Answer

India has historically extended refuge to displaced populations like Tibetans (1959), Bangladeshis (1971), and Sri Lankan Tamils (1983). However, lacking a formal refugee law, its approach remains ad hoc, balancing security concerns, humanitarian ethos, and global expectations in a context shaped by porous borders and regional instability.

India’s Refugee Crisis Management: Balancing National Security, Humanitarian Responsibilities, and International Expectations

National Security Concerns

• Cross-border infiltration threat: Refugee entry via porous borders raises surveillance concerns and risks of undocumented migration.
  Eg. In 2023, MHA flagged illegal Rohingya infiltration through Tripura and Assam, prompting fencing and tighter surveillance.
• Terrorism links reported: Refugees with alleged terror links justify state concerns about internal security threats.
  Eg. In 2017, the Centre cited Rohingya links to terrorist organisations before the Supreme Court, supporting proposed deportations.
• Illegal migrants vs. refugees blurred: Without a refugee law, genuine asylum seekers are often mistaken for illegal migrants.
  Eg. The 2019 NRC excluded 19 lakh individuals, many of whom were undocumented refugees or long-term residents.

Humanitarian Obligations

• Shelter for Tibetan & Tamil communities: India has provided land, education, and local integration despite no formal law.
  Eg. Over 110,000 Tibetans and 64,000 Sri Lankan Tamils live in settlements across Himachal Pradesh, Tamil Nadu, and Karnataka.
• Emergency visas for Afghan minorities: India provided quick humanitarian support post-Taliban by issuing long-term stay options.
  Eg. After 2021, India granted e-visas to Afghan Sikhs/Hindus, enabling access to education and work in Delhi and Punjab.
• UNHCR registration and aid: India allows refugee registration via UNHCR, offering basic relief despite being non-signatory.
  Eg. As of 2024, ~236,000 urban refugees, including Rohingya and Afghans, were registered with UNHCR India for aid and services.

International Expectations

• Non-signatory to 1951 Refugee Convention: India avoids international obligations by rejecting formal refugee protocols.
  Eg. India is not party to the 1951 Convention/1967 Protocol, citing sovereignty and security as primary concerns.
• Alleged non-refoulement breaches: Deportations of stateless refugees often trigger global criticism of India’s compliance with norms.
  Eg. In 2025, India alleged deportation of  Rohingya into conflict-hit Myanmar, violating the non-refoulement principle.
• Regional humanitarian aid diplomacy: India uses aid without formal refugee recognition to balance regional diplomacy.
  Eg. During the 2017 Rohingya crisis, India launched Operation Insaniyat to send relief to Bangladesh hosting Rohingya refugees.

Shortcomings in India’s Approach

• No statutory refugee protection: Refugee treatment varies by state, with no national legal definition or process.
  Eg. Despite NHRC proposals since 2006, India lacks a national refugee law, affecting groups like Chakmas and Rohingyas.
• Security overtaking asylum rights: Refugees with valid IDs face eviction due to being perceived as threats.
  Eg. In 2023, Rohingyas in Jammu faced eviction despite UNHCR cards, citing security and demographic concerns.
• Denial of basic services and education: Refugees face exclusion from welfare due to lack of Aadhaar or legal ID.
  Eg. In 2024, Rohingya children in Delhi were denied school admissions despite residence and UNHCR documents.
• Indefinite detention without charge: Undocumented refugees are held under the Foreigners Act with no legal review.
  Eg. In 2024, over 988 Rohingyas were in Assam detention centres, many without trial or legal aid.

Way Forward

• Enact comprehensive refugee law: Legal clarity will ensure uniformity, protection, and national oversight.
  Eg. The 2006 NHRC Model Law proposes refugee registration, non-refoulement, and access to basic services.
• Implement refugee identification system: Biometrics would ensure service access and better tracking.
  Eg. In 2019, MHA advised biometric ID registration for refugees to balance welfare access and security.
• Strengthen community integration initiatives: Local development reduces marginalisation and dependency.
  Eg. Sri Lankan Tamil women in Tamil Nadu gained economic stability through vocational training and SHG models.
• Forge regional refugee coordination: A South Asian approach can ensure shared responsibility.
  Eg. India could revive SAARC protocols with Bangladesh and Myanmar for joint verification and repatriation plans.

India must transition from an ad-hoc, security-first stance to a rights-based refugee framework rooted in humanitarian values and regional cooperation. A formal legal policy will ensure protection, preserve sovereignty, and uphold India’s civilizational ethos in line with global democratic standards.

DOWNLOAD PDF