ABSTRACT
The global refugee crisis, particularly the plight of the Rohingya Muslims, remains a pressing humanitarian issue overseen by the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR). The Rohingyas have endured prolonged discrimination and violence, leading to their mass displacement. This article aims to analyze the position of refugees in India and will be going to do a critical analysis of legislative framework. Citizenship Act, 1955, introduces a contentious provision that affects the status of illegal migrants. The CAA provides a pathway to Indian citizenship for six religious communities Sikhs, Jains, Parsis, Buddhists, Hindus, and Christians who entered India from Pakistan, Bangladesh, or Afghanistan before December 2014, by significantly reducing the required period of stay from eleven to five years. Further the article will be examining the role of Indian judiciary in providing protection to refugees in India. The legislative change has sparked considerable debate over its implications for secularism and the treatment of refugees, raising questions about India’s commitment to its foundational principles and its response to the global refugee crisis. Despite the scale of this humanitarian challenge, India has yet to enact specific legislation for refugees and remains a non-signatory to the 1951 UN Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees and its 1967 Protocol. This article also analyses the implications of the CAA in the context of international refugee law, exploring how it conflicts with the universal standards set by the 1951 Convention. This article examines the current legal framework and status of refugees in India, with a particular focus on the Rohingya community. Therefore, the paper highlights gaps, and challenges in India’s approach to refugee management and their problems. At last, this article will also attempt to provide certain possible suggestions to the challenges faced by the refugees in India.
KEYWORDS: Rohingya, Muslims, Citizenship, Illegal Migrant, Secularism.
INTRODUCTION
The refugee problem is deeply rooted in history and is driven by various factors that force people to leave their homes, including persecution, conflict, and severe economic hardship. The quest for freedom and security has always led individuals to seek refuge in other countries. The establishment of international agencies, such as the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR), and various multilateral agreements like the 1951 Refugee Convention and its 1967 Protocol, represent significant efforts to address and manage the refugee crisis. However, despite these frameworks, a significant number of refugees still lack protection under customary international law. Customary international law refers to unwritten rules derived from the consistent practice of states and is often less comprehensive in addressing specific issues like refugee protection compared to formal treaties and conventions. The absence of a unified legal framework results in a patchwork of policies and measures that can vary depending on the refugee’s nationality, political circumstances, or other factors. The plight of individuals fleeing persecution is a significant humanitarian concern addressed by international law. At the heart of this issue is the term “refugee,” which is formally defined in the United Nations Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees, 1951. According to the Convention, a refugee is someone who has been compelled to leave their country of nationality or habitual residence due to a well-founded fear of persecution and is unable to return because of that fear. This definition is crucial in distinguishing refugees from other migrants and underscores the specific legal protections afforded to those who fall within this category. In contrast, individuals who seek safety in another country but have not yet been recognized as refugees are known as “asylum seekers.”[1] Asylum seekers are those who request international protection due to their fear of persecution in their home country. The distinction between asylum seekers and refugees lies in the status determination process: asylum seekers are in the process of proving their claim for protection, while those who are granted asylum achieve refugee status and are entitled to various rights and protections under international law. The principle of “non-refoulement,” a fundamental tenet of international refugee law, ensures that individuals cannot be returned to a country where they face a serious risk of persecution. The determination of asylum is based on a “well-founded “fear of persecution, which requires solid evidence of past or potential threats, often corroborated by media reports, legislative actions, or executive measures. The article has been divided into 4 chapters wherein the first chapter will be dealing with the constitutional and legal provision on refugees in India. Further the paper will analyze the current legal framework and policies in India concerning the treatment and rights of refugees, and how are they applied in practice. Thereafter the second chapter will be discussing about the migration of Rohingya refugees in India and will be analyzing the factors which have driven Rohingya refugees to seek asylum in India, and what are their current conditions and challenges within the country. Further the third chapter will be examining the citizenship amendment act 2019 and will be doing critical analysis on the same. Therefore, the chapter four will be shedding light on the role of Indian judiciary on protection with respect to refugees.
[1] Manoj Kumar, Legal Framework of Protection of Refugees in India, 14-15 ISILY. B. Int’l Human. & Refugee
- 199, 199-215 (2014-2015).