VISSNU

“EXPLORING THE SRILANKAN REFUGEE CRISIS IN INDIA: A HUMAN
RIGHT STUDY”.
Submitted By
Name: VISSNUPRIYAN.S
Id No.: 20191BBL0077
Dissertation submitted in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the award of Degree of
Bachelor of Law (BBA. LLB) Batch of 2019
Under the Supervision of
MS. EUGRATIA MARWEIN
Assistant Professor
School of Law, Presidency University, Itgalpura, Yelahanka, Bangalore-560064.
SCHOOL OF LAW
PRESIDENCY UNIVERSITY, BANGALORE
PAGE \* MERGEFORMAT 2 | Page

CERTIFICATE
This is to certify that this dissertation titled, " EXPLORING THE SRILANKAN REFUGEE
CRISIS IN INDIA: A HUMAN RIGHT STUDY " submitted by VISSNUPRIYAN (I.D:

20191BBL0077) for the degree of Bachelor of law (BBA.LLB) for the academic session 2019-2024, at
Presidency University Bengaluru, is the result of bonafide research satisfactorily carried on by him under my
guidance and supervision. To the best of my knowledge, this dissertation or any part thereof has not been
submitted elsewhere for any other degree
DATE:
PLACE:
EUGRATIA MARWEIN

DECLARATION
I, VISSNUPRIYAN S , do hereby declare that this dissertation titled, “EXPLORING THE SRILANKAN
REFUGEE CRISIS IN INDIA: A HUMAN RIGHT STUDY” is the result of research undertaken by me in
partial fulfilment of the Bachelor of law (BBA.LLB) program at Presidency University, Bengaluru, under the
supervision and guidance of Prof. EUGRATIA MARWEIN I further declare that this dissertation is my
original work and the relevant material taken from other sources has been cited in the appropriate places. I
declare that this work has not been submitted either in part or in whole for any other degree, diploma, or other
courses at any University or Institute.
DATE:
PLACE:

S VISSNU PRIYAN
20191BBL0077
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
“I give thanks to the Almighty for all of His mercies. This dissertation is the outcome of the important work and
contributions of several persons in my immediate environment. I made earnest attempts to finish the dissertation,
enjoying the majority of the research tasks, being lost in the process, and eventually feeling relieved, pleased,
and satisfied to have finished it. First, I would like to thank, PROF. EUGRATIA MARWEIN , for her guidance
and support. I have been going through a hard phase, if it was not for her kindness, patience and encouragement,
the dissertation would have remained incomplete. I owe Mam a debt of gratitude for his tireless attempts to
broaden my perspective and elevate my work.”

S VISSNU PRIYAN
TABLE OF CONTENTS
S.NO TITLE PG.NO

1. INTRODUCTION 7
1.1 DEFINITION 8
1.2 SIGNIFICANCE OF STUDY 9
1.3 REVIEW OF LITERATURE 10
1.4 OBJECTIVE OF STUDY 13
1.5 STATEMENT OF PROBLEM 13
1.6 HYPOTHESIS 14
1.7 RESEARCH QUESTION 14
1.8 SCOPE OF STUDY 14
1.9 RESEARCH METHEDOLOGY 15
1.10 CHAPTERISATION 15
1. UNHRC ACTION TOWARDS REFUGGES LEGAL

FRAMEWOK OF IT
2. UNSETTLED LIVES: ASSESSING THE HUMAN 16
RIGHTS SITUATION OF SRILANKAN REFUGEES IN
INDIA
Legal Challenges and Government Assistance
2.1 INTRODUCTION 16
2.2 CHALLENGES FACED BY REFUGEES 17
2.3 STATISTICS OF SRI LANKAN REFUGEES 18
2.4 PLANTATION TAMILS 29
2.5 CONCLUSION 31
3. SEEKING PROTECTION: EXAMINING 32

INTERNATIONAL LAW ON REFUGEES
INTERNATIONAL LEGAL FRAMEWORK FOR
REFUGEES
3.1 INTRODUCTION 32
3.2 LEGAL DEFENCES FOR REFUGEE PEOPLE 33
3.3 LEGLITY FOR REFUGEES UNDER CONVDNTION 34
3.4 NON REFOULMENT SHOULD BE FOLLOWED BY 36

ALL STARE GOVERNMENTS
3.5 IMPLEMENTATION REQUESTING ASYLUM 42
3.6 UNHRC AND REFUGEE 49
3.7 CASE LAWS 53
3.8 CONCLUSION 65
4. FROM ASYLUM TO INTEGRATION: ANALYSING 67

NATIONAL LAW AND REFUGEE LAW
INTERGARTION AND RESETTLEMENT
4.1 INTRODUCTION 67
4.2 REFUGEES IN INDIA 68
4.3 PRINCIPLE OF NON REFOULMENT 74
4.4 CITIZENSHIP AMENDMENT ACT 82
4.5 CITIZENSHIP AS PER INDIAN LAWS 85
4.6 CAA&NRC 87
4.7 CONCLUSION 88
5. CONCLUSION AND FINDINGS 90
5.1 FINDINGS 91
BIBLIOGRAPHY 95

