Supreme Court decision on the Rohingya’s status must protectthose fleeing persecution

The Supreme Court’s decision to examine the question whetherillegal immigrants are entitled to refugee status needs to be welcomed, butwith caution. It is debatable whether the Centre is right in claiming that thishas emerged as a substantial question of law in the context of the RohingyaMuslims from Myanmar. For, it is fairly obvious that those escaping persecutionin their home country are invariably undocumented. It logically follows thatthose fleeing conditions of war or conflict will have to be treated as refugeesfirst before their cases can be examined in detail, and deemed fit fordeportation as illegal entrants. It will be strange if any court holds that no illegalimmigrant is entitled to refugee status. That would amount to a perverse denialof the very existence of refugees as a class. What the government is perhapslooking for is a decision holding that it can choose the class of illegalimmigrants it wishes to treat as refugees; and that it can deny that status toany section it deems a threat to national security or is likely to strain localresources. The court’s decision to go into the issue, therefore, offers anopportunity to clarify India’s approach to the refugee question, which hasgenerally been favourable to vulnerable entrants, but is stridently hostile tothe Rohingya.

India is not a signatory to the UN Convention on the Statusof Refugees, 1951, and a Protocol adopted in 1967 on the subject. However,since Independence it has by and large adhered to the larger humanitarianprinciples underlying these instruments. In this backdrop, it is astonishingthat the present regime is determined to deport the Rohingya, in utterdisregard of the danger to their lives in Myanmar, and in violation of theprinciple of non-refoulement, the norm that prohibits states from forciblyreturning refugees to conditions that caused them to flee their homes in thefirst place. It will be amoral and unjust if this most vulnerable group fromMyanmar’s Rakhine state, numbering about 40,000 in India now, is denied refugeestatus. With the Centre taking a stand against treating them as refugees, apositive ruling is needed from the apex court to prevent their forcible deportation.The government’s keenness to deport the Rohingya is rooted in thetechnicalities of its citizenship law. It defines “illegal immigrant” as anyforeigner entering India without valid travel documents, or overstays apermitted period of stay. It rules out giving citizenship by registration tosuch illegal immigrants. The amendments it proposes to the Citizenship Act donot cover Muslim immigrants and are limited to persecuted Afghan, Bangladeshiand Pakistani minorities. India should work with the world community on thevoluntary repatriation of the Rohingya and not besmirch its fine record ofhumane treatment of refugees by pursuing the deportation option without relent.