QUESTION ASKED BY SC

• Can India live up to its international commitments and protect a large section of humanity comprising Rohingya women, children, the sick and the old who are “really suffering”?

Government's Stand

• The crisis over its move to deport 40,000 Rohingya was not “justiciable” implying that it is outside the domain of the judiciary.
• The government said its August 8, 2017 communication to all the States to identify Rohingya and aid in their deportation was based on certain “executive parameters” like diplomatic concerns, on whether the county can sustain such an influx of refugees and geographically whether there would be tensions and threat to national security

SC on obligation to grant asylum is universal

• The fundamental right to life enshrined in Article 21 of the Constitution protected all “persons”, including refugees who fled persecution in their native countries.
• Referred to the December 29, 2011 directive, which laid out the standard operating procedure and internal guidelines for Foreigner Regional Registration Office (FRRO), and if necessary take steps to provide the foreign national with a long term visa. This had to be done irrespective of religion, gender, etc.

Rohingya represetative's stand 

• The Rohingya had said anyone among them found to be a militant can be proceeded against in accordance with law and he or she can be stripped off the status of a refugee under the exclusion clause of the 1951 Refugee Convention.
• The Rohingya countered the government’s claims that India was not bound by the Convention Relating to Status of Refugees, 1951 and Protocol Relating to the Status of Refugees of 1967.
• They said though India was not a signatory, it was a member of several international instruments/declarations which provide for right to asylum and against forcible repatriation.
• India had a legal obligation to protect the human rights of refugees under Article 51(c) of the Constitution.