CHAPTER 1
INTRODUCTION
UNHRC ACTION TOWARDS REFUGEE LAW:
The Sri Lankan refugee situation in India has drawn the attention of the United Nations High
Commissioner for Refugees In order to safeguard and help Sri Lankan refugees in India, the UNHCR has
been cooperating with the Indian government and other parties. 2010 saw the introduction of a program
by the Indian government allowing Sri Lankan refugees to live and work outside of camps, giving them
better access to healthcare, education, and economic possibilities. To safeguard the safety and wellbeing of
these refugees, the UNHCR has been collaborating closely with the Indian government. The UNHCR has
also been pushing for a thorough and long-lasting solution to the Sri Lankan refugee situation. In order to
address the underlying causes of displacement, encourage voluntary repatriation, and guarantee the
protection and rights of refugees and other vulnerable populations, this entails collaborating with the
governments of India and Sri Lanka. In general, the UNHCR plays a significant role in supporting
international collaboration to handle refugee challenges, as well as the protection and rights of refugees.
The group is still working to help Sri Lankan refugees in India find long-lasting solutions and to assist the
nations taking part in addressing the difficulties faced by refugees.
1.1 DEFINITION/ DESCRIPTION OF THE TOPIC:
The paper likely delves into various aspects of the Sri Lankan refugee crisis, including the legal, social,
and humanitarian challenges faced by Sri Lankan refugees in India. It may discuss the historical
background of the conflict in Sri Lanka, the reasons for refugee influx into India, the legal framework
governing refugee rights in India, and the protection mechanisms available to Sri Lankan refugees.
Moreover, the Paper may analyse the human rights implications of the Sri Lankan refugee crisis,
examining issues such as access to asylum, non-refoulement, right to work, education, healthcare, and
other fundamental rights for refugees. It may also explore the role of international law, regional
agreements, and domestic policies in addressing the needs and rights of Sri Lankan refugees in India.
Overall, the Paper likely provides a comprehensive study of the Sri Lankan refugee crisis in India,

offering insights into the legal, ethical, and practical dimensions of refugee protection and human rights in
the context of forced displacement and asylum-seeking.
1.2 SIGNIFICANCE OF STUDY:

The contribution to the understanding of the Sri Lankan refugee crisis in India from a human
rights perspective. By examining the legal, social, and humanitarian challenges faced by Sri
Lankan refugees in India, the study aims to shed light on the complexities of the refugee situation
and the implications for human rights protection. Through an analysis of the historical context,
legal frameworks, and rights of Sri Lankan refugees in India, the study seeks to provide valuable
insights into the gaps and opportunities in the current refugee protection mechanisms. By
exploring the human rights implications of the crisis, including issues of access to asylum, non-
refoulement, and socio-economic rights, the research aims to contribute to the academic discourse
on refugee law and policy. Furthermore, the study’s focus on the Sri Lankan refugee crisis
specifically in India adds a unique perspective to the existing literature on forced displacement
and asylum-seeking in the region. By highlighting the challenges faced by Sri Lankan refugees
and examining the responses of the Indian government, non-governmental organizations, and
other stakeholders, the research aims to inform policy discussions and advocacy efforts aimed at
improving the protection and well-being of refugees in India.In conclusion, the significance of
this study lies in its potential to deepen our understanding of the human rights dimensions of the
Sri Lankan refugee crisis in India and to offer recommendations for enhancing the legal and
policy frameworks that govern refugee protection in the country.
1.3 OBJECTIVES OF THE STUDY:
a) To analyze the root causes for the increase in the number of refugees fleeing over from Sri
Lanka.
b) To analyze the struggles and sufferings faced by the refugees, to know the needs of refugees
from Human Rights perspective.
c) To study the India-Sri Lanka issue related to fishermen and refugees.
d) To study out a way to encourage effective action from international organizations like the
UNHRC to promote peace, stability, and protection of human rights in the region.
e) To conclusively determine a suitable policy framework to safeguard the basic human rights of
these refugees.

1.4 STATEMENT OF PROBLEM:
The India-Sri Lanka issue related refugees has been a long-standing problem that has resulted in the loss
of life, displacement of communities, and a strained relationship between the two countries. The conflict
over maritime boundaries and fishing rights in the Palk Strait region has led to frequent clashes between
Indian and Sri Lankan fishermen, while the displacement of Sri Lankan Tamil refugees to India has
placed a significant burden on host communities and highlighted the need for adequate protection and
support for vulnerable populations. Moreover, the role of international organizations such as the United
Nations Human Rights Council (UNHRC) in addressing this issue has been a subject of debate, with
some arguing that more could be done to ensure that the rights of affected communities are protected and
that peace and stability are promoted in the region.
1.5 HYPOTHESIS:
There is absolutely no violation of human rights of Sri Lankan refugees in India. International
organizations like UNHRC, etc. Credible when it comes to addressing the problem. Research design
Study settings and population Study settings and population Table.
1.Sri Lankan Tamil refugees To the literature: Standard measures that are relevant to the
study and have an established record of reliability and validity Table
2.Potential rights of Sri Lankan Tamil refugees: Scope of study Sri Lankan Tamil refugees to
get what they want
1.6 RESEARCH QUESTIONS :
A) What is the role of international organizations like UNHRC, etc. in dealing with the issue of
Sri-Lanka refugee crisis?
B) What are the key aspects of the ongoing India-Sri Lanka issue concerning fishermen and refugees,
including the underlying causes, historical context, current challenges, and potential solutions?
C) What strategies can be employed to effectively engage international organizations, particularly the
UNHRC, in promoting peace, stability, and safeguarding human rights in the region, considering the
unique challenges and complexities of the situation?
D) What comprehensive policy framework can be developed to ensure the protection of basic human
rights for refugees, taking into account their specific needs and vulnerabilities, while also considering the
legal, social, and economic contexts of host countries?
1.7 SCOPE OF STUDY:

