Wisdom Crux

Rohingya Refugee Crisis : Democracy or Hypocrisy

Posted on by Admin

[Volume 2; Issue 12]

Author- Shravani Shreya, B.A.LL.B (Hons.) College of  Legal Studies, University of Petroleum & Energy Studies, Dehradun, Uttrakhand

Co-Author- Shubham Srivastava, B.Com.LL.B (Hons.) College of  Legal Studies, University of Petroleum & Energy Studies, Dehradun, Uttrakhand 

The past few years has witnessed a trend that is disturbing to the core. Plagued by large-scale displacements, immigration and refugees, the World has been in annihilation mode owing to the international character these issues bring with themselves. Such issues are not confined to the territorial limits or sovereignty and integrity of any nation, but transcends beyond the national boundaries affecting the international community at large. The most common of being them is the Syrian Refugee Crisis which saw a magnanimous 13 million people being in absolute need of humanitarian aid with a major chunk of them moving to Europe. On the same lines but for different reasons, a crisis has hit the region of South-East Asia in the nation of Myanmar. The Country which has its president as a recipient of Nobel Prize for Peace reeling through such crisis speaks volume of the situation of the Rohingya Muslims. The UN in a statement issued has declared the Rohingyas as World’s most persecuted community. Delving deep into the details with regard to the crisis, its history, the stand of the international community on this precarious issue and an Indian perspective of the same, the essay will focus on the suggestive reforms that can be put to use for putting an end to this crisis.

Keywords – immigration, refugee, community, reforms

                                                                                            INDEX                   

1. Introduction

2. History of Rohingya’s

3. Current Situation of Rohingya in Myanmar

4. Series of Event which lead to Rohingya crisis          

5. Situation of Refugee in INDIA

6. Stand of International Community in Rohingya Crisis         

7. Conclusion

Introduction

Rohingya Community is one of the persecuted community as declared by UN. To study one of the extreme crisis it is important to know about the situation of Rakhine State. The largest group in the state are the Rakhine, who are Buddhist, and there is a significant Muslim minority, including the Rohingya – a designation rejected by the government and Rakhine. Current situation in the Rakhine State contains a toxic mixture of historical centre-periphery tensions, some religious conflicts as well as intercommunal conflicts with minority Muslim communities, and extreme poverty and under-development. This led to major violence in 2017, 2016 as well as and 2012 and further sporadic outbreaks since then. These Event has severely damaged the reputation of the government when it most needs international support and investment. Any policy approach must start from the recognition that there will be no easy fixes or quick solutions. Rakhine State faces many problems which are deeply rooted in decades of armed violence, authoritarian rule and state-society conflict. This crisis has affected the whole of the state and all communities within it. It requires a sustained and multi-pronged response, as well as critical humanitarian and protection interventions in the interim. Muslim communities, particularly the Rohingya are constantly treated insignificantly socially as well as politically. Major population of Rohingya have not been given full citizenship, with significant consequences for their livelihoods and well-being. There are now efforts underway in the legislature to disenfranchise them, which could be incendiary, it would be hard for them to avoid the conclusion that politics had failed them – which could prompt civil disobedience or even organized violence.

 Rohingya crises recently precipitated by the reported attack on August 25, 2017, on Burmese security facilities which is near the border of the Bangladesh. Rohingya nationalist took is behind the attack and the ArakanRohingya Salvation Army (ARSA), and this has resulted in a “clearance operation” conducted by Burma’s security forces in other words it can also be called as ethical cleansing of Rohingya community from Myanmar which has forced the people of the community in a rapid displacement of more than 600,000 Rohingya into makeshift camps in eastern Bangladesh, and the internal displacement of an unknown number of people within Rakhine State. These events have created two immediate humanitarian crises in Bangladesh and in Rakhine State which has resulted in disturbing the environment of the Myanmar also, which is presently a newly democratized country and under the previous military rule there were many insurgencies across the country. The new government is seeking to resolve these conflicts and has been recognized as having begun to improve human rights across the country. This has not been the case with the Rohingya crisis, where there is evidence of systemic human rights abuses as the security forces target the general population in their search for insurgents. The response of Myanmar’s government to the tensions in Rakhine State brought international condemnation and made the situation worse, the reaction of the security forces to the October attacks has been disproportionate and has involved serious human rights violations. It is not the fact that they have responded to insurgent violence that has brought criticism, but the manner in which they have responded. They have applied a collective and arbitrary punishment based on ethnicity and religion instead of a proportionate and legal response. There should be an end to this communal violence and human rights violation which has shaken up the world, there should some strict measures and also it’s a high time for Myanmar government to adopt some polies which can put end to this current situation. One of the most important solutions is to ensure that safe passage is provided for the Rohingya people. Another possible way in which the issue can be dealt with is by educating the citizens of Myanmar of the Rohingya people’s origins as well as providing them citizenship in other neighboring countries.[1] By having educational tv or radio shows in which the Rohingya people’s origins is explained in an interesting way, the Buddhist citizens will start to inquire about the morality of the government. This could then lead to protests as they will no longer agree with the actions of the government. These protests are another way to pressure the government to end the violence[2].

