The SC On Thursday observe that if Rohingya are found to be Foreiners under the Foreigners Act they will be dealt with by the Central in accordance with law.
A three-judge Bench, headed by Justice Surya Kant, was hearing a batch of petitions challenging the Centre’s power to deport Rohingya refugees. The pe-titioners said as persons identified as ‘refugees’ by the United Nations High Commission for Refugees (UNHCR), they have consti-tutional protection against deportation to Myanmar.
The petitioners, repre-sented by senior advocate Colin Gonsalves and advo-cate Prashant Bhushan, claimed non-refoulement, saying they would be tor-tured and killed if they were depoted to Myanmar hich have anyway declared them ‘stateless’.
The lawyers referred to media reports claiming that some of their clients, along with women and children, all of whom were UNHCR cardholders, were picked up and deported on Wednesday night.
Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, for the Centre, sub-mitted that India was not a signatory to the UN Convention on Refugees. He referred to an interim or-der passed by the Supreme Court that the government’s power under Section 3 of the Foreigners Act to issue orders to “prohibit, regulate, restrict entry or departure of foreigners”
was absolute and unlimit-ed, especially when nation-al security concerns were in play.
Justice Dipankar Datta agreed with Mr. Mehta’s submissions that though right to life and due pro-cess (Article 21) and the right to equality (Article 14) of the Constitution were available to all, the funda-mental right to reside or settle in any part of India under Article 19(1)(e) was only available to Indian ci-tizens. “You do not have a right to settle here,” Justice Datta addressed petitioners. the
“If they [refugees] have a right to stay here, it will be acknowledged. However, if they do not have a right, they will be deported as per the procedure pre-scribed in law,” Justice Kant remarked.
The Supreme Court agreed to hear the case in detail in July.
Nice