 Time scope: The study will cover the period from 1980 to the present, which marks a significant
period of conflict and displacement for the Tamil population in Sri Lanka.
 Subject scope: The study will examine the causes and consequences of the killing and
displacement of Sri Lankan and Indian fishermen in the Palk Strait region. The study will also
explore the conditions and experiences of Sri Lankan Tamil refugees in India, including their
access to basic needs, rights, and services.
 Data scope: The study will collect and analyze secondary data, including official reports, news
articles, academic studies and other sources.
 Overall, the scope of study for the Sri Lanka-India fishermen killing and refugees will provide a
comprehensive understanding of the complex issues and challenges faced by the affected
communities, and help to inform policy and practice for addressing their needs and rights.
1.8 RESEARCH METHODOLOGY:
 Exploratory and descriptive, primarily relying on Secondary Data such as books, journals, Govt
Reports and uses the Doctrinal Method of Research. The Methodology adopted for the Research
endeavors to utilize the available information, which is limited, optimally to cover the vast
expanse of frauds that occur across all operations and processes of Banking Services.
1.9 CHAPTERISATION:
1- CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION – UNHRC ACTION TOWARDS REFUGGES LEGAL
FRAMEWOK OF IT
CHAPTER -2 UNSETTLED LIVES: ASSESSING THE HUMAN RIGHTS SITUATION OF SRILANKAN

REFUGEES IN INDIA
CHAPTER -3 SEEKING PROTECTION: EXAMINING INTERNATIONAL LAW ON REFUGEES

INTERNATIONAL LEGAL FRAMEWORK FOR REFUGEES
CHAPTER – 4 FROM ASYLUM TO INTEGRATION: ANALYSING NATIONAL LAW AND REFUGEE

LAW INTERGARTION AND RESETTLEMENT
CHAPTER 5: CONCLUSION AND SUGGESTIONS
1.10 REVIEW OF LITERATURE:

1. Wies M. de Vries and Melissa Siegel. “Refugees, Migrants, and Statelessness:
Understanding the Global Challenges” (2014) 13.
The work by Wies M. de Vries and Melissa Siegel titled “Refugees, Migrants, and Statelessness:
Understanding the Global Challenges” published in 2014 likely provides a comprehensive examination of
the global challenges faced by refugees, migrants, and stateless individuals. The authors may delve into
the complexities of forced displacement, voluntary migration, and the legal status of stateless populations
to offer a nuanced understanding of the issues at hand.In this work, de Vries and Siegel may explore the
root causes of displacement, such as conflict, persecution, human rights violations, and environmental
factors, shedding light on the diverse circumstances that lead individuals to seek refuge or migrate to other
countries.
They may also discuss the legal frameworks governing the protection and rights of refugees, migrants,
and stateless persons, emphasizing the importance of international law and domestic policies in
safeguarding their well-being.Furthermore, the authors likely analyze the socio-economic implications of
hosting large refugee populations, the challenges faced by host countries in providing essential services
and opportunities to refugees and migrants, and the importance of social integration for sustainable
solutions. They may also address the issue of statelessness, examining its causes, consequences, and
advocating for measures to prevent and resolve statelessness globally. Overall, this work by de Vries and
Siegel is likely to provide valuable insights into the multifaceted nature of forced displacement, migration,
and statelessness, offering a holistic perspective on the global challenges and the need for coordinated
efforts to address the rights and protection of vulnerable populations.
2. Robert D. Lambert and Sharyl N. “Refugees and Asylum Seekers in India” (2009) 11.
The work by Robert D. Lambert and Sharyl N. titled “Refugees and Asylum Seekers in
India” published in 2009 likely focuses on the situation of refugees and asylum seekers in
India, examining the legal frameworks, policies, and challenges faced by individuals
seeking refuge in the country. The authors may provide insights into the protection
mechanisms available to refugees and asylum seekers, as well as the roles of
governmental and non-governmental organizations in addressing their needs.In this
work, Lambert and Sharyl may discuss the international refugee law principles that

govern the treatment of refugees and asylum seekers in India, highlighting the rights and
obligations of the host country towards these vulnerable populations.
They may also explore the domestic asylum procedures in India, including the process of
seeking asylum, refugee status determination, and access to essential services such as
healthcare, education, and employment. Furthermore, the authors may analyze the socio-
economic challenges faced by refugees and asylum seekers in India, including issues
related to livelihood opportunities, social integration, and protection from discrimination
and exploitation. They may also examine the efforts of the Indian government and non-
governmental organizations in providing assistance and support to refugees, as well as
the gaps in the existing frameworks that need to be addressed for better refugee
protection. Overall, this work by Lambert and Sharyl is likely to offer a comprehensive
overview of the situation of refugees and asylum seekers in India, providing valuable
insights into the legal, social, and humanitarian aspects of forced displacement and
asylum-seeking in the country.
3. A. Anitha and K. Sivaraman. “Socio-economic Challenges and Livelihood

Strategies of Sri Lankan Tamil Refugees in Tamil Nadu, India” (2016) 11
Challenges and Livelihood Strategies of Sri Lankan Tamil Refugees in Tamil Nadu,
India” published in 2016 likely focuses on the specific socio-economic challenges faced
by Sri Lankan Tamil refugees residing in Tamil Nadu, India. The authors may delve into
the livelihood strategies adopted by these refugees to cope with displacement and
improve their economic well-being in their host country.In this work, Anitha and
Sivaraman may explore the demographic profile of Sri Lankan Tamil refugees in Tamil
Nadu, including their education levels, employment status, and access to healthcare.
They may analyze the living conditions in refugee camps and the impact of prolonged
displacement on the social and economic well-being of the refugee community.
Furthermore, the authors may discuss the role of government agencies, non-
governmental organizations, and other stakeholders in providing support to Sri Lankan
Tamil refugees in Tamil Nadu. They may highlight the challenges faced by the refugees
in accessing basic services, finding sustainable livelihood opportunities, and integrating
into the host society while preserving their cultural identity. Overall, this work by Anitha
and Sivaraman is likely to provide valuable insights into the unique challenges faced by
Sri Lankan Tamil refugees in Tamil Nadu, India, and the strategies they employ to
address these challenges. The study may offer recommendations for policy interventions
and initiatives that promote the self-reliance and well-being of the refugee community in
the region.
4. S. Aravindan and A. Saravanan. “A Study on the Socio-economic Conditions of