History of Rohingya community in Myanmar –

Rohingya is the word which is derived from the word Rohai or Roshangee, a terminology pervered to Rohingya. Rohai and Roshangee generally means the Muslim people residing in the old Arakan (Rohan/Roshang/ Roang). It is probably the exploitation of Arabic term Raham (blessing) or RahamBorri meaning the land of God’s blessings. The word Rahma to Rahmi-Rahmia-Rahingya to Rohingya, which denotes honest, dutiful, pitiful or kind hearted to others.

The US Department of State’s Human Rights Report for 2015 stated: ‘The name Rohingya is used in reference to a group that self-identifies as belonging to an ethnic group defined by religious, linguistic, and other ethnic features. Rohingya do not dispute their ethnogeographic origins from present-day Bangladesh but hold that they have resided in what is now Rakhine State for decades, if not centuries. Authorities usually stated Rohingya as “Bengali,” who are claiming to be a Muslim resident of northern Rakhine State are irregular migrants from Bangladesh or descendants of migrants transplanted by the British during colonial rule.[3]

 Earlier the name for Rakhine State was Rohang from which the term Rohingya was originated[4]. Today, this terminology (Rohingya) has now become a political Issue. Two strong alliances in Myanmar have emerged: pro and anti-Rohingya.  The pro alliance takes the view that the Rohingyas settled in Myanmar in the ninth century, which, through the ages, have mixed with Bengalis, Persians, Moghuls, Turks and Pathans, in line with the historically pluralistic population of Arakan State (Human Rights Watch 1996:10; Zarni and Cowley, 2014). The latter takes the view that the Rohingyas are a modern construct, comprising, principally, of illegal ChittagonianBengalis that arrived as a by-product of British colonial rule. Myanmar gained independence from Great Britain in 1948 and this issue is a problem that Myanmar has had to grapple with since that time. Rohingyas are the Muslims of Mayu Frontier area, present-day Buthidaung and Maungdaw Townships of Arakan (Rakhine) State, an isolated province in the western part of the country across Naaf River as boundary from Bangladesh. Arakan had been an independent kingdom before it was occupied by the Burmese in 1784. Rohingya historians have written many discourses in which they claim for themselves an indigenous status that is traceable within Arakan State for more than a thousand years. Although this fact is not generally accepted in academia, a few volumes purporting to be history but mainly composed of fictitious stories, myths and legends have been published formerly in Myanmar and later in the United States, Japan and Bangladesh. From the earlier fact it is clear that thre is a need to reexamine the ethnicity of the ‘Rohingyas’ and to trace their history back to the earliest presence of their ancestors in Arakan and history tells us that we do not have to go back very far as the existence of Rohingya is from early 1950s that a few Bengali Muslim intellectuals of the northwestern part of Arakan stated to use the term “Rohingya” to call themselves. They were believed to be the direct descendants of immigrants from the Chittagong District of East Bengal (present-day Bangladesh), who had migrated into Arakan after the province was ceded to British India under the the Treaty of Yandabo, an event that settled the First Anglo-Burmese War (1824-1826). These migrants settled down in the Mayu Frontier Area, which is now Burma’s border with modern Bangladesh. They were actually called “Chittagonians” in the British colonial records. The Muslims in the Arakan State can be divided into different groups, namely the Chittagonian Bengalis in the Mayu Frontier; the descendents of the Muslim Community of Arakan in the Mrauk-U period (1430-1784), presently living in the Mrauk-U and Kyauktaw townships; the decendents of Muslim mercenaries in Ramree Island known to the Arakanese as Kaman; and the Muslims from the Myedu area of Central Burma, left behind by the Burmese invaders in Sandoway District after the conquest of Arakan in 1784.

