राहदानी नविकरण नहुँदा अमेरिकाका नेपाली आक्रोसित
Setopati

अमेरिकामा राजनीतिक शरणार्थी लिएका र तीनका परिवारलाई सरकारले मेसिन रिडेवल पासर्पोट (एमआरपी) नदिएकोमा यहाँ बस्ने नेपालीहरू सरकारप्रति आक्रोशित भएका छन्।

नेपाली जनसम्पर्क समिति कोलोराडो च्याप्टरद्धारा आइतवार आयोजित कार्यक्रममा सहभागी नेपालीले आफ्नो जाय जेथा नेपालमा रहेको र अल्पकालिन रुपमा वस्नका लागि शरणार्थी लिनुपरेको अवस्थामा सरकारको यस्तो रवैया दुभार्ग्यपुर्ण भएको बताए।

यहाँ राजनीतिक शरणार्थी लिनु भनेको कानुनी रुपमा बस्नका लागि मात्र हो भन्ने सम्वन्धित निकायले नवुझ्दा अप्ठ्यारो परेको उनीहरुले बताए। आउने नोभेम्बर महिनादेखि हातले लेखेको राहदानी उपयोग गर्न सकिदैन। शरणार्थी लिनेले प्रकृया पुरा गरेमा पाँच बर्षपछि मात्र अमेरिकाको पासपोर्ट लिन योग्य हुन्छन्। तर, वासिंटन डीसीस्थित नेपाली दूतावास र न्यूओर्कमा रहेको कन्सुलेट जनरल कार्यालयले शरणार्थी छाप लागेको पासपोर्ट नविकरण गर्न इन्कार गर्दै आएको छ।
कोलोराडो बस्दै आएका लोककुमार रेग्मीले अमेरिका बस्ने सयौं नेपाली पासपोर्ट नविकरण नहुँदा अप्ठ्यारोमा परेको बताए। यो समस्या तत्काल सम्वोधन नभए यस्ता सयौं नेपाली प्रति ठूलो अन्याय हुने उनले दुखेसो पोखे।

जनसम्पर्क समितिका उपाध्यक्ष धर्मराज श्रेष्ठले यो पासपोर्ट नविकरण मुद्दा प्रमुख समस्याका रुपमा आएको बताए। 'प्रधानमन्त्रीलाई जानकारी गराउँदासमेत अहिलेसम्म सम्वोधन नहुनु दूर्भाग्यपुर्ण हो,' श्रेष्ठले भने। झण्डै १ वर्षदेखि अमेरिकामा शरणार्थी पाएका र तीनका परिवारको राहदानी नविकरण भएको छैन।

यस बारेमा पराराष्ट्र मन्त्रालयले हालसम्म दिने निर्णय गरेको छैन। वासिंटनस्थित नेपाली दूतावासका कर्मचारीले गृहमन्त्रालयसँग पनि यो विषय सम्वन्धी रहेकाले यो निर्णयमा ढिलाई भएको बुझिएको बताए। अब छि्ट्टै यसवारेमा सकारात्मक निर्णय हुने आशा हामीले गरेका छौ,' ती कर्मचारीले भने। नेपाली जनसम्पर्क समिति अमेरिकाका अध्यक्ष आनन्द विष्टले यस समस्या वारे प्रधानमन्त्री सुशील कोइराला न्यूओर्क आउँदा आफूहरुले उठाएको जानकारी दिए। 'प्रधानमन्त्रीले त्यसवेला परराष्ट्रसँग कुरागरी यो समस्या तत्काल हटाउने आश्वासन दिनुभएकेा थियो,' विष्टले भने, 'तर अहिलेसम्म किन समस्या अड्केको छ यसवारेमा पुन: दवाव दिन्छौ।

राहदानी नविकरण रोक्नुपर्ने कुनै कारण नरहेको वताउँदै विष्टले यस्तो हुनु दुर्भाग्यपूर्ण रहेको बताए। अमेरिकामा करिव ५ हजारभन्दा बढीले शरणर्थी लिएको अनुमान छ। यसवाहेक युरोप र अष्ट्रेलियामा पनि नेपालीले शरणर्थी लिएका छन्। यसरी शरणार्थी पाउनेले परिवार पनि ल्याउन पाउँछन्। शरणार्थी लिनेलाई भन्दापनि राहदानीमा छाप हुने तीनका परिवारले एमआरपी पाएका छैनन्।

