India Deports Rohingya Refugees
Emergency food, drinking water and shelter to help people displaced in the Rakhine State in 2012.
India deported seven Rohingya refugees back to their home country of Myanmar on October 4 amid sentiments of opposition of illegal immigration. These refugees had been detained since 2012 in the eastern state of Assam. The United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) denounced the decision, condemning India for denying the refugees legal counsel and for not allowing the UNHCR to assess their asylum claims. The refugees’ appeal to restrain deportation was denied by the Indian Supreme Court, who cited that the detainees were accepted by their home country as residents and the refugees’ 2016 appeal to Myanmar was to be repatriated. Yet, this comes before the Supreme Court considers a petition to deem the government’s move to deport all approximately 40,000 Rohingya refugees, 18,000 of whom are registered with the UNHCR, regardless of their refugee status.
Rohingya Muslims have historically been persecuted in Buddhist-majority Myanmar where they are incorrectly considered illegal Bengali immigrants and stripped of equal rights and citizenship. They reside mostly in central Rakhine, a western state in Myanmar. Following Rohingya militant attacks against security forces that killed 12 personnel, the Myanmar military, supported by Rakhine Buddhist mobs, led a brutal offensive in Central Rakhine that drove over 700,000 Rohingya refugees from their homes and forced them to seek asylum in neighboring Bangladesh.
Though the Myanmar government denies any violence against civilians, a 444 page UN fact-finding report commissioned by the UN Council for Human Rights found that there was a level of premeditation and “genocidal intent” in the military offensives. Myanmar claims to be taking steps towards repatriating its Rohingya population and providing a path to citizenship for those who return through a verification document that labels them as “Bengali” instead of Rohingya. The path to greater equality and citizenship has not been explicitly outlined. Instead, the Myanmar government touts its infrastructure for returning Rohingya which is generally viewed by the refugees as a façade behind which more persecution hides.
In India, the nationalist Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) plans on deporting all 40,000 Rohingya refugees to enforce their strict policies against illegal immigration. Government officials have likened the refugees to “termites” whose mass influx threatens “Assamese jobs and culture.” Rijiju, a prominent minister, justifies the mass deportation as well as the deportation of the seven Rohingya men by stating that India is not a “signatory to the accord on refugees” and thus can deport illegal migrants.
However, human rights activists in India point out the government’s liability, as refugees are still in danger if sent back. This violates the international refugee law of non-refoulement, which prohibits the returning of refugees when they would be subject to persecution. India must abide by this law even though it is not a signatory. The ensuing possible petition by a revolutionary progressive Indian Supreme Court will determine whether or not refugee rights are upheld in an increasingly anti-migration environment.