Current Situation of Rohingya in Myanmar

The current situation of Rohingya Muslims in Myanmar is very critical and needs the attention of the world. Over 120,000 internally displaced persons (IDPs) are currently living in very extreme situation there are only temporary shelters available with limited access to food, there is no proper medical care available, sanitation facilities are worse, and even basic necessities for daily livelihood for humans are not available[5]. According to some reports, some medical practitioners have listed several cases of skin infections, worms, chronic coughing, and diarrhea in the camps and said that its staff members had encountered “alarming numbers of severely malnourished children[6].” Obtaining clean drinking water remains a concern due to the continued threat of violence—violence that persists even as of this writing.

Human rights concerns –This is the major concern for the Rohingya community as it faces several critical human rights issues: denial of citizenship rights, restrictions on religious freedom, forced displacement, and the lethal use of force. In fact, these issues were examined earlier also from 2008 there are reports which have highlighted the major concern of Rohingya and the why they need the attention of the world to stop human rights violence which is continuously going on in Myanmar.

Some of the major human rights violation against Rohingya’s are-

Burmese Denial of Citizenship – As mentioned before how Rohingya Muslims are surviving currently in the state of Myanmar and the Rohingya’s stateless status have only helped in making the situation worse in Myanmar and have aggravated in their condition of suffering. According to the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, statelessness is a matter of human rights law. There are specific Article which provides security against the statelessness such as Article 15 provides, in relevant part, that (1) everyone has the right to a nationality, and (2) no one shall be arbitrarily deprived of his nationality nor denied the right to change his nationality[7]. In 1982 Burmese government passed a Citizenship Law which clearly violates these provisions. The Rohingya’s statelessness give rise to the other human rights violations such as the group’s lack of access to identity documents, education, employment, and even there are restriction on freedom of movement[8]. No citizenship for Rohingya’s have resulted in very dark side for the community as many group members are facing arbitrary detention, forced labor, discriminatory taxation, and confiscation of property. If some amendments in the 1982 Act happens then only there is a scope for improvement in the condition of Rohingya’s, if no such amendment were done then there is no ray of hope left for improvement in the condition of Rohingya’s.

Restricting Religious Freedom – There are some essentials for modern political and civil freedom one of these component is religious freedom as pointed out by many scholars and advocates Some have observed that where religious freedom is undermined, additional anti-democratic initiatives will follow. These are significant considerations in light of official Burmese disregard for religious freedom vis-a-vis the Rohingya Muslim population. As mentioned above Rohingya’s are not the citizen of the state, so there is no as such anti-discrimination laws for the community. Asif you go through the Act then for instance Article 34 of the Burmese 2008 Constitution states, “Every citizen is equally entitled to freedom of conscience and the right to freely profess and practice religion subject to public order, morality or health and to the other provisions of this Constitution[9].”

In a similar vein, Article 354 provides that every citizen shall be at liberty . . . if not contrary to the laws, enacted for Union security, prevalence of law and order, community peace and tranquility or public order and morality . . . to develop . . . [the]religion they profess and customs without prejudice to the relations between one national race and another or among national races and to other faiths.[10] The main thing to look is the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) which protects freedom of religion or belief.[11] As Article 18 sets forth, restrictions on religious freedom must sound in necessity and focus upon protecting public safety, order, health, or fundamental rights. There is clear violation of tenets by the Burmese official. In addition to the abuses detailed within the above section, there are unnecessary violence as well as unlawful detention by security forces of Burmese Muslims for teaching religious doctrine and praying. There are several other restrictions also on Religious practice particularly of Muslims. Muslims community are not allowed to build a Religious place of worship with formal approval that was frequently rescinded when officials or conditions changed. More formal requests were often delayed or denied. As such, Muslims encountered increasing difficulty in building or even repairing houses of worship[12].

Forced Displacement- As already mentioned previously in the paper, there is a human rights violation in the state of Myanmar, not only Burmese officials have a major role in such violation but these official have also obstructed access to humanitarian aid to the Rohingya, which has resulted in the clear violation of the United Nations Guiding Principles on Displacement, drawn from international law. Indeed, the Guiding Principles provide that “national authorities have the primary duty and responsibility to provide protection and humanitarian assistance to internally displaced persons within their jurisdiction,” and “without discrimination of any kind, including religion, national or ethnic origin, or legal status.”  So, according to these rules if the Burmese official have complied with these rules then they would have the primary responsibility for providing protection and humanitarian assistance, but the official has not been seen taking such responsibility, moreover the Guiding Principles also require them to “grant and facilitate the free passage of humanitarian assistance” and allow “rapid and unimpeded access to the internally displaced.” Burmese officials have shirked these international obligations vis-à-vis the Rohingya Muslim population by obstructing the efforts of the U.N. workers and other humanitarian agents.

