to adequate housing, but the fundamental need for
shelter was acknowledged by the Chinese government in 1996,
stating that "adequate housing [is] a basic human right."
While housing space in Lhasa and other urban areas is
increasing, it is almost exclusively geared toward Chinese
settlers. Tibetan refugees widely report that housing
facilities are better for Chinese than for Tibetans, due
to both financial reasons and the deliberate allocation
of new apartments to Chinese. Tibetan living quarters have
been demolished and Tibetan residents forcefully removed to
make way for Chinese construction. Thupten, 28, from Lhasa
reported that many Tibetan families have been approached
by foreigners interested in sponsoring renovation of their
old Tibetan houses, but the authorities did not allow it.
A
17 year-old boy
from Lhasa City
told TCHRD that in 1997 around 150 traditional Tibetan
houses were demolished in the eastern part of Lhasa. The
residents were poor Tibetans who could not afford to pay
taxes for their homes. They were expelled to their native
villages, and were not given any compensation. After the
houses were demolished apartment buildings for Chinese
officials and settlers were constructed on the site.
Nyima Tsering,
17 years old from Gyatso-toe village in Lhasa Municipality
arrived in exile in July 1999. He reported that before
1980 there were around 21 Tibetan families in his village
and most of them were farmers. After 1980 the Chinese
authorities started to confiscate land to build hotels
and living quarters for retired Chinese officials. As
compensation, the authorities paid only 2,000 to 3,000
yuan per mu, and no resettlement plans were initiated
for the farmers. Since 1980, the Chinese have built many
houses around the village for the retired Chinese officials
or settlers. Presently there are approximately 300 such
families living in Gaytso-toe and all their houses were
built on confiscated lands of resident farmers.
Article 5(e) (iv) of the CERD guarantees the right of
everyone, without distinction as to race, colour, or
national or ethnic origin, to enjoy:
The right to public health, medical care, social security
and social services.
The Chinese government claims great improvement
in the health sector in Tibet. While it is true
that a significant number of health institutions
have been established, the distribution of these is
discriminatory. The majority of hospitals and medical
clinics are in urban areas, serving mainly Chinese
rather than Tibetans. Tibetans from rural areas report
difficulties in acquiring the necessary medical treatment
due to lack of health facilities.
The Chinese government claims that "[m]edical treatment is
free in farming and pastoral areas, and is financed jointly
by personal medical insurance and the state in cities and
towns" and that "[w]omen from minority nationalities in
Tibet enjoy free medical service provided by the state."
These claims are negated by testimonies from Tibetans
indicating that the Tibetan people, both men and women, are
charged for all medical services, often in a discriminatory
manner. This is a major barrier to health care access for
Tibetans, as few have the financial resources to cover
such high medical expenses. Before being admitted into
a hospital one is required to pay a deposit. Tibetan
refugees report that people not being able to pay the
required deposit are denied treatment, irrespective of
their condition. The lack of facilities and high expenses
discriminates against Tibetans and deter many from seeking
medical treatment.
The Chinese government continues to implement its policy of
birth control in all areas of Tibet. Although Chinese
women are also subjected to birth control policies, the
restriction of the reproductive rights of Tibetan women
must be viewed as discrimination against the Tibetan
people. Given the low density of Tibetan population in
Tibet there is no rational basis for controlling the timing
and number of births among Tibetans.
Sangye Tsering
from Tsokho township, Dingri County, Shigatse Prefecture
in "TAR" described that in his village there is
only one doctor, who does not have the proper medical
qualifications. Furthermore, the roads are very bad making
it extremely difficult to transport seriously ill people
to the county hospital. Many people die of this reason.
Yeshi,
31 years old from Burang County in Ngari Prefecture, "TAR",
arrived in Dharamsala in November 1999. She said that the
conditions and treatment level in the hospital in Burang
are poor, still the medical charges are very high. For the
Chinese living in the area there is a separate hospital
inside an army camp, and Tibetans are not admitted.
Despite guarantees under both international and Chinese
national law, Tibetans continue to be discriminated against
in various sectors of life.
The distinguishing feature of discrimination of the
Tibetans in Tibet lies in the fact that the Tibetan
people do not have any political rights, which serve as
the foundational principle against which discriminatory
policies or effects of the state may be measured.
The integral role of the CCP in the political sector
enables policies, the effects of which result in making
the Tibetan people susceptible to discrimination.
The demographic changes resulting from the policy of
population transfer, coupled with the premium placed
on the Chinese language, results in unequal access to
employment, education, housing and health services. The
Chinese authorities claim that they do not have policies
that are discriminating. However, evidence indicates
that the larger structural policies, when translated into
their microscopic effects, result in discrimination of
the Tibetan people.
[ Contents ]
[ Recommendations ]
|
