Consider the following statements:1. India is a signatory to the 1951 ...
Last week, the Supreme Court appeared to accept the Centre’s contention that the Rohingya people in India are illegal immigrants, most of whom are in a detention camp in Jammu, and others in Delhi. It said they should be deported according to procedures under the Foreigners Act, 1946.
- Under the 1951 UN Convention on the Status of Refugees and the subsequent 1967 Protocol, the word refugee pertains to any person who is outside their country of origin and unable or unwilling to return owing to well-founded fear of persecution for reasons of race, religion, nationality, membership of a particular social group or political opinion.
- Stateless persons may also be refugees in this sense, where country of origin (citizenship) is understood as ‘country of former habitual residence’.
India & UN convention
- India has welcomed refugees in the past, and on date, nearly 300,000 people here are categorised as refugees.
- But India is not a signatory to the 1951 UN Convention on the Status of Refugees and the subsequent 1967 Protocol.
- Nor does India have a refugee policy or a refugee law of its own.
- The closest India has come to a refugee policy in recent years is the Citizenship Amendment Act, 2019, which discriminates between refugees on the basis of religion in offering them Indian citizenship.
Hence only statement 2 is correct.
Consider the following statements:1. India is a signatory to the 1951 ...
Statement 1: India is a signatory to the 1951 UN Convention on the Status of Refugees and the subsequent 1967 Protocol.
Statement 2: India does not have a refugee policy or a refugee law of its own.
Explanation:
1. India as a signatory:
India is indeed a signatory to the 1951 UN Convention on the Status of Refugees and the subsequent 1967 Protocol. The convention defines who is a refugee, their rights, and the legal obligations of states towards refugees. India signed the convention on September 30, 1953, and the protocol on January 31, 1968. As a signatory, India has agreed to abide by the principles laid down in the convention and protocol.
2. Absence of a refugee policy or law:
India does not have a specific refugee policy or a refugee law of its own. While India is a signatory to the international instruments, it has not enacted any domestic legislation to deal specifically with refugees. This absence of a comprehensive refugee law has resulted in a lack of legal framework to guide the treatment of refugees in India.
3. Legal status of refugees in India:
In the absence of a specific refugee law, the legal status of refugees in India is governed by various acts and policies that apply to foreign nationals in general. The primary legislation that deals with foreigners in India is the Foreigners Act, 1946. This act empowers the government to regulate the entry, presence, and departure of foreigners in India. However, it does not make any distinction between refugees and other foreign nationals.
4. Refugee determination process:
In the absence of a refugee law, India does not have a formal refugee determination process. As a result, refugees in India are not provided with legal protection or entitlements specific to their refugee status. Instead, they are often treated as illegal immigrants and are subject to detention, deportation, and other restrictions.
5. Ad-hoc approach:
Despite the absence of a specific refugee law, India has historically provided refuge to various communities fleeing persecution in neighboring countries. However, the treatment of refugees in India has largely been ad-hoc and based on political considerations rather than a comprehensive legal framework.
Conclusion:
In conclusion, while India is a signatory to the 1951 UN Convention on the Status of Refugees and the subsequent 1967 Protocol, it does not have a specific refugee policy or a refugee law of its own. The absence of a comprehensive legal framework has resulted in a lack of protection and entitlements for refugees in India.