Lethal Use of Force– As set forth above, Burmese security forces regularly beat and mistreated Rohingya, resulting in deaths[13]. The way Burmese security forces have acted they have clearly violated the United Nations Basic Principles on the Use of Force and Firearms by Law Enforcement Officials that requires employing nonviolent measures prior to using force.93 And, even where force may be warranted, the Burmese officials are required to exercise restraint and react proportionally to minimize damage and injury but they have completely failed in making such attempt.

Series of Event which Lead to the Crisis

Myanmar has never accepted that the Muslim minority specially Rohingya as the internal part of the sate they have always treated Rohingya community as an outsider who never belongs to their own state. There are series of event from British era only which give you evidence that Rohingya community is not accepted in Myanmar but some major events took place in the 1960 elections prior to the coup, Prime Minister Nu had promised that the state of Rakhine will be formally awarded the status of an ethnic state (which many other major ethnic areas had been granted under the 1947 constitution), while also courting the Muslim vote with promises of an autonomous region in northern Rakhine. The plan to grant statehood to Rakhine was interrupted by the 1962 coup, but the question was raised again in 1973, when the military government held consultations on a new constitution. Muslim representatives of northern Rakhine proposed the establishment of a separate Muslim state, or at least a self-administered area similar to the Mayu Frontier Administration. This request was later denied. Rakhine became one of the seven ethnic states under the 1974 constitution, without special provisions for the administration of the Mayu frontier. Now, In 1977, the government of Burma started a operation nationwide to challenge illegal immigration (operation nagamin, or “dragon king”). The lack of formal immigration status of many Muslims, combined with the abusive or violent way in which the operation was implemented in Rakhine State – including serious episodes of intercommunal violence – caused some 200,000 Rakhine Muslims to flee to Bang- ladesh. Most of these refugees returned over the course of the following year, under intense pressure from Bangladeshi authorities, but there were no real efforts at rein- tegration, and the majority still had no citizenship papers.[14] There is yet another changed in the political system of Burma which tried to give some rights to the Rohingya as their representative were choosen to fight the election but then the results of the election were never implemented and multiparty election have failed in 1990 due to which military rule continued. In 1991, new operation took place by the military in the northern Rakhine State. Troops confiscated Muslim land for their camps and for agriculture to provide for their food, levied arbitrary taxes, and imposed forced labour on the villagers. They were forced economically and various unnecessary demands has been put forth which are coupled with violence which resulted in migration of more than 250,000 Muslims to Bangladesh, where they were housed in crowded refugee camps and this all happened in early 1992. Again in 2001 riots between Rakhine Buddhists and Muslims broke out in the state capital Sittwe. An argument between a group of young monks and a Muslim stall- holder escalated into a night of violence during which perhaps twenty people were killed and homes and businesses were torched. A curfew was imposed in the city for several months. Violence also spread to Maungdaw township, and several mosques and madrasas were destroyed[15]. In the same year, violence also targeted Muslim communities in other parts of Myanmar. From 2010, there is formation of Union solidarity and Development Party (USDP) prior to the multiparty election due to which political tensions in Rakhine State is seen again. Many Rakhine Buddhists were angry at pledges by the regime-established to grant Rohingya people citizenship – part of an effort to secure the Muslim vote and thereby limit the electoral success of the Rakhine party[16]. In June 2012, deadly sectarian violence erupted in western Burma’s Arakan State between ethnic Arakan Buddhists and Rohingya Muslims (as well as non-Rohingya Muslims). The violence broke out after reports circulated that on May 28 an Arakan woman was raped and killed in the town of Ramri allegedly by three Muslim men. Details of the crime were circulated locally in an incendiary pamphlet, and on June 3, a large group of Arakan villagers in Toungop stopped a bus and brutally killed 10 Muslims on board. Human Rights Watch confirmed that local police and soldiers stood by and watched the killings without intervening.On June 8, thousands of Rohingya rioted in Maungdaw town after Friday prayers, destroying Arakan property and killing an unknown number of Arakan residents. Sectarian violence then quickly swept through the Arakan State capital, Sittwe, and surrounding areas. Mobs from both communities soon stormed unsuspecting villages and neighborhoods, killing residents and destroying homes, shops, and houses of worship. With little to no government security present to stop the violence, people armed themselves with swords, spears, sticks, iron rods, knives, and other basic weapons, taking the law into their own hands. Vast stretches of property from both communities were razed. The government[17] claimed that 78 people were killed—an undoubtedly conservative figure—while more than 100,000 people were displaced from their homes. The hostilities were fanned by inflammatory anti-Muslim media accounts and local propaganda. During the period after the rape and killing was reported and before the violence broke out, tensions had risen dramatically in Arakan State. However, local residents from each community told Human Rights Watch that the Burmese authorities provided no protection and did not appear to have taken any special measures to preempt the violence. On June 10, fearing the unrest would spread beyond the borders of Arakan State, Burmese President Thein Sein announced a state of emergency, transferring civilian power to the Burmese army in affected areas of the state. At this point, a wave of concerted violence by various state security forces against Rohingya communities began. For example, Rohingya in Narzi quarter—the largest Muslim area in Sittwe, home to 10,000 Muslims—described how Arakan mobs burned down their homes on June 12 while the police and paramilitary Lon Thein forces opened fire on them with live ammunition. In northern Arakan State, the Nasaka border guard force, the army, police, and Lon Thein committed killings, mass arrests, and looting against Rohingya. In the aftermath, local Arakan leaders and members of the Arakan community in Sittwe have called for the forced displacement of the Muslim community from the city, while local Buddhist monks have initiated a campaign of exclusion, calling on the local Buddhist population to neither befriend nor do business with Muslims. On August 25, 2017, ARSA members and local Rohingya supporters reportedly attacked 30 security facilities, including border outposts and one military base, killing over a dozen Burmese security personnel. The Burmese military, or Tatmadaw, almost immediately began a “clearance operation,” deploying more than 70 battalions, or an estimated 30,000-35,000 soldiers, into Rakhine State. According to State Counsellor Aung San Suu Kyi, the clearance operation ended on September 5, 2017. The “clearance operation” in the townships of Buthidaung, Maungdaw, and Rathedaung in northern Rakhine State was a major factor leading to the displacement of more than 600,000 Rohingya into Bangladesh, as well as the internal displacement of an unknown number of Rakhine, Rohingya, Hindu, Magyi, Mro, and Thet in Rakhine State.[18]