प्रकृया पूरा गरेर नेपालबाटै आउने शरणार्थीका परिवारको राहदानी नविकरण नगर्नू कुनै तर्कले पनि नमिल्ने नेपालीहरुको भनाई छ। नेपाली दूतावास डीसीमा एमआरपी लिनेको चाप निकै बढेको छ। प्रति महिना एक हजार भन्दा बढीको आवेदन आइरहेको ती कर्मचारीले वताए। यहाँ एमआरपी लिन २ महिनाभन्दा वढी समय लाग्ने गरेको छ। दूतावासमा नविकरणका लागि आएका निवेदन संकलन गरेर प्रत्येक महिना दुई पटक नेपाल पठाउने गरिएको छ।

Do you guys agree that they should be allowed to renew their passport? Are all Nepali are refugees? According to United Nations Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees has adopted the following definition of a refugee
" [A]ny person who: owing to a well-founded fear of being persecuted for reasons of race, religion, nationality, membership of a particular social group, or political opinion, is outside the country of his nationality, and is unable to or, owing to such fear, is unwilling to avail himself of the protection of that country"

How true is this for Nepalese?

Cardinal Bro-
I just notice this thread yesterday, and totally understand this issue is important to all asylee and lot of other people. I totally agree they are still Nepali citizen, even though they have applied for asylum and got approved, and I am not in position, to influence this decision of Nepal government, I think they will eventually give it.

There is not difference in people who got GC by other way and asylee, if we think and accept that they did it just to find legal way to stay in US. But people need accept that thing. Asylum is granted for people whose life is at risk the moment they put their feet in their home country, and they appealed that their home state can’t provide them any security, they and their family’s life is at complete risk. Other type of GC holder didn’t agree to that.

Now I think they will easily get passport, if they go home and try to renew it or fight in court system. But filing asylum means, one no longer have trust on any state body, which includes judicial system too. The conflict of interest, is in one hand asylee agree that they don’t trust any government authority and other hand they try to maintain passport and use service of Nepal government. Remember that passport is not citizenship; Nepal government is responsible for its passport holder in case emergency, receiving in case of deportation, evacuation etc, but not for travel document holder. Do asylee want to travel with Nepal government passport and evacuated to Nepal in case of emergency, where there life is already in risk? These are reason I think there is conflict of interest.

But do Nepal government cares about this thing, I don’t think so. They are not renewing it, because they don’t know what to do, they think asylee already denounce the citizenship.

Most Nepalese Asylum seekers in US are suckers and Fakers.  

Government of Nepal should confiscated the property of all fake asylum seekers and blue passport holders and give it to poor and homeless. Stop using India route.

The real asylees whose life is at real risk back home will never apply for nepali passport. Do you think they will ever go back to nepal with nepali passport to get themselves killed? hahahaha.

So, now that we have established, the asylee can get travel document, why does he/she need a passport?

People who say obtaining GC by any other means is similar to getting one via asylum route seem to have confused with the motive. Asylum seeker have declared that the country that they were citizen of, is not safe for them. Other GC holders are thus not under the same category. Why is this important? Because you are trying to get travel document from the same country that you said isn't safe for your habitat.

Now if you think the hostile situation no longer exists and you should be allowed back in the country then you have to surrender you asylum status.

meraj bro - thanks for the thoughtful reply. I think the conflict of interest you mention is the reason why many people have a conflict regarding granting passport renewal to asylees. Lets probe that a bit if you don't mind.

Lets think from the individual's perspective. If the asylee has lost faith in the government's ability to provide security, does that necessarily mean that s/he has lost all faith in govt? I do not think so. Here is an example. If someone is genuinely concerned that his life is at risk in Nepal because he was a political activist whose views are strongly opposed by the govt. S/he might still have faith in the judiciary. He might however be concerned that the govt would not even allow him to have a fair trial, and he might be killed in 'encounter'. The point I am making is that it is not always true that the asylee has lost all faith in every aspect of the government, only that he sees serious risks to his security. So if there is a situation if he is traveling with Nepali passport and that Nepali govt makes any effort to rescue him, he does have a choice to comply with the offer for help or decline it. As an individual he should be empowered to make that decision. So I do not see a serious conflict of interest here.

