The Supreme Court has expressed its concern and displeasure over the repeated filing of Public Interest Litigations (PILs) seeking to halt the deportation of Rohingya refugees from India. The court has questioned the motives and factual basis of these petitions, especially during a time when the country is facing significant challenges.
Several petitions have been filed in the Supreme Court alleging the "forcible deportation" of Rohingya refugees by the Indian government to Myanmar. These petitions claim that refugees, including children, women, the elderly, and those with serious health conditions, have been deported against their will. Some petitions even allege that refugees were transported to Port Blair, then forcibly put on naval ships with their hands tied and blindfolded, before being abandoned in international waters. One petition claimed 43 refugees were deported and left adrift in the Andaman Sea.
The Supreme Court has raised doubts about the credibility of these claims. In one instance, a bench of Justices Surya Kant and N Kotiswar Singh questioned a petition alleging that 43 Rohingyas were thrown into the sea, calling it a "beautifully crafted story" and "fanciful ideas". Justice Kant remarked that such claims lack a credible basis, especially when the nation is facing difficult circumstances. The court also questioned the authenticity of evidence presented, such as recorded phone calls purportedly from deported refugees. The bench observed that the claims appeared to be based on unverified social media content and lacked prima facie evidence.
The Indian government, represented by Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, has maintained that the deportation of Rohingya migrants is carried out in accordance with the law. The government argues that many Rohingya migrants pose a national security threat and that India is not a signatory to the 1951 Refugee Convention or its 1967 Protocol and therefore isn't bound by international refugee laws. Mehta cited a previous Supreme Court order from April 8, 2021, which stated that while Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution apply to all persons, the right against deportation is not guaranteed unless accompanied by the right to reside under Article 19(1)(e), which is restricted to citizens. The Supreme Court has affirmed that the right to reside in India is exclusively for citizens, not for Rohingyas.
The court has acknowledged the security concerns raised by the government and has referenced prior rulings on deportations from Assam and Jammu & Kashmir. In a May 8 ruling, the Supreme Court stated that if Rohingya refugees in the country are found to be foreigners under Indian laws, they will have to be deported.
Despite the Supreme Court's stance, concerns remain regarding the safety and human rights of deported Rohingya refugees. Refugees International has urged the Indian government to halt the forced deportation of Rohingya refugees, emphasizing that they fled genocide and ongoing conflict in Myanmar. The organization argues that returning them now places their lives at grave risk and violates India's obligations under international law. It has been reported that at least 40 Rohingya refugees have been deported from India to Myanmar, with another 50 pushed into Bangladesh. Those deported have said that while they are currently safe, they are hiding from the military junta. Family members still in India have expressed anguish at the sudden separation and uncertainty their deported loved ones now face.
The Supreme Court is currently hearing cases relating to the deportation and living conditions of Rohingya refugees. While the court has not issued any interim orders to halt deportations, it has listed the matter for further hearing on July 31.