Scenario of Refugee in India

A brief look at the refugee scenario in India will help appreciate in the proper perspective, the complexities of law enforcement in a variety of situations impinging upon the refugees. India has been home to refugees for centuries. From the time when almost the entire Zoroastrian community took refuge in India fleeing from the persecution they were then subjected to on religious grounds in Iran, India has, from time to time continued to receive a large number of refugees from different countries, not necessarily from the neighboring countries alone. The most significant thing which deserves to be taken note of is that, there has not been  a single occasion of  any refugee originating from the Indian soil except the transboundary movement of the people during the partition of the country in 1947. On the other hand, it has invariably been a receiving country and in the process, enlarging its multi-cultural and multi-ethnic fabric. In keeping with its secular policies, India has been the home to refugees belonging to all religions and sects. It is relevant to point out that since its independence India has received refugees not only from some of its neighboring countries but distant countries like Afghanistan, Iran, Iraq, Somalia, Sudan and Uganda.

The South Asian sub-continent has often witnessed situations where refugees from one or the other neighbouring countries have crossed over to India. Considering the sensitivities of national and regional politics in the sub-continent, the problem of refugees crossing over to India cannot be totally disassociated from the overall security issues relevant locally. At the end of 1999, India had well over 2,51,400 refugees, who do not include those from countries like Afghanistan, Iran, Iraq, Somalia, Sudan and Uganda.

Refugees and The Indian Legal Framework

Refugees encounter the Indian legal system on two counts. There are laws which regulate their entry into and stay in India along with a host of related issues. These are various constitutional and legal provisions with which refugees may be concerned under varying circumstances[19].

A. Constitutional Provisions

There are a few Articles of the Indian Constitution which are equally applicable to refugees on the Indian soil in the same way as they are applicable to the  Indian Citizens[20] .

The Supreme Court of India has consistently held that the Fundamental Right enshrined under Article 21 of the Indian Constitution regarding the Right to life and personal liberty, applies to all irrespective of the fact whether they are citizens of India or aliens. The various High Courts in India have liberally adopted the rules of natural justice to refugee issues, along with recognition of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) as playing an important role in the protection of refugees. The Hon’ble High Court of Guwahati has in various judgements,recognised the refugee issue and permitted refugees to approach the UNHCR for determination of their refugee status, while staying the deportation orders issued by the district court or the administration.Also, Article 51(c) of the Constitution of India advocates fostering respect for international law. In the matter of Gurunathan and others vs. Government of India[21] and others and in the matter of A.C.Mohd.Siddique vs. Government of India and others[22], the  High Court of Madras expressed its unwillingness to let any Sri Lankan refugees to be forced to return to Sri Lanka against their will. The Bombay High Court in the matter of Syed Ata Mohammadi vs. Union of India[23], was pleased to direct that “there is no question of deporting the Iranian refugee to Iran, since he has been recognised as a refugee by the UNHCR.” The Hon’ble Court further permitted the refugee to travel to whichever country he desired. Such an order is in line with the internationally accepted principles of ‘non-refoulement’ of refugees to their country of origin.