Now lets think about it from State's perspective. The conflict of interest might arise if the state needs to rescue someone who has clearly stated that he is not confident in the state's ability to ensure his safety. Should the state still bother to rescue him? Before I answer this, let me pose you some scenarios: When Parwej Mussaraf took over military rule in Pakistan, Nawaj Sharif and Benajir bhutto took asylum in UK and UAE ( I think). After 9-11 Benajir Bhutto even came to the US and gave public speeches about the menace of Taliban that was threatening Afganisthan and Pakistan. If she had been in an accident during her travel, the Army govt. at that time might not have been too keen to rescue her. But do you think the ordinary citizens of Pakistan would have wanted her to be rescued? The point I am trying to make here is that it is not always what the State wants, but what do the citizens of that country want the State to do on their behalf that is important. If Nepal Govt raises this issue in the parliament and the members of parliament vote to discontinue granting support to asylees then I have nothing to say. But the scenario we have is that the govt. of Nepal has made a unilateral decision without any discussion with stakeholders or with the public.

SIS - The thread debate is not really whether Nepali asylum seekers in US are fake or not, rather it is regarding whether an asylee should have his/her passport renewed by home country or not.

sbh - Be careful what you wish for. If you think it is ok for government to take over private property with the pretext that they left the country, then there is nothing stopping the govt from taking over anyone else's property (including yours and mine) under some other flimsy pretext. There is a reason why 'right to due process' is an important right in a democratic society.

Kiddo - the travel document you mention is for travel back to Nepal. Passport is for travel to other countries apart from Nepal. There is a difference

It does not make sense to provide passport of the country where you escaped persecution and settled down to the foreign country as a asylee. btw travel document will let you travel to other foreign countries too but you have to go through the normal visa process.
You are asking for refuge in the host country fearing persecution from the home country. You have been given refuge here. Now, why would you want the passport from the home country renewed? YOu have provision for travel with the travel document to any country provided that you follow the visa procedure. With the home country passport, I guess you want to travel back and maintain properties there which totally fcuks up the asylee case in the host country. Anyway, idk if its fake or real or whatever the case might be. once you have refuge in the host country, the validity of the home country goes down the drain. Considering your refuge in the host country, now why would the home country want to give you passport and stuff?

Cardinal, wouldn't it be prudent to research the topic before refuting somebody's statement? Travel document is treated like US passport and it's not only for travel to Nepal.

This might help: http://www.nolo.com/legal-encyclopedia/applying-refugee-travel-document.html

I simply don't understand why a refugee would need a Nepali passport when there is the travel document, other than illegit reasons of course.

Kiddo - Thank you for the link. I was not aware that one could travel to a third country with the refugee travel document. I appreciate you enlightening me on that. That does take away one of the key reasons I was advocating for granting passport renewal to asylees.

Cardinal Bro – I really didn’t understand your point on your last post. But any way, my example of rescue was just one example. Government of Nepal is responsible for many other services/ consular services for its passport holder and I don’t think true asylee wants those services from home country from where they ran for fear for their life, and also not all time people are in position to make decisions in time of emergency.

And also I get change to read this whole thread, again, and I have to say, some comments to yaaku are not fair. I know this thread is not about people’s asylum application fake or not, but if we see with common sense approach, it will come down to that. Basic question is, why would asylee need passport from home country? If applicant is true asylee, I don’t see they would want it, until the scenario changes in favorable way for them to go back home. And if they return home, they can fight in court system or I think they will just get it. If they are fake applicant, they will need it, cause they want to go home and they can’t use travel document for that. So, it really does matter, if the applicant has true or fake intention.

And regarding Nepal government taking decision, again common sense approach like our Chai Party Fellows , Nepal is country without constitution right, law to define this, is way too low in food chain. And governments being executive body have a full right to define gray area in regulation, unless it is over thrown by congress or judicial. So, unless there is clear law for it, it is government of Nepal, who will decide how to handle it.