Sri Lankan Tamil Refugees in Tamil Nadu, India” (2018) 11.
The work by S. Aravindan and A. Saravanan titled “A Study on the Socio-economic

Conditions of Sri Lankan Tamil Refugees in Tamil Nadu, India” published in 2018 likely
focuses on examining the socio-economic conditions of Sri Lankan Tamil refugees living
in Tamil Nadu, India. The authors may delve into various aspects of the refugees’ lives,
including their living conditions, access to education, healthcare, employment
opportunities, and overall well-being in their host country. In this study, Aravindan and
Saravanan may provide insights into the demographic profile of Sri Lankan Tamil
refugees in Tamil Nadu, highlighting factors such as age, gender, education levels, and
family composition. They may analyze the challenges faced by the refugee community
in accessing basic services and opportunities for socio-economic development.
Furthermore, the authors may explore the coping strategies employed by Sri Lankan
Tamil refugees to navigate the socio-economic challenges they encounter in Tamil Nadu.
This could include initiatives taken by the refugees themselves, as well as support
provided by governmental and non-governmental organizations to improve the
livelihoods and well-being of the refugee population.Overall, this study by Aravindan
and Saravanan is likely to shed light on the specific socio-economic conditions of Sri
Lankan Tamil refugees in Tamil Nadu, offering valuable insights into their experiences,
challenges, and resilience in the face of displacement. The findings of the study may
contribute to a better understanding of the needs of the refugee community and inform
policy interventions aimed at enhancing their socio-economic integration and overall
quality of life in India.
UNSETTLED LIVES: ASSESSING THE HUMAN RIGHTS SITUATION OF SRI LANKAN

REFUGEES IN INDIA LEGAL CHALLENGES AND GOVERNMENT ASSISTANCE:
2.1 INTRODUCTION:

Millions of people have been compelled to escape their countries because of war,
persecution, or natural catastrophes, making the refugee problem a major global concern
for many years. This article provides a thorough summary of the present situation of
refugees globally, noting important trends, difficulties, and actions in place to serve their
needs and defend their rights.
Global Refugee Statistics According to UNHRC, there will be about 82.4 million
forcibly displaced persons in the world by the end of 2021. This number comprises 4.2
million stateless people, 4.1 million asylum applicants, and 26.4 million refugees. Within
their own nations, the remaining 47.7 million people are internally displaced.
Displacement Factors: Armed conflict, persecution, breaches of human rights, and

environmental issues like natural catastrophes and climate change are some of the causes
of human relocation. Syria, Afghanistan, and South Sudan’s ongoing hostilities have
caused sizable refugee populations. Large-scale migration has also been triggered by
political and economic crises, such those in Venezuela and Myanmar.
Regional Displacement Trends: Refugees are not distributed equally across regions. In
conflict areas, neighbouring nations host the majority of refugees. For instance, Turkey is
home to the majority of refugees worldwide, mostly as a result of the crisis in Syria.
Germany, Uganda, Pakistan, Colombia, and Pakistan are additional significant host
nations. In order to provide basic services to sizable refugee populations, such healthcare,
education, and employment prospects, these countries must overcome formidable
obstacles.

CHAPTER 2
2.4 SRI LANKAN REFUGEES:
HISTORY OF PEOPLE WHO ARE NOW CALLED REFUGEES.
The history of the Tamil people in Sri Lanka is intricately entwined with Sri Lanka’s overall past. Tamils
are an ethnic group that predominately inhabits the island’s northern and eastern parts. Their history spans
more than two millennia and is characterized by changes in culture, society, and politics.
Beginning approximately the third century BCE, ancient Tamil kingdoms in northern SriLanka
flourished, including the Jaffna Kingdom and the Vani Nadu. These kingdoms engaged in commerce with
other South Indian states and were influenced by the larger Tamil civilization.
Portuguese, Dutch, and British colonial forces arrived in Sri Lanka in the sixteenth century and eventually
took control of various regions of the island. The Tamil-dominated areas were incorporated into the
colonies ruled by these European powers during colonial rule.
The British imported a sizable number of Tamils from South India to work on the plantations during their
colonial rule (1815–1948), particularly in the tea and rubber industries. Due to this migration, Sri Lanka
now has a substantial Indian Tamil community that is separate from the Tamils who had previously lived
there.
Sri Lanka had difficulties in nation-building and resolving the concerns of many ethnic and religious
groupings after achieving independence from British colonial authority in 1948. As a result of tensions
that developed between the majority Sinhalese group and the Tamil minority, the Tamil nationalist
movement began to call for more political freedom and autonomy.
As a result of the rise in these tensions, the Sri Lankan Civil War broke out in 1983 and raged for 26 years
until 2009. The Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE), a militant group striving for an independent
Tamil state, and Sri Lanka’s government, which is dominated by the Sinhalese majority, were the main
parties to the conflict. Significant numbers of people were killed, displaced, and a great deal of property
was destroyed during the war.
A significant turning point In the history of Sri Lankan Tamils occurred with the end of the civil war in
2009. Although the LTTE was defeated, the government still faced difficulties in post-conflict
reconciliation, resettlement, and resolving the complaints of impacted populations.

