India cannot be a refugee capital: govt.

The government was responding to a submission made by Rohingya refugees that the Border Security Force (BSF) at the borders was “pushing back” their compatriots fleeing persecution in Myanmar with chilli spray and stun grenades



Feb 01

India cannot be a refugee capital: govt.

Introduction

  • We do not want India to become the refugee capital of the world,” the Centre told the Supreme Court.

Government response

  • The government was responding to a submission made by Rohingya refugees that the Border Security Force (BSF) at the borders was “pushing back” their compatriots fleeing persecution in Myanmar with chilli spray and stun grenades.
  • Mr. Mehta submitted that the government was in talks and should be allowed to take a decision. There was no contingency as of now and this was not a matter for the court to intervene.
  • Mr. Mehta said he needed time to respond to the allegations made by the refugees, represented by advocate Prashant Bhushan, about being driven back from the border.
  • At one point, Mr. Mehta said the government was “constitutionally obliged” to decide on the Rohingya issue.
  • Mr. Bhushan submitted that welcoming refugees, who had fled persecution, with violence was against India’s international and humanitarian commitments. He pointed out that the Rohingya refugees in camps in India lived in abject poverty and squalour.
  • “The conditions are inhuman. There is no access to either schools or hospitals,” Mr. Bhushan submitted.

Concern

  • Senior advocate Rajeev Dhavan, an intervenor, said: “Somebody comes to your border and says I am a refugee. It has to be determined whether he is a refugee. He cannot be blindly pushed back... then what is the commitment of India to refugee determination? Several high courts have upheld the right to refugee determination. Let the government deal with it diplomatically, but this court should also decide on its own.”
  • Senior advocate Ashwini Kumar, also for the refugees, said “minimum humanitarian morality” should be shown to the Rohingya refugees at the border.
  • “We cannot push them back to the jaws of death. You cannot deny a man his right to life. The Supreme Court has to intervene as the ultimate protector of life,” Mr. Kumar submitted.
  • The Supreme Court has said it would want to balance national interests with humanitarian concern about the refugees.
  • The court is hearing a bunch of petitions, one filed by persons within the Rohingya community, against a proposed move to deport over 40,000 Rohingya refugees.

"Due to prosecution of Rohingya in Myanmar, exodus of Rohingya community fled to nearby countries, in their destiny they face deportation to their country" the government has stated that its decision to deport Rohingyas concerns the state of security, whether Government's attitude is right, write your opinion.