Now will it be defined in LAW, that asylee of Nepal should get passport renewed soon, doesn’t look like. Looks like back channel negotiation is only way out for now. Seems like decision of filing asylum, without true reason or risk on life, will come heavy on some people. Some sort of dual citizenship or dual right will come sooner or later, but do asylee will be eligible for that, let’s see how law will be crafted. Haa. i love these free time on holiday season, bunch of free time to type long post on sajha..

I see your point cardinal, but I agree with Meraj. I just don't see a reason for passport for asylee.

Hence, this thread makes it clear that Nepalese asylee in USA do not need Nepalese passport. Anyone who are still in confusion, I will recommend to follow meraj's and Kiddo's comments. Jai Nepal!!

If someone travels to his country upon being granted asylum, that person may no longer be suffering persecution in his home country. On this ground, his green card may be revoked.

This does not mean that a person should be imprisoned to American territory upon being asylum. Right to travel outside the country of your residence is a part of human right. In order to cross border, one needs a passport. An asylum is not eligible to get a US passport because he is not a US citizen.

Unless there is a law in the Nepal’s book stating that a person loses Nepali citizenship upon seeking asylum (or upon being granted asylum), that person’s Nepali citizenship continues to be in good standing. Not issuing, renewing or validating Nepali passport to a bona fide Nepali citizen is a violation of law. Until a person’s Nepali citizenship is in good standing (in this case, it is) that person should have, as a part of his fundamental right, ability to retain, maintain, and extend (or renew) his Nepali passport.

Whether or not that person needs a Nepali passport is a moot question. Does each Nepali need a passport? If you intend to travel to other countries (or cross the border); you will need. A passport is also considered a proof of citizenship. Those who believe that a person granted asylum should not be allowed to renew it, should voice his or her opinion to Nepali legislators to have Nepali law amended. In a country where legislators can’t come to agreement in formulation constitution for decades (remember, constitution is main law of a country), good luck with that. If you believe some of your friends, relatives, or acquaintances has been granted asylum, chill out, and continue to be hopeful that the adjudicating officers have done a thorough job prior to granting that status. Again please, chill out.

बिकसित र सुरक्ष्या ब्यबस्था राम्रो भएका देसमा शरण लिएका नेपालीहरु आफ्नो देश बिरुद्ध वा देशको कानुन बिरुद्ध अपराध गरेर देश छोडेका मान्छे होइनन - भुटान सरकारले नेपाली मुलका भुटानीलाई यो बर्गमा राखेको छ, तेही भएर त भुटानमा हुदा सरकारी जागिर खाएका मान्छे हरुको भुटानी-पासपोर्ट जफत गरेर वा पासपोर्ट आफु संगै भए पनि निस्क्रिय गर्दियेर वा नबिकरण नगर्दियेर भुटान सरकारले उनीहरुलाई पासपोर्ट सुबिधा बाट बन्चित गरेको थियो | अनि कतिपय लाइ चौथो मुलुक (भारत बाहेक ) जानको लागि नेपाल सरकाले travel document दिने गर्थ्यो |

तेस्रो मुलुकमा शरण लिएका नेपालीको सन्दर्भ अल्लि फरक छ | उनीहरु वर्तमान राज्यले (कार्यपालिका, न्यापालिका, व्यबस्थापिका है ) आफ्नो सुरक्ष्या दिन सकेन भनेर बिदेशमा शरण लिएका हुन् | उनीहरुलाई नेपाली हुनुको अधिकार कसैले खोस्न सक्दैन - जुन कुरा नागरिकता र पासपोर्टको कागजकै खोस्टाले दिने हो | कसैले भन्ला- तेस्तो विश्वास नभएको राज्य/सरकारले जारी गर्ने राहदानी किन लिनु पर्यो | तर वर्तमान राज्य संग विश्वास नभएपनि नेपाल-देश संगै सम्बन्ध बिच्छेद गर्नु पर्छ भन्ने कुरो जायज होइन | अहिले देशमा ज्यानकै खतरा भएर बस्नै नसक्ने भए पनि भबिस्यमा जब नेपाली राज्य प्रति भरोसा र विश्वास जाग्छ अनि उनीहरु फर्केलन - कमसेकम कसैले येसो भन्यो भने होइन भन्ने आधार केहि हुन्न |