The Supreme Court of India has in a number of cases stayed deportation of refugees such as Maiwand’s Trust of Afghan Human Freedom vs. State of Punjab[24] ; and,N.D.Pancholi vs. State of Punjab & Others[25].In the matter of MalavikaKarlekar vs. Union of India[26] ,the  Supreme Court directed stay of deportation of the Andaman Island Burmese refugees, since  “their claim for refugee status was pending determination and a prima facie case is made out for grant of refugee status.” The Supreme Court judgement in the Chakma refugee case clearly declared that no one shall be deprived of his or her life or liberty without the due process of law. Earlier judgements of the Supreme Court in Luis De Raedt vs. Union of India25  and also State ofArunachal Pradesh vs. KhudiramChakma26 , had also stressed the same point.

International Community Stand on Rohingya Crisis

Neighboring Countries – Countrieslike Thailand, Bangladesh, Malaysia, and Indonesia and Other Southeast Asian countries are the majorly effective country by Rohingya crisis and these crises have socially and economically effected these countries. There is major migration of Rohingya Muslims in these countries they do not have any say as in they are not left with any option as to accept or to reject such major human infiltration. Each of these countries has, willingly or unwillingly, received Rohingya refugees. These counties have also taken some step to stop migration of Rohingya Muslim and also tried to seek attention of the world toward these crisis, they have also been hesitant to allow the Rohingya into their country, working to discourage them from entering or actively preventing their entry.Many Rohingya choose to cross the border from Rakhine state into Bangladesh, where they live in conditions little better than the ones they left behind in Myanmar. Around 30,000 Rohingya live in registered camps in Bangladesh where they can receive assistance from the UN and other humanitarian groups. At least 200,000 Rohingya live in unofficial camps or nearby villages where they receive no assistance and are at risk of deportation back to Myanmar at any time. Bangladesh has also become a secondary point of exit for Rohingya, where they find passage by boat to other countries in the region.

“We have treated [migrants] humanely but they cannot be flooding our shores like this… They are not welcome here.”

– Malaysian Deputy Home Minister Wan JunaidiJafaar –

Thailand is one of the country along with Bangladesh which has played a particularly prominent role in the Rohingya crisis. As a global hub for human trafficking, numerous abuses have been committed against the Rohingya and others in Thailand. People of Rohingya community are smuggled into Thailand and then trafficked to other places around the world. There was a recent crackdown on human trafficking and smuggling in the country which had actually exacerbated the crisis. Smugglers feared arrest by the Thai government, so they stated abandoning boats which are full of Rohingya refugees in the ocean or on islands near the coast. Most were abandoned without basic daily needs such as food or water. Thai authorities have also been accused of conspiring with smugglers and turning a blind eye to “transit camps” along the Thai-Malaysian border. These camps are run by smugglers, where migrants live in very terrible conditions until their families agree to pay a bribe. Concealed graves have recently been found in abandoned transit camps in Thailand.

ASEAN, a regional grouping of ten countries in Southeast Asia, has spoken out about the Rohingya situation, but done very little to actually pressure Myanmar to make changes. Critics have pointed to this lack of action as evidence of ASEAN’s overall ineffectiveness. As the crisis continues, however, and ASEAN-member states have to deal with the influx of refugees, they may be forced to implement more concrete actions on behalf of the Rohingya[27].

Because the Rohingya migrant crisis has increased so drastically in 2017 and 2015 also, the international community began pressuring nearby countries to be more humane and proactive in their treatment of the Rohingya.

Indonesia and Malaysia began offering temporary shelter to migrants. Malaysia began rescuing stranded boats of migrants. Thailand agreed to stop towing boats of migrants into international water. Myanmar’s navy even began rescue missions. While these efforts are a good start to addressing the Rohingya crisis, more must be done both in Myanmar and in neighboring countries to preserve the lives and rights of the Rohingya.

