India’s obligations towards Rohingya Refugees

Context: A recent study was conducted by the Azadi Project and Refugee International on the plight of the Rohingya refugees which highlighted the gross violation of human and constitutional rights in the refugee camps.

Relevance of the Topic: Mains: Ethics and status of refugees in India, including citizenship issues. 

Who are Rohingya Refugees?

• Rohingya people of Myanmar constitute the world’s largest stateless population in the world estimating about 2.8 million.
• The group is denied citizenship, rights and faced genocide in the Myanmar’s Rakhine region. 
• As per the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR), India hosts a Rohingya population of 22,500 refugees.

India’s stand on Rohingya refugees:

• India is neither a signatory to the Refugee Convention, nor a party to the key International instruments such as:
  • Conventions against Torture and other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment
  • International Convention for the Protection of all Persons from Enforced Disappearance.
• Therefore, India maintains no legal obligations to provide asylum and adhere to non-refoulement.
  • Policy of Non-refoulement prohibits returning individuals to places where they face persecution, torture, or serious harm, protecting refugee and human rights.
• India continues to detain Rohingya refugees under domestic acts like:
  • The Foreigners Act, 1967 regulates the entry, stay, and departure of foreigners in India, along with deportation of the illegal migrants in India
  • The Passport Act, 1967 governs the issuance and regulation of passports in India
• India categorises Rohingya refugees as ‘Illegal Migrants’.
• Additional Information: 
  • Case regarding Rohingyas: Mohammad Salimullah versus Union of India 2021 rejected the plea to prevent deportation of 170 Rohingya illegal migrants.
  • The Supreme Court rejected the plea stating the right to reside is not a right under Article 21. 
  • The matters regarding Citizenship are part of the Union list in Schedule VII. 

Arguments for Non-Refoulement of Rohingyas:

• International Obligation: India is a signatory to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, whose Article 7 refrains from the refoulement of refugee to a place where that can face torture or cruel treatment.
• Lack of Domestic Law: Legal vacuum regarding refugee issue makes a ground to follow the international conventions and norms in this regard as per the Supreme Court in Vishakha versus State of Rajasthan case 1997.
• Constitutional Morality: Following non-refoulement principle will uphold constitutional morality as Article 51(c) of constitution mandates that the state must strive to promote respect for international laws and treaty obligations.
• Discriminatory Policy: The refuge policy of the government is discriminatory as Citizenship Amendment Act 2019 excludes persecuted rohingya muslims.

Arguments against Policy of Non-Refoulement:

• Non-signatory: India is not signatory to the Refugee convention, hence, India does not have a specific obligation on non-refoulement.
• Internal security: India’s security policy is strictly against illegal migration as it can create law and order issues in the nation. Example: Rohingya settlements in Sri Nagar removed due to security concerns.
• Resource constraints: India already has a vast population under poverty to address. Migrants will pose an additional burden on national resources.
• Cascading demand: Providing refugee status to Rohingya will have a cascading demand from the other regions too. Example: Ahmadiyya Muslim population in Pakistan.

Conclusion: The Rohingya issue is complex as it involves the angles like international law; internal security and governance; and ethical issues like humanity and protection to the aggrieved. India in order to address such challenges and issues should come up with a dedicated law and policy for refugees.