मैले यो सबै भनेर शरण लिने हरुको पक्ष्यमा बोलेको होइन है | मेरा पुराना comments हरुमा अधिकांशले कस्ता कस्ता काइते र नक्कली कारण देखाएर शरण लिएका छन् भनेर बिरोध गरेकै छु | तर शरण दिने देशले अधिकांश नक्कली कथामा विश्वास गरेर दिएकै छ अनि नेपाली-राज्यले पनि ज्यानको सुरक्ष्याको कारणले कसैले पनि बिदेशमा शरण लिन पर्ने अवस्था छैन भनेर कानुनी वा कुटनीतिक माध्यमबाट यो कामलाई निषेध गर्न सकेको छैन \ तेसैले तेस्रो देशमा शरण लिने मान्छेलाई नेपाली पासपोर्टबाट बन्चित गर्ने आधार देखिन मैले |

Cost, Validity Period, and primary reason for applying for various "travel documents"

1. Re-entry permit - $445. 2 years. It enables permanent residents to stay outside the US for upto 2 years w/o losing their green cards.

2. Refugee Travel document - $220. 1 year. It enables refugees and asylees to travel outside the US provided that they don't have green cards.

3. Passports (Nepali) - $50-$150 (depending on where you apply it from) - 10 years. It can be used by any permanent resident to travel all over the globe.

Hope this 'clarifies' people's doubts and queries pertaining to Nepali refugees/asylees wishing to renew their Nepali passports.

Looks like people are panicked that we made decision, not to give passport to asylee, but that not the case. There are few different aspect discussed here.

1. Do asylee need passport? –Looks like true asylee won’t need it, as travel document can substitute it
2. Do asylee want it? ------ Looks like most of them definitely do.
3. Can they get it? ------Looks like as of now they can’t get it renewed.
4. Who makes decision? -----Of course Nepal government, unless there is clear law defined by congress of Nepal or judicial of Nepal.
5. Can asylee fight for it? ----Of course they can in court of Nepal, or do lobbying for it.
6. Will community support it? ---Doesn’t look like there is huge support to fight heavily for it , but they may not heavily oppose it, if Nepal government agrees to give it.
7. Is passport basic/human right of asylee? ---- This will have personal opinion, I personally do not think, for asylee getting passport from home country, from where they flee is human right issue. When they have to flee from home country, there is biggest human right issue for them is being able to go back to their home. If that got fixed, passport will get fixed automatically. So the argument of passport as human right issue doesn’t carry weight for at least me. Through I am not expert on international law and human right, my common sense doesn’t allow me to accept that.

here is the lawyer point of view

अमेरीकामा एजाईलीको स्टाटस पाएको नेपाली नागरिकले फेरी नेपाल जानुपर्दा नेपालको पासपोर्ट प्रयोग गर्न पाऊने कि नपाऊने ??
- बिनोद रोका, Attorney at Law, न्यूर्योक