Indian Stand – There is a pressure on India from home as well as abroad to take some steps toward the crisis, the region’s dominant power and a country with a long history of providing humanitarian assistance to its neighbors, to play a proactive role in the crisis. India has strong influence in both Myanmar and Bangladesh, and could make a real difference. However, India has not been seen to highlight the issue of human rights violation. Also, contrary from being supportive or sensitive to the plight of the Rohingya, the government of India labeled them as illegal migrants who require deportation. India’s Home Affairs Ministry has issued instructions to concerned states to identify illegal Rohingya and repatriate them to Myanmar[28]. In addition, the government has also filed a petition before the Indian Supreme Court for declaring the Rohingya to be both illegal migrants as well as threat to national security.[29] Recently when the crisis took place, when hundreds of fleeing refugees are dying in desperate circumstances, New Delhi’s uncompromising position has been criticized by the global community and, indeed, the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights. The biggest shock came when the Indian prime minister visited Myanmar in September. At his joint press conference with Suu Kyi, Modi said, “We are partners in your concerns over the loss of lives of security forces and innocent people due to the extremist violence in Rakhine State.”13 Not only did he avoid using the word Rohingya, possibly at the behest of his host, but Modi did not even make a passing mention of the state’s persecution and ongoing displacement of the Rohingya. In short, New Delhi’s response appears to be guided by a cold cost-benefit calculation concerning trade with Myanmar, maintaining its leverage vis-à-vis China, and safeguarding cooperation on counterinsurgency operations in its northeast.

Western Countries

Since the political and economic reforms of 2010, Myanmar’s relations with the West have been much improved. Sanctions were lifted and diplomatic relations were renewed. However, the United States and European Union[30], in particular, have tried to exert pressure on Myanmar’s government to improve its treatment of the Rohingya. US President Barack Obama visited Myanmar in 2012. During his time there, he spoke specifically about the Rohingya and encouraged the country to implement human rights reforms. While Myanmar’s government has agreed to some reforms, they have not followed through with these promises.

Conclusion

To address this humanitarian crisis, the Rohingya issue needs a permanent solution and not incremental fixings. Any such solution needs to take the following steps: First, provide them full citizenship status and rights. The conditions mentioned in the 1982 citizenship rights have to be removed. Second, the government of Myanmar has to take back all the Rohingya’s who have fled to different parts of Asia due to military operations against them in their country. Also, a safe zone has to be demarcated for the Rohingyas in Myanmar where they can live after their return. Third, the process of further “Burmanisation” of Myanmar has to be stopped. Finally, although the global community has come forward to provide humanitarian assistance to the Rohingyas, the world has to exert more pressure on the Myanmar government to end the violence against the ethnic minority.

[1] “Rohingya Crisis Explained in Maps.” Myanmar | Al Jazeera, www.aljazeera.com/indepth/interactive/2017/09/rohingya-crisis-explained-maps-170910140906580.html.

[2] Lone, Wa, and Andrew R.C. Marshall. “Exclusive: ‘We Will Kill You All’ – Rohingya Villagers in Myanmar Beg for Safe Passage.” Reuters, Thomson Reuters, 18 Sept. 2017, www.reuters.com/article/us-myanmarrohingya-exclusive/exclusive-we-will-kill-you-all-rohingya-villagers-in-myanmar-beg-for-safe-passageidUSKCN1BS0PH.

[3]US Department of State, ‘Country Report on Human Rights Practices for 2015 – Burma’, (Section 2d), 23 April 2016, http://www.state.gov/j/drl/rls/hrrpt/humanrightsreport/index.htm?year=2015&dlid=252751. Accessed: February 8, 2018

[4] 1 For analysis of the origins of the term “Rohingya” see Charney, M.W., Buddhism in Arakan: Theories and Histiography of the Religious Basis of Ethnonyms, submitted to the Arakan History Conference, Bangkok, 2005, available at: http:// www.kaladanpress.org/index.php/scholar-column-mainmenu-36/58-arakan- historical-seminar/718- buddhism-in-arakantheories-and-historiography-ofthe-religious-basis-of-ethnonyms.html.

[5]Myanmar: Independent human rights monitoring still needed, AMNESTY INTERNATIONAL, http://www.amnesty.org/en/library/asset/ASA16/001/2013/en/a203877f -7fc6-4b09-bd63-0ebc4ac57387/asa160012013en.pdf; see also Burma: Medical Crises Looms in Rakhine

[6]Myanmar: Medical Crises Looms in Rakhine

[7]Universal Declaration of Human Rights, G.A. Res. 217 (III) A, U.N. Doc. A/RES/217(III) (Dec. 10, 1948). 67

[8]U.S. DEP’T OF STATE  BUREAU OF DEMOCRACY, HUMAN RIGHTS, AND LABOR, COUNTRY REPORTS ON HUMAN RIGHTS PRACTICES FOR 2012 23 (2012).).

[9]CONSTITUTION OF THE REPUBLIC OF THE UNION OF MYANMAR, Sept. 20, 2008, art. 34 (emphasis added).

