Ambiguities Over the Status of Rohingyas in India

Synopsis:

India has shown an ambiguous stance over the status of Rohingyas in India. This has created some complexities, thus it desires alteration as per international law.

Background:

• It is assumed that the Supreme Court(SC) has implicitly accepted the center’s view that Rohingya in India are illegal immigrants. 
• The belief is based on the court’s refusal to release 300 Rohingyas from detention camps in Jammu and Delhi. The court called for their deportation under the Foreigners Act, 1946.
• However, different countries/organizations have different stances over them.

Stand of different Stakeholders over the status of Rohingyas :

• The UN treats Rohingya as refugees. As per the organization, the Myanmar military crackdown in Rakhine state in 2017 created the world’s biggest refugee crisis.
  • The 1951 UN convention on the status of refugees and 1967 protocol defines refugees as:
    • Persons who fled their homes and countries due to a well-founded fear of persecution. The persecution can be because of his/her race, religion, nationality, membership of a particular social group, or political opinion.
• Bangladesh gave refuge to Rohingyas in the Cox Bazaar region on humanitarian grounds. It converted the region into the biggest refugee camp in the world.
• Myanmar believes that Rohingyas are illegal immigrants that entered their country from Bangladesh. 

Ambiguous Stance of India:

• The Indian PM has assured Bangladeshi PM that both countries will ensure the return of Rohingya refugees to Myanmar sustainably. There are about a million refugees in Myanmar and 40000 in India.
• Further, India allowed the UN High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) to carry out verification and provide some of them with identity cards. Approximately 14000  issued refugee identity cards.
• However, the solicitor general has imposed allegations of terrorism and communalism on them and demanded their deportation.

How has India been able to maintain this ambiguity?

• The country is non-signatory to the 1951 UN Convention or the 1967 Protocol.
• Further, it doesn’t have a dedicated refugee law or policy that determines who should be given the refugee status.
  • Some people say the Citizenship Amendment Act, 2019 comes closest to a refugee policy. Although it discriminates between refugees on the basis of religion in offering them Indian citizenship.

It allows the government to declare any person as an illegal migrant. Despite this, the country has nearly 3 lakh refugees.

Issues with Deportation of Rohingyas:

• An influx of Pro-Democracy Protestors: They have entered India through Manipur and Mizoram since the Feb 2021 military coup in Myanmar. If refugee status is given to them, then it would be very difficult to deport Rohingyas as both face a threat of persecution.
• Cooperation from Myanmar: Myanmar is reluctant to admit Rohingyas under its territory. Further India has been able to send back only a few refugees in the last 4 years. 
• Principle of non-refoulment: The desire to send back Rohingyas goes against this principle. India is bound to follow it as it is a signatory to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.
  • • The principle states that no refugee shall be returned in any manner to any country where he or she would be at risk of persecution.
• Differential Treatment: India offers Voluntary repatriation to Sri Lankan Tamil refugees after the end of the civil war in 2009. Further, they can seek jobs and send their children to schools. 

Thus, the need is to engage with agencies like UNHCR (United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees) and country of origin (Myanmar). This will result in the creation of an enabling environment for voluntary repatriation in consonance with international law.

Source: Indian Express