अमेरीकामा एजाईलीको स्टाटस पाएको नेपाली नागरिकले फेरी नेपाल जानुपर्दा नेपालको पासपोर्ट प्रयोग गर्न पाऊने कि नपाऊने- भन्ने विषयमा अमेरीकामा प्राय चर्चा परिचर्चा हुने गर्दछ। यसै बिच चाडै नै एमआरपी पासपोर्ट नबनाएमा पुरानो नेपाली पासपोर्टबाट विदेश भ्रमणगर्न नसकिने भन्ने कारणले गर्दा पनि नेपालीहरुले आफनो पासपोर्ट नविकरण गराऊने वा नया बनाऊने काम गरि रहेका छन। अमेरीकामा शरणार्थीको स्टाटस पाएका व्यक्तिहरुले सम्वन्धित निकाय समक्ष गै नेपाली पासपोर्ट नविकरण वा नया बनाऊनका लागि अनुरोध गर्दा हाल यस्ता व्यक्तिहरुलाई नेपाली पासपोर्ट दिइएको छैन भन्ने सुनिन्छ। र यसरी नेपाली नागरिकलाई नेपालकै पासपोर्ट नदिईनु कानुनन हुदैन भन्ने गुनासाहरु छापामा आऊने गरेको पाईन्छ।
मेरो बिचारमा अमेरीकामा एजाईजीको स्टाटस वा सोको आधारमा ग्रिनकार्ड पाएको नेपालको पासपोर्ट भएको व्यक्तिले अमेरीकाबाट बाहिर जानुपर्दा नेपालको पासपोर्ट होईन कि Refugee Travel Document(RTD) प्रयोग गर्नु पर्दछ। यदि यस्को ठाऊमा शरणार्थीले नेपालको पासपोर्ट नै प्रयोग गर्ने हो भने उस्ले आफुले अमेरीकामा शरणार्थीकोको स्टाटस पाऊनका लागि नेपालमा रहदा त्यहाको
सरकार वा सरकारले पनि नियन्त्रण गर्न नसकेको व्रि्रोही समुहले विगतमा निजको जात, धर्म, राष्ट्रि्यता, कुनै निश्चित सामाजीक समुह, जस्तो सेना वा प्रहरीका परिवार, भुतपर्ुव सेना वा प्रहरी वा अन्य समुह, जो स्पष्ट रुपबाट चिनिन सकिन्छ, को सदस्यता वा राजनैतिक बिचारधाराको आधारमा यातना पाएको र भविष्यमा पनि त्यस्ता यातना दिईने प्रबल सम्भावना धभिि ायगलमभम ाभबच रहेको छ भन्ने तथ्य पुष्टिका लागि दिएको घटना विवरण र त्यसलाई प्रमाणित गर्न पेश गरिएका प्रमाणहरु dmुठृा रहेछन भनि अनुमान गर्न सकिने बलियो आधार बन्दछ। यसरी गरिएको अनुमान विश्वसनिय देखिएमा पुन अमेरीकी अद्यागमन विभागले छानविन गरि व्यक्तिलाई दिएको स्टाटस बदर गरी देश निष्कासनको लागि कार्वाही चलाऊन सक्दछ।

अमेरीकामा एजाईलीको स्टाटस पाएका र एजाईलीको स्टाटसबाट ग्रीनकार्ड पाएका व्यक्तिहरुले प्राय सोध्ने गर्नुहुन्छ नेपाली पासपोर्ट लिएर नेपाल गएर अमेरीकामा प्रवेश गर्दा कुनै अपठ्यारो पर्छ कि पर्दैन- जवाफमा अमेरीकी पासपोर्ट लिएर जादा राम्रो हुन्छ। नेपाली पासपोर्टको आधारमा आवतजावत गर्दा पछि अपठ्यारो पर्न सक्छ भन्ने गर्दछु। फेरी प्रश्नकर्ताको सवाल हुन्छ फलानो फलानो त नेपाली पासपोर्ट र अमेरीकी ग्रीनकार्ड लिएर आऊने जाने गरेका छन केही समस्या भएन रे अमेरीकामा प्रवेश गर्दा, एजाईलीको स्टाटस त माओवादीको कारणले पाएको हो नेपाल सरकारले दिने पासपोर्ट लिदा के हुन्छ र-आदि। तर ज जस्लाई समस्या परयो ती व्यक्तिहरुको वारेमा प्रश्नकर्तालाई थाहा जानकारी भएको हुन्न। किनकि एजाईलीको स्टाटस पाएका नेपालीले ग्रीनकार्ड पाएपछि नेपाली पासपोर्टको आधारमा नेपाल गएर अमेरीका प्रवेश गर्दा ऋद्यए का अधिकारीहरुले ग्रीनकार्ड लिएर रिमोभल अर्थात अमेरीकाबाट निष्कासन गरिनु पर्छ भनि अद्यागमन अदालतमा कार्वाही चलाएको मुद्दामा आफैले प्रतिरक्षा गरेको छु।

