<p class="bodytext">A United Nations expert on human rights has alleged that around 40 Rohingya refugees detained from Delhi early last month were made to board, blindfolded, an Indian Navy vessel to the Andaman Sea where they were forced off the ship to swim, with life-jackets, to a nearby island in Myanmar. Many of them had identity documents issued by the UN High Commissioner for Refugees. India has neither confirmed nor denied the incident. A petition filed before the Supreme Court alleged that the refugees included women and children. The apex court dismissed the petition, citing lack of evidence, but the UN Special Rapporteur for Human Rights situation in Myanmar, Thomas Andrews, has begun an inquiry into India’s “unconscionable” act. He has urged New Delhi to refrain from inhumane treatment of the Rohingya, including their repatriation into perilous conditions in Myanmar where the community faced violence and persecution.</p>.<p class="bodytext">India is not a signatory to the 1951 Refugee Convention and the absence of a comprehensive refugee framework has led to inconsistencies in its handling of asylum-seekers. The UNHCR, however, holds that the “principle of non-refoulement” (not sending back refugees to places where they face danger) is part of international law and, therefore, binding even on non-signatory states. The government told the Supreme Court that it did not consider Rohingya as refugees and hence, they would be deported according to the law. If the UN Special Rapporteur’s allegation has any iota of truth, the question arises whether the law of the land allows the Navy to force the Rohingya into Myanmar, where the ethnic cleansing against the community is well-documented. Even if the government does not want to grant refugee status to the Rohingya, cannot the deportation be more humane, in keeping with India’s civilisational values, its commitment to human rights and international laws, and its Vishwaguru aspirations?</p>.'Push back' route for sending 'illegal migrants' to Bangladesh spurs fear of harassment in Assam.<p class="bodytext">Himanta Biswa Sarma who heads Assam’s BJP-led government has confirmed that India, over the past few weeks, “pushed back” to Bangladesh several illegal migrants. The Ministry of External Affairs maintains that the Bangladesh government has, for several years, not done its bit to verify and accept its 2,369 citizens caught in India as illegal migrants. New Delhi and Dhaka had a Sonali Adhyay (golden chapter) in bilateral relations till August 2024. Why couldn’t India make Sheikh Hasina’s government take them back? Why did it opt for a pushback now, instead of a formal repatriation? After the Donald Trump administration deported 104 Indian illegal migrants from the United States aboard a military aircraft in February, the inhumane treatment of the deportees triggered uproar and a strong response from New Delhi. Shouldn’t India practise what it preaches?</p>
<p class="bodytext">A United Nations expert on human rights has alleged that around 40 Rohingya refugees detained from Delhi early last month were made to board, blindfolded, an Indian Navy vessel to the Andaman Sea where they were forced off the ship to swim, with life-jackets, to a nearby island in Myanmar. Many of them had identity documents issued by the UN High Commissioner for Refugees. India has neither confirmed nor denied the incident. A petition filed before the Supreme Court alleged that the refugees included women and children. The apex court dismissed the petition, citing lack of evidence, but the UN Special Rapporteur for Human Rights situation in Myanmar, Thomas Andrews, has begun an inquiry into India’s “unconscionable” act. He has urged New Delhi to refrain from inhumane treatment of the Rohingya, including their repatriation into perilous conditions in Myanmar where the community faced violence and persecution.</p>.<p class="bodytext">India is not a signatory to the 1951 Refugee Convention and the absence of a comprehensive refugee framework has led to inconsistencies in its handling of asylum-seekers. The UNHCR, however, holds that the “principle of non-refoulement” (not sending back refugees to places where they face danger) is part of international law and, therefore, binding even on non-signatory states. The government told the Supreme Court that it did not consider Rohingya as refugees and hence, they would be deported according to the law. If the UN Special Rapporteur’s allegation has any iota of truth, the question arises whether the law of the land allows the Navy to force the Rohingya into Myanmar, where the ethnic cleansing against the community is well-documented. Even if the government does not want to grant refugee status to the Rohingya, cannot the deportation be more humane, in keeping with India’s civilisational values, its commitment to human rights and international laws, and its Vishwaguru aspirations?</p>.'Push back' route for sending 'illegal migrants' to Bangladesh spurs fear of harassment in Assam.<p class="bodytext">Himanta Biswa Sarma who heads Assam’s BJP-led government has confirmed that India, over the past few weeks, “pushed back” to Bangladesh several illegal migrants. The Ministry of External Affairs maintains that the Bangladesh government has, for several years, not done its bit to verify and accept its 2,369 citizens caught in India as illegal migrants. New Delhi and Dhaka had a Sonali Adhyay (golden chapter) in bilateral relations till August 2024. Why couldn’t India make Sheikh Hasina’s government take them back? Why did it opt for a pushback now, instead of a formal repatriation? After the Donald Trump administration deported 104 Indian illegal migrants from the United States aboard a military aircraft in February, the inhumane treatment of the deportees triggered uproar and a strong response from New Delhi. Shouldn’t India practise what it preaches?</p>