Since then, initiatives have been made to encourage peace, advancement, and political inclusion for all Sri
Lankan communities, especially the Tamils. The need to resolve issues like property disputes, missing
persons, and responsibility for human rights violations committed during the conflict, as well as continued
worries about development, remain, nevertheless.
The history of the Tamil people in Sri Lanka is a complicated tapestry of social, political, and cultural
changes influenced by colonial pressures, migration, and civil war. Knowing this history is essential to
understanding the current struggles and goals of the Tamil population in Sri Lanka.
Indian workers were brought in by the British to work on cash crop plantations owned by Europeans in
Sri Lanka. Thousands of Tamil “coolies” from southern India were brought into Sri Lanka to work on
these plantations under the Indian indenture system.
The British removed all governmental monopolies and the requirement for military service in order to
remove economic constraints on Ceylon. Additionally, it “supported the emancipation of the economy,
which generated new business ventures. To promote plantation agriculture, British crown-owned land was
sold at a discount to farmers; the business was successful. Plantations of coffee were extremely profitable.
Ceylon’s economic growth was driven by coffee cultivation from 1830 till the middle of the 19 th century.
To accommodate coffee planters’ needs, the area under coffee cultivation increased, and roads were built.
Beginning in the 1840s, a major influx of indentured workers from southern India arrived due to a labour
shortage on the plantations. However, a leaf disease in the 1870s decimated the coffee industry. In the
1880s, tea was tried as a plantation crop with instant success, and it quickly expanded across the higher
and lower slopes of the hill region. Coconuts and rubber were also grown as plantation crops at this time.
Large-scale capital investments were made in the industries of tea and rubber, and the expansion of these
industries led to a need for a permanent workforce.
To settle Indian workers on the plantations, measures were employed. In response to these advances,
ancillary services quickly developed. The Colombo harbours was enlarged as a result of increased export
trade, and roads and railways were built. The English-educated had no trouble finding work, and
opportunities were established for Ceylonese businesspeople. Although these advances were confined to
the cities and the plantation land, capitalist companies did modify agricultural and horticultural practices.
The rest of the nation continued to practice traditional subsistence farming techniques. However, the
isolation of the villages was lessened by roads and trains, and increased trade eventually drew the
populace of the countryside into the monetary system.

2.5 FLEE OF REFUGEES FROM SRIIANKA:
Due to conflict, persecution, or other types of violence, Sri Lankan refugees have left their homeland.
Many Sri Lankan Tamils sought sanctuary in other nations throughout the world during the Sri Lankan
Civil War, which ranged from 1983 to 2009.
The “Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam” (LTTE), a separatist militant group representing the Tamil
minority, and the Sri Lankan government, which is largely made up of Sinhalese, were the main parties
involved in the civil war. Due to the war, many Sri Lankan Tamils were displaced, and many of them
sought safety and refuge in nearby nations like India and other areas like Europe, North America, and
Australia.
Depending on their host countries, Sri Lankan refugees experienced different conditions. While some
nations provided temporary housing and basic requirements, others granted refugees the right to seek
legal protections, healthcare, education, and career possibilities. However, a large number of Sri Lankan
refugees encountered difficulties integrating, faced language obstacles, and lost their social and cultural
networks.
The situation has changed after the civil war ended in 2009, and there are now fewer Sri Lankan refugees.
Some Sri Lankan exiles, however, are still unable to go back to their homes because of persistent
problems, such as land conflicts, the need for employment possibilities, and worries about safety and
security. The core reasons of Sri Lankan refugees’ displacement are being addressed by a number of
organizations and governments in an effort to promote their repatriation and reintegration.
2.6TREATMENT OF SRI LANKAN REFUGEES IN INDIA:
The way Sri Lankan refugees are treated in India has changed over time and is influenced by a number of
variables, including governmental policies, public opinion, and the unique circumstances of each refugee.
Here is a summary of how Sri Lankan refugees are treated in India.
REFUGEE STATUS:
Usually, the government of India grants refugees from Sri Lanka refugee status. They now have various
rights and legal protections under Indian law as a result of this recognition.
GOVERNMENT ASSISTANCE:

The Indian government offers refugees from Sri Lanka some crucial aid in cooperation with the UNHCR.
In addition, financial assistance for food and shelter through refugee camps or settlements is provided
CAMPS AND SETTLEMENTS:
Many Sri Lankan refugees in India reside in set-aside camps or communities for them. Although these
camps offer the most fundamental comforts and services, the conditions can occasionally be difficult due
to crowding and scarce supplies.
EDUCATION AND HEALTHCARE:
Children who have fled Sri Lanka have the right to an education in India, and efforts are made to set up
educational facilities for them inside or close to the refugee camps. In a similar vein, refugee patients
frequently have access to healthcare facilities.
LIVELIHOOD AND EMPLOYMENT:
Refugees from Sri Lanka who have fled to India encounter difficulties finding employment. Due to
constraints on their mobility and employment permissions, they might have few possibilities for
sustainable livelihoods.
LEGAL CHALLENGES:
Legal issues relating to their status, such as difficulties attaining citizenship or long-term stay, could affect
Sri Lankan refugees in India. These obstacles may make it more difficult for them to get certain rights and
services.
INTEGRATION AND SOCIAL ACCEPTANCE:
Integration and social acceptance of Sri Lankan refugees in Indian society can vary. Refugees may face
social and cultural hurdles in terms of acceptance and integration because certain communities may be
friendly while others may consider them as outsiders.
THE ECONOMIC CRISIS AT PRESENT:
However, it’s vital to note that “refugee” generally refers to those who have left their native countries out
of a genuine fear of persecution, conflict, or violence. Economic crises can cause displacement and

migration. On the other side, economic migrants travel abroad largely in pursuit of greater economic
prospects.
ECONOMIC HARDSHIPS:
Sri Lanka have included high rates of poverty, unemployment, and inequality. These economic variables
may encourage people to leave their home countries in search of better opportunities. However, it’s
important to keep in mind that according to international law, economic migrants are not considered
refugees and that the main motivations behind their departure are not persecution or conflict but rather
economic ones.
People from Sri Lanka who leave the nation for economic reasons might go for work in the Middle East,
East Asia, Europe, or North America. They might experience a variety of difficulties, such as exploitation,
legal problems, and restricted access to social safeguards. Depending on the nations they migrate to and
their circumstances, the experiences and circumstances of economic migrants might differ greatly. It’s
critical to distinguish between refugees and economic migrants since, in accordance with international
law, they have different legal statuses and entitlements. While economic migrants are subject to the
immigration policies and regulations of the countries they travel to, refugees are entitled to certain
safeguards and support.
2.7 LIFE EXPECTATION:
There are roughly 30,000 Sri Lankan Tamil refugees outside the camps in addition to about 59,000 inside
Tamil Nadu’s more than 100 refugee camps. Two Indo-Sri Lankan pacts brought over four lakh plantation
Tamils to India, but the majority of these individuals of Indian descent, to whom the CAB caters, are in Sri
Lanka. Both groups fit the criteria set forth by the Bhartiya Janata Party (BJP), as the majority of persons
who belong to both of these communities are Hindu and have endured government tyranny and neglect.
The Sri Lankan Tamils living in refugee camps check off another requirement; many of them have been
there for at least 15 years.
If they are not citizens, the Tamil refugees must deal with certain practical issues. For instance, a smart girl
from a camp who graduated at the top of her class a few years ago got admitted to a university abroad on

a full scholarship (the Tamil Nadu government offers free education, health care, rations, and a modest
allowance for Tamil refugee families). She only required travel documents from India.1
Unfortunately, there is no provision for the Q Branch police, who serve as the "minders" of the refugee
population in Tamil Nadu, to distribute such travel documents. The only thing the Q Branch can do is
assist in obtaining documents needed to return to Sri Lanka. Although the personnel handling the issue
were sensitive and the child having lived her entire life in Tamil Nadu with no connection to Sri Lanka,
they were unable to assist the pupil because there was no provision in the guidelines for this.
"A lot of people in the [Sri Lankan Tamil] refugee community hope that they would get [Indian]
citizenship," said a refugee who wished to remain anonymous. The younger generation has lived here
their entire lives. They are ignorant of Sri Lanka. They are unwilling to travel to Sri Lanka. The refugee,
who also grew up here, said, "This is home."
The older generation, which is more receptive to returning, and the younger generation, which has
practically grown up in India and does not wish to return, hold different points of view. "The majority of
these youngsters were born in the 1990s. Nearly 30 years have passed since they first arrived. In response
to a query, a refugee remarked, "It is really hard for them to go back.
It was interesting to note that the issue of facilities back in Sri Lanka came up as well. Both the north and
the east of Sri Lanka, where the refugee populations are from, lag behind the urban centers of Tamil Nadu,
where some of the camps are situated. "Some of the refugees who have returned are dissatisfied there
because they have trouble finding work. The refugee added, "They don't fit in.
Youth refugees are becoming increasingly frustrated since they are unable to attend job interviews with
the government or even the commercial sector because they lack a passport. Many organizations have
started seeking passports from job seekers. These youngsters grew up in this area and dared to dream.
They reside here. They converse in Indian Tamil. Many of them don't even speak Tamil from Sri Lanka,
according to a refugee in Chennai.2
Not that the Tamil refugees who live in camps adore their surroundings. Although the majority of refugee
communities now have larger populations, there is no plan in place for more housing. Both rain and
drought are ongoing issues; rain causes many camps to have flooded walkways, and drought causes
people to have to walk farther to get water. Despite the fact that there are few and far between medical
1
Dhananjayan Sriskandarajah, The Migration Development Nexus: Sri Lanka case study, 285
2

facilities and that sanitation problems are getting worse, the Tamils as a community take great pleasure in
personal hygiene.
In comparison to urban camps, there is also a significant issue with the availability of jobs and resources
in rural camps. Living outside Chennai necessitates travel to the Sri Lankan Deputy High Commission in
Chennai for documentation needs, which adds further barriers such as funding for travel and approval
from the Q Branch. Skirmishes between refugees and members of the Q section of the police, who are
unduly harsh on the refugees, are not uncommon. In one case, which received widespread media
attention, a refugee killed himself in Madurai in 2016 as a result of a resolute official's reluctance to
provide meals for his son, who was in the hospital. residing in uncharted territory.
Many camp inhabitants in Tamil Nadu are currently trapped in uncharted territory. After the new
government in Sri Lanka took office in 2015, they had anticipated advancement on the issue of
rehabilitation for the displaced and the refugees who were Tamils. The Sri Lankan leadership at the time,
including President Maithripala Sirisena and Prime Minister Ranil Wickremesinghe, had stated that they
intended to resolve the issue of the Tamils' political rights as well as a proper and phased resettlement of
both the internally displaced and the refugees. That government was seen as friendly toward India.
When Prime Minister Narendra Modi visited Jaffna that same year and became the first Indian Prime
Minister to do so, the refugees in India were overjoyed. However, 2015's events have a symbolic
meaning. They stayed just that. Rehabilitative efforts have not made much progress after four years. The
Tamil refugees assert that they are doubly cursed, saying, "If we were in Sri Lanka [after the war ended in
2009], we would at least have been able to get a house [from the Indian Housing project]." The Indian
government provided housing for those who had been internally displaced. We were far more impacted
by the war than they were, which is why we had to leave and travel to India. If we turn around now, we
have nothing. One of them told this reporter, "If we stay here, we are refugees, and it is hard.3
Any possibility of advancement on the issue of rehabilitation and the political rights of Tamils remained a
pipe dream after Gotabaya Rajapaksa was elected president of Sri Lanka. When asked what his definition
of reconciliation was, Gotabaya Rajapaksa did not even mention the concept of political rights (see
"Rajapaksas back in the game," Frontline, December 20, 2019).
Along with having their travel options limited and having the police intrude on their life, people who are
refugees frequently struggle to find regular jobs. The majority of Tamils in Sri Lanka are permitted to
3

work as temporary workers but not in regular positions. As a result, it is not unusual to discover among
immigrants someone with an engineering degree who works as a daily wage foreman in an industry.
Tamils from Sri Lanka who desire citizenship in India are qualified through naturalization. They've been
residing here for so long. They ought to renounce their Sri Lankan nationality. Do they intend to comply?
Frontline was informed by Prof. V. Suryanarayana, a former director of the University of Madras' Center
for South and South East Asian Studies.
Many of the Sri Lankan Tamils in the camps with whom this correspondent spoke asked the authorities to
grant them citizenship because they had been living in India for more than ten years. When asked if India
will provide citizenship to Sri Lankan Tamil refugees and had included them in the CAB, Sri Lanka is at
peace following the end of the conflict, according to Rohan Gunaratna, professor of security studies at the
S. Rajarathnam School of International Studies at Nanyang Technological University in Singapore.
However, Sri Lankan Tamils residing abroad should choose their place of residence. They shouldn't be
forced to leave their current homes, places of employment, or places of study. No government should
force someone to live somewhere they don't want to.Many people in India think they ought to be given
citizenship. All India Anna Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam (AIADMK) official Maitreyan Vasudevan, a
three-term member of parliament, adopted a stance that is contrary to that of his party. "Our leader
Puratchi Thalaivi Amma [J. Jayalalithaa] was very vocal and concerned about the Eelam Tamils and the
Lankan Tamils of Indian origin," the speaker stated. She originally pushed for dual citizenship to be
granted to the Sri Lankan refugees living in Tamil Nadu so they could access work and other possibilities.
It would have been preferable if the Central government had also included Tamils in Sri Lanka in the
scope of the Bill. (Jayalalithaa even suggested that a separate nation be created for the Sri Lankan Tamils
in the run-up to the 2009 Lok Sabha election.)
On the subject of Sri Lankan Tamils' rights, all political parties in Tamil Nadu agree, however there still
seems to be some confusion regarding the different Tamil classes in Sri Lanka. Most Tamil political
groups conflate the fight of all Sri Lankan Tamils with that of the Eelam Tamils, a term used to refer to the
Tamils of the north and east; this may be done on purpose.4
Tamils in Sri Lanka fall into one of four broad categories. The Tamils of Jaffna believe they are at the top
of the heap and are distinct from the Tamils of the east. The Colombo Tamil group is the third. The
plantation Tamil, or Indian Tamil, is the final group, practically at the bottom of the heap. Their ancestors
were Tamils whom the British had brought from Tamil Nadu.5
4
Dhananjayan Sriskandarajah, The Migration Development Nexus: Sri Lanka case study,296
5
Dhananjayan Sriskandarajah, The Migration Development Nexus: Sri Lanka case study,298

2 Labourers from Tamil Eelam:
The labourers from Tamil Eelam were driven out of their homes twice: once by the British who moved
them from India to Sri Lanka and other places like Malaysia, Myanmar, the Caribbean, South Africa, and
even Fiji; and again, by a suspicious government in Sri Lanka. When the British presented the opportunity
for these individuals to work abroad starting in the 1820s, when large areas of land in various countries
were turned into plantations, many Indians, especially Tamils, chose to leave on their own.
The second forced displacement occurred from Sri Lanka to India. Despite efforts and concessions from
the Sri Lankan government, the Tamil plantation workers who were forcibly relocated in this way still
face difficulties. For example, the Tamandu Tea Plantation Corporation (Tan tea) was set up in 1976 with
the intention of employing those who were being moved. However, it failed to fulfill its purpose.
The Sri Lankan government’s changes to the agreement, which were overlooked by the Indian
government, were a significant factor in this clear case of forced return becoming a forced migration:
“The biggest error the Indian government made in 1964 was to connect the acceptance as Indian citizens
with the condition of repatriation to India,” S. Thondaman, the late leader of the Indian National Congress,
stated.
The Ceylon Citizenship Act of 1948, along with two other agreements, the Lal Bahadur Shastri-Sirimavo
Bandaranaike and the Sirimavo Bandaranaike-Indira Gandhi agreements, led the Tamils to India. The fear
of Sri Lanka being overrun by Tamil plantation workers was the reason behind the Citizenship Act.
According to the Ceylon Citizenship Act of 1948, a person born in Ceylon after the “appointed date”
would only be considered a citizen of Ceylon if his father was born there. The “appointed date” was
November 15, 1948. A person born after this date would only be a citizen of Ceylon if his father was born
there at the time of his birth. The Repatriation Puzzle by Thomas Abraham was published in The Hindu
on April 16, 1986. Abraham writes, “If the crucial restrictive qualification of the “appointed date” were
removed, the total effect of such a removal would be that all stateless individuals and their descendants
would become citizens of Ceylon.”
2.9 CONCLUSION:
According to a report in India Today titled “Survey among Sri Lankan Tamil repatriates reveals anger at
their current situation” (issue dated December 15, 1983 and updated February 1, 2014), nearly 70,000 of
the 1.1 lakh families of plantation Tamils who have returned are covered by the business loan program.

The report continued, “Most of these, with their loans completed, are now practically on the streets,
causing all kinds of economic, social, and environmental problems.”
There are numerous accounts of Tamils from plantations who lost their way in and around Chennai.
Tamils from the hill country are of Indian descent. Why do we grant citizenship to those from
Bangladesh, Pakistan, and Afghanistan? Since they are of Indian descent. Where will they go next? This
is relevant to Tamils from the hill country. They come from India. They are unwilling to return to Sri
Lanka. They came here with the hope of obtaining citizenship, according to Prof. V. Suryanarayana.
Lithuanian, a plantation Tamil, was one of the several Tamils who got lost along the route and eventually
wound up on the streets of Chennai. With millions of people displaced from their homes, refugees
continue to be a major global concern. Even though progress has been made in meeting their needs and
defending their rights, there are still significant obstacles to overcome. To protect the welfare and dignity
of refugees globally, the international community must keep cooperating, raising support and resources,
and encouraging creative solutions. Thus, we may work to make the world more welcoming and
compassionate for people who are compelled to leave their homes in pursuit of security and a better future