एजाईलीले अमेरिकाबाट बाहिर जानुपर्ने भएमा इम्रि्रेशन र्सर्भिसबाट पर्ुव स्विकृती लिएर अर्थात च्त्म् लिएर जानुपर्ने हुन्छ। किनकि आई १३१ फाराममा स्पष्ट रुपबाट च्त्म् को व्यवस्था रिफ्युजी। एजाईली र यस्को आधारमा अमेरीकाको ग्रिनकार्ड पाएका व्यक्तिहरुका व्यक्तिका लागि भनिएको छ। च्त्म् को अवधि १ बर्षो लागि मान्य हुने गर्दछ। यस्तो अनुमति पत्र लिएर अमेरिका बाहिर छोटो समयका लागि गएको व्यक्ति पुन अमेरिका र्फकन पाउछ। सामान्यतया च्त्म् अमेरिका छोडनु अगाडी नै लिनुपर्ने हुन्छ। यद्यपी अपवादको रुपमा समय र परीस्थिति हेरी अमेरिका बाहिर पनि पाउन सकिने हुन्छ। तर च्त्म् पाएकै आधारमा अमेरिकामा प्रवेश पाईन्छ नै भन्ने चाहि होइन। किनकि एजाइलीले पोर्ट अफर् इन्ट्र्ीमा ऋद्यए अफिसरको सोधपुछमा चित्तबुdmदो जवाफ दिइ पास भने हुनैपर्ने हुन्छ।

त्यस्तै एजाइलीको आधारमा ग्रीनकार्ड पाएका व्यक्तिले पनि च्त्म् लिएर अमेरिका बाहिर जान सक्दछ। तर यसरी आफुले यातना पाएको वा पाउने सम्भावना रहेको देशमा फर्किएर गै पुन अमेरिका आएको अवस्थामा भने एजाइलमबाट पाएको ग्रीनकार्ड बदर हुन पनि सक्ने हुन्छ। किनकि एजाइलमको आधारमा पाएको एजाइली स्टाटस व्यक्तिले ग्रीनकार्ड लिइसकेको भएपनि बदर हुन सक्दछ। किनकि भय र डर छ भनिएको देशमा स्वतन्त्रतापर्ुवक जान पाउन सक्ने भएमा एजाइलीले देखाएको डर वास्तविक एवं वस्तुगत रहेनछ भन्ने अनुमान गर्न सकिने हुन्छ। यस्का अतिरिक्त एजाइलम पाएका व्यक्ति आफनै स्वइच्छाले यातना पाउने भनिएको देशमा सुरक्षित र व्यवस्थित रुपले रहन थालेमा पनि ग्रीनकार्ड बदर हुन सक्ने सम्भावना रहन्छ। जस्तो कि त्यस्तो देशमा स्थायी बसोवास गर्ने हैसियत पाएमा, वा उक्त देशमा स्थायी बसोवास गर्न पाउने अन्य व्यक्ति सरहको अधिकार र कर्तव्य भयरहित रुपमा उपभोग गर्न पाउने सम्भावना रहेको पाइएमा।

एजाइलमको आधारमा ग्रीनकार्ड पाएका व्यक्तिले यातना पाउने सम्भावना रहेको भनिएको देशमा गै पुन अमेरिका प्रवेश गर्दाको अवस्थामा ऋद्यए अफिसरले त्यो देशमा जादा सुरक्षित रहे नरहेको विषयमा प्रश्न गर्न सक्दछन। यसरी सोधपुछ गर्दा व्यक्तिले दिएको उत्तरमा भयरहित रुपमा बसोवास गरेको पाइएमा ऋद्यए ले कतिपय अवसथ्ामा यस्ता व्यक्तिहरु एजाइलमबाट पाएको एजाइलीको स्टाटस रद्द गरिने कार्बाही चलाउन सक्दछन। तर्सथ एजाइली र यसबाट ग्रीनकार्ड पाएका व्यक्ति आफुले यातना पाउने सम्भावना रहेको भनिएको देशमा अमेरिकी नागरिक नभएसम्म छोटै समयका लागि भएपनि फर्केर जादा जोखीम उठाउनु पर्ने देखिन्छ।