[10]Id. art. 354 (emphasis added).

[11]International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, Dec. 16, 1966, S. Exec. Rep. 102-23, 999 U.N.T.S. 171

[12]Id. (“The roof repair of a Rangoon mosque became the center of controversy after the Yangon City Development Committee forced the mosque to suspend work. Rangoon Mayor and USDP candidate Aung Thein Linn allegedly approved the renovation project after the Muslim community agreed to support him in the elections. However, authorities revoked the permit after the Buddhist community allegedly sent a letter of protest to the Union Election Commission in Naypyitaw. At year’s end, the mosque was still without a roof.”).

[13]8th U.N. Congress on the Prevention of Crime and the Treatment of Offenders, Havana, Cuba, Aug. 27 to Sept. 7, 1990, Basic Principles on the Use of Firearms by Law Enforcement Officials, ¶ 4, U.N. Doc. A/CONF.144/28/Rev.1, [hereinafter Basic Principles].

[14]See “The Rohingya Muslims: Ending A Cycle Of Exodus?”, Human Rights Watch, September 1996

[15]See “Crackdown on Burmese Muslims”, Human Rights Watch, July 2002.

[16]That is, the Rakhine Nationalities Development Party, now Arakan National Party. Crisis Group interview, international expert on Rakhine State, Yangon, September 2012; see also “Final Report of Inquiry Commission on Sectarian Violence in Rakhine State”, Republic of the Union of Myan- mar, 8 July 2013, p. 15, para. 4.5.

[17]The Myanmar National Human Rights Commission, “Statement No. (4/2012) of Myanmar National Human Rights Commission concerning incidents in Rakhine State in June 2012,” The New Light of Myanmar , July 11, 2012.

[18] Austin Ramzy, “Rohingya Refugees Fleeing Myanmar Await Entrance to Squalid Camps,” New York Times, October 18, 2017.

[19]List I (Union List)   Entry 14 – confers on the Parliament exclusive power to make laws with respect to “entering into treaties and agreements with foreign countries and implementing treaties, agreements and conventions with foreign countries. 

Entry 17. Speaks about citizenship, naturalisation and aliens;

Entry 18. Speaks about Extradition;

Entry 19. Speaks about Admission into and Emigration & Expulsion from, India; passport and visas.

List III (Concurrent List), Entry 27 – speaks about Relief and Rehabilitation of persons displaced from their original place of residence by reason of the setting up of the Dominions of India & Pakistan.                

Part II – Citizenship, Articles 5 to 11: These Articles provide for Rights of Citizenship of migrants from Pakistan; Rights of Citizenship of migrants to Pakistan; Rights of citizenship of certain persons of Indian origin residing outside India; voluntary acquisition of other citizenship and Parliamentary rights to regulate citizenship.

[20] Articles,14,20 and 21 of the Indian Constituion.

[21]     WP No.S 6708 and 7916 of 1992

[22] 1998(47)DRJ(DB)p.74.

[23]Syed Ata Mohammadi vs. State, Criminal writ petition no.7504/1994 at the Bombay High Court

[24]Crl. WP No.125 & 126 of 1986.

[25]N.D. Pancholi vs. State of Punjab & Others [WP (civil) No. 1294 of 1987, unreported)].

[26] 24.       Crl. WP No.243 of 1988

[27]“Rohingya Crisis Highlights Toothless Nature of ASEAN.” The New York Times. May 19, 2017. http://www. nytimes.com/aponline/2015/05/19/world/asia/ap-as-rohingya-toothless-diplomacy.html?

[28] See the excerpt of the order in SuhasiniHaidar and Vijaita Singh, “Governments Firms Up Plan to Deport Rohingyas,” Hindu, August 17, 2017, http://www.thehindu.com/news/national/government-firms-up-plan-to-deport-rohingyas/article19511385.ece.

[29] The Rohingya refugees’ plea to stay in India has been taken up by a battery of top lawyers and human rights activists in the form of public interest litigation, whereas India’s federal government has deputized one of its top attorneys to defend the case. The case will be heard by the top court in the following weeks. See the detailed story in Prashant Bhushan and Cheryl D’Souza, “Will India Extend Protection to the World’s Most Persecuted Ethnic Minority – the Rohingya?,” Wire, October 10, 2017. https://thewire. in/186024/will-india-extend-protection-worlds-persecuted-ethnicminority-rohingya/.

[30]The Rohingya: A Humanitarian Crisis.” Al Jazeera English. August 5, 2012. http://www.aljazeera.com/ programmes/insidestory/2012/08/201281542835204365.html.