CHAPTER 3
SEEKING PROTECTION EXAMINING INTERNATIONAL LAW ON

REFUGEES.
3.1 INTRODUCTION:
They have not left their country of habitual residence. Historically, nations have often provided refuge to
individuals and communities escaping persecution, but the contemporary refugee framework largely
emerged in the latter part of the 20th century. This framework, akin to international human rights law,
traces its origins back to the refugee crises before and after World War II. The Universal Declaration of
Human Rights (UDHR) of 1948, Article 14(1) in particular, asserts that every person has the right to seek
and obtain asylum in another country. Following this, two other regional human rights agreements, the
American Convention on Human Rights, Article 22(7), and the African [Banjul] Charter on Human and
Peoples' Rights, Article 12(3), further elaborate on this right by ensuring the "right to seek and receive
asylum in a foreign country, in accordance with the laws of the host state and international treaties."
The primary international treaty that governs refugee law is the 1951 Convention Relating to the Status of
Refugees (1951 Convention) and its 1967 Optional Protocol Relating to the Status of Refugees (1967
Optional Protocol). This treaty outlines the definition of a refugee, the rights afforded to those granted
refugee status, and the principle of non-refoulement. Although it remains a fundamental principle,
regional human rights agreements have since revised the definition of a refugee to address displacement
situations not covered by the 1951 Convention.
The 1951 Convention is somewhat vague regarding the criteria for determining if a person qualifies as a
refugee. Instead, it leaves it to each country to establish its asylum request procedures and refugee status
determination. This leads to variations among countries due to their unique resources, national security
concerns, and historical experiences with forced migration. Despite these differences at both national and

regional levels, the overarching aim of the present refugee system is to protect individuals who are forced
to leave their homes due to their countries' unwillingness or inability to do so.
3.2 LEGAL DEFENSES FOR THE REFUGEE PEOPLE:
Welcome to the UNHCR’s Database of Refugee Population Statistics. The database includes data on
populations who have been forcibly relocated over the course of more than 70 years of statistical
activities. It covers displaced populations, including their demographics, including refugees, asylum
seekers, and internally displaced persons. Also included are stateless persons, the majority of whom have
never been displaced. The database also includes information on various relocation and repatriation
options for displaced people.
Data gathered by UNHCR through its annual statistics activities, some of which date back to 1951, the
year UNHCR was founded. The United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the
Near East (UNRWA) provided the information. Under the authority of UNRWA, information is only
available to registered Palestine refugees. The Internal Displacement Monitoring Center (IDMC) has
given data. Only those who have been internally displaced by conflict or violence are given access to
information.
3.2.1 Refugee-related international and regional instruments include:
A)In relation to the 1951 Convention relating to the Status of Refugees
B)The Optional Protocol Relating to the Status of Refugees of 1967
C)Article Universal Declaration of Human Rights
D)Article 27 of the Declaration of Human Rights and Duties of the United States
E)Article 22 of the Inter-American Convention on Human Rights
F)Colloquium on the International Protection of Refugees in Central America, Mexico and Panama, also
known as the Cartagena Declaration on Refugees
G)Article 12 of the African [Banjuli] Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights \ n The African Refugee
Problem: Special Features of the OAU Convention

H)Article 28 of the Arab Charter on Human Rights
I)Article 12 of the Cairo Declaration on Human Rights in Islam
J)European Convention on Human Rights (Articles 2, 3 and 5)
K)Criteria and procedures The selection of the Member State in charge of handling an asylum application
presented by a third-country person in a Member State was established by Council (EC) No. 343/2003 of
February 18, 2003. M. Council Directive 2004/83/EC, published on 29 April 2004, on minimum
requirements regarding the status of refugees and other persons in need of international protection and the
nature of the protection granted. Issues
L)Article 3 of the Convention on Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or
Punishment
M)African Convention on the Protection and Assistance of Internally Displaced Persons
N)Article 22 of the Convention on the Rights of the Child.
3.3 LEGALITY FOR REFUGEES UNDER UN CONVENTION:
According to Article 1(A)(2) of the 1951 Convention, a person who is outside of their country of
citizenship or usual residence and is unable or unwilling to go back because of a well-founded fear of
being persecuted due to their race, religion, nationality, political opinion, or membership in a particular
social group is referred to as a refugee. In accordance with this definition, neither the 1951 Convention nor
the 1967 Optional Protocol apply to internally displaced persons (IDPs), which includes those who have
crossed an international border while escaping generalized violence as well as those who are stateless and
Countries in the Americas and Africa that have seen large-scale displacement as a result of armed
engagements claim that the 1951 Convention definition does not go far enough to satisfy their citizens'
safety needs. Accordingly, under Article 3 of the Cartagena Declaration and Article 1(2) of the 1969 OAU
Convention, someone who is forced to flee their place of habitual residence in order to seek refuge in
another location outside of their country of origin or nationality because of "external aggression,
occupation, foreign domination, or events seriously disturbing public order in either part or the entirety of
his country of origin or nationality" is given refugee status. It is extraordinary that the African Union has a
convention that specifically addresses the needs of IDPs in terms of protection. the Convention for the

Protection and Assistance of Persons Forced to Leave Their Homes of the African Union. The United
Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) provides protection to IDPs and stateless people in
addition to refugees under the 1951 Refugee Convention.
3.3.1Exclusion and Cessation Clauses are exceptions.
According to the 1951 Convention, there are certain restrictions on obtaining refugee status. Article 1 (D)
does not cover persons who, at the time of entry into force of the 1951 Convention, have already received
protection or assistance from another UN body or agency. Both the Korean Reconstruction Agency
(UNKRA) and the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East
(UNRWA) provided assistance to both