अत यस्तो अवस्थामा अमेरीकामा एजाईलीको स्टाटस पाएका र यस्को आधारमा ग्रीनकार्ड लिएका व्यक्तिहरुले अमेरीकाभन्दा बाहिर जानुपर्दा ९च्त्म्० लिई भारत लगायतका अन्य भ्रमण गर्ने मुलुकको भिषा लिएर जानु ऊचित हुन्छ। मेरो जानकारीमा आए अनुसार सल्लाह दिइएका व्यक्तिहरुले भारत जानका लागि सजिलै संग भारतीय कन्सुलर अफिसबाट भिषा पाएको सुनेको छु। अमेरीकाको शरणार्थी परिचयपत्र र नेपालको पोसपोर्ट देखाएर नेपाल र भारत लगायतका अन्य देशमा आवत जावत गर्ने गरेमा अमेरीकी नागरिक्ता लिने बेलासम्म पनि संकाको घेरामा पर्न सकिन्छ। र यसरी संकाको घेरामा परिएम्ाा ऋद्यए ले स्टाटस बदर गरी देश निष्कासन गरी पाऊ भन्ने मुद्दा चलाऊन सक्ने सम्भावना रहन्छ। मेरो बिचारमा चिनी रोग लागेको भनेर ठहर गरिएको व्यक्तिले मिर्ठाई खादा के हुन्छ भन्नु र खानु भन्दा त्यस्लाई नछुनु नै उचित हुन्छ। त्यसैले अमेरीकामा एजाईलीकोे दर्जा पाएका वा सोको आधारमा यहाको ग्रीनकार्ड लिएका व्यक्तिले अमेरीकाको नागरिक भै अमेरीकी पासपोर्ट लिएर वा च्त्म् को आधारमा भिषा लिएर अमेरीका बाहिर जानु सुरक्षित हुन सक्दछ।

ंबिनोद रोका, न्यर्ूयाेक राज्यको उच्च न्यायालय, अपिलाट डिभिजनको दोश्रो न्याय विभागमा र्एटनी एट ल को रुपमा मान्यता प्राप्त वकिल र अमेरीकर्ीर् इम्रि्रेशन बार एशोसियसन एवं न्यूर्योकर् इम्रि्रेशन बार एशोसियसनका सदस्य हुनुहुन्छ। हाम्रो कानुनी सेवा प्रति यहाको ध्यानाकर्षा रहोस भन्ने ध्येय यहा राखिएको छ। तपाइहरुलाई अगाडीको जस्तैैै सफलता दिलाऊने हाम्रो प्रयास रहनेछ यद्यपि सफलताको ग्यारेण्टी भने हाम्रो हातमा छैन। यहालाई यो लेखमा चर्चा गरिएको विषयमा सामान्य जानकारी गराउने सम्मको ध्येय राखिएको छ। तर्सथ निश्चित सेवाको लागि वकिल मुकरर नगरेसम्म हामीमा पक्ष र वकिलको सम्वन्ध कायम रहने छैन। कानुनले दिएको सुविधा प्राप्तीका लागिे निवेदन गर्नुपर्दार् इजाजत प्राप्त सम्वन्धित विषयका वकिलको सल्लाह लिई गर्नु उचित हुन्छ।

nepalmother.com

रोक्का जी उत्तर सरनार्थी भएर बसेका हरुको लागि नेपाल यात्रा गर्न हुन्छ हुदैन संग सम्बन्धित छ तर सरनार्थी भएर बसेकाले नपालको रहाहदानी नेपाल सरकारलाई बु झाउनु पर्छ भनि कसैले पनि ब्यक्त गर्नु भएन | यदि बुझाउनु नपर्ने प्राबधान भए अबस्य पनि नबिकरण हुनु पर्छ भन्ने मेरो जिकिर छ |

During these day i see so many Asylee has concerned about MRP. Most of them are not being able to get it . But the WEIRED thing is i have seen an asylee got his New MRP last week. His asylum got approved last year. And He applied his MRP 6 months ago. I Fucking hate the bias nature of NEPALI EMBASSY. IT'S CORRUPTED FOR BIG TIME AND ONE SHOULD TAKE ACTION FOR THIS. I am not for or against asylee But f**king hate the NEPALI EMBASSY. I can provide a proof if any one take action against this. If you have power and money you can by NEPALI EMBASSY.