According to a survey, there are 56 countries in which the majority are Muslims. The Rohingya are a Muslim-majority group in Myanmar. They constitute 1% of the total population of Myanmar and 4% of the population of Rakhine, a state in western Myanmar. The largest group in the state is the Rakhine Buddhist community, who make up 60% of the state population. Originally, the Rohingya were an ethnic group living in the coastal areas of Bengal, in present day Bangladesh. The British colonial government followed a policy of appeasement towards the Muslims of the region by providing them better opportunities and recruiting them in the army. This resulted in an influx of Muslims in the early 20th century. Consequently, Myanmar considers them migrants who moved to the country in search of a better livelihood.
At present, the Rohingya are devoid of any kind of rights and are not considered citizens of Myanmar as per the Citizenship law passed in 1982. Consequently, they are barred from businesses, jobs, the right to vote and access to the courts. Bangladesh has also refused to accept the Rohingya as citizens as it considers them a burden on their population, in what is already one of the most densely populated countries in the world. This means that the Rohingya are currently stateless.
Is the Indian Government’s Approach a Violation of International Law? The Indian government believes that the Rohingyas are illegal immigrants and have no right to stay in India. The Indian government has asked the state governments to identify illegal immigrants and to start the deportation process of the refugees seeking shelter in India. According to the Indian government, there is a viable threat to national security if the Rohingyas are allowed to stay in India, as their vulnerability could be exploited by Islamic extremist groups. India is also eager to maintain good bilateral relations with Myanmar, as Myanmar is a vital ally in dealing with Chinese incursions in the disputed region of Arunachal Pradesh. The approach of the Indian government has garnered international notoriety, which has led the UNHCR, the UN Refugee Agency, to condemn it as a violation of international law. Article 33 (1) of the UN Convention on Refugees 1951 highlights the principles of non-refoulement, which states that a State shall not expel or return a refugee in any manner to the frontiers of territories where his life or freedom would be threatened on account of his race, religion, nationality, membership of a particular social group or political opinion. According to the report of an UN fact finding mission on Myanmar, crimes committed by security forces against Rohingyas amounted to “crimes against humanity” and “a possible ethnic cleansing”, thus confirming the serious threat faced by the Rohingyas in Myanmar.
According to the Indian government, India is not violating international law as it is not a party to the Convention and thereby not bound by the principles of non-refoulement. The UNHCR states that the principle of non-refoulement constitutes an essential and non-derogable component of international refugee protection. As per article 38(1) (b) of the statute of the International Court of Justice, “International custom is general practice accepted as law” and one of the sources applied by the ICJ when deciding disputes in accordance with international law. The UNHCR is of the view that the principle of non-refoulement constitutes a part of customary international law. Hence it is binding on all States, including those which have not yet become party to the 1951 Convention and/or its 1967 Protocol.
1. As per the above passage, what is the status of citizenship of Rohingya refugees?
a. In India, at present, they are devoid of any kind of rights and are not considered citizens of Myanmar as per the Citizenship law passed in 1982.
b. Bangladesh has refused to accept the Rohingya as citizens as it considers them a burden on their population.
c. Rohingyas are currently stateless.
d. All (a), (b) and (c)
2. Which of the following reasons justifies the move of the Indian Government to deport the refugees and declaring them as illegal immigrants?
a. The Indian authorities believe that the Rohnigyas are a viable threat to national security.
b. The vulnerability of the Rohingyas could be exploited by Islamic extremist groups.
c. Both (a) and (b)
d. Neither (a) nor (b)
3. Which amongst the below given statement defines the principle of non-refoulement as explained in the above passage?
a. A State shall not ask a refugee to return back to a territory where he his life or freedom is under threat on the irrespective of what the basis of such threat is.
b. A State shall not ask a refugee to return back to a territory where he his life or freedom is under threat on the basis of his race, religion, nationality, membership of a particular social group or political opinion.
c. A State can ask a refugee to return back to a territory irrespective of the facts that his life or freedom is under threat on the basis of his race, religion, nationality, membership of a particular social group or political opinion.
d. A State can ask a refugee to return back but not to a territory where he his life or freedom is under threat on the basis of his race and religion.
4. India is not violating international law as it is not a party to the UN Convention on Refugees 1951 and thereby not bound by the principles of non-refoulement. What are the possible arguments against above statement with an appropriate justification from the choices given below?
I. The UNHCR states that the principle of non-refoulement constitutes an essential and non-derogable component of international refugee protection.
II. The UNHCR is of the view that the principle of non-refoulement constitutes a part of customary international law. Hence it is binding on all States, including those which have not yet become party to the 1951 Convention and/or its 1967 Protocol.
III. The International Court of Justice in the North Sea Continental Shelf case held that that a provision in a treaty may constitute the basis of a rule which, when coupled with the opinion juris, can lead to the creation of a binding custom governing all states (not just those parties to the original treaty).
a. Only I and II are the correct defences.
b. Only II and III are the correct defences
c. All I, II and III are the correct defences.
d. Neither I, II or III the correct defences.
5. Inspired and incited by the fiery speeches of Ayatollah Geelani, the Supreme Religious Head of the country of Nazirisitan, a large number of students of the National University, along with armed police personnel and militia, stormed the American Embassy and took all the employees and diplomatic personnel hostage. They contended that till the US Government discontinued all its imperialist and exploitative practices, no hostage would be released, and after the expiry of a specific deadline, they would be killed one-by one. It is only after the intervention of the global community and the United Nations that the hostages are released after being in captivity for three months. Naziristan is a theocratic State, where the Ayatollah is more powerful than the President, who is the elected Head of State, and the Constitution grants the Ayatollah the powers to veto any decision or action of the Government. Subsequently, the US sues Naziristan before the international Court of Justice, contending that Naziristan had violated the norms and principles of international law. Naziristan disclaims all responsibility, claiming that the Government had not ordered or aided the students and others to hold the US national’s hostage.
a. The US would succeed, because the students were substantially aided by the police and other armed personnel.
b. Naziristan would succeed because it had already dismissed those police and military personnel who had taken part in the above incident.
c. The US would succeed, because the acts of the attackers could be attributed to the Government of Naziristan.
d. The US would not succeed, because the Government had no role to play in the capture of the embassy, rather, the attackers had acted out of misplaced religious zeal.
Correct Answers :
1. D
2. C
3. B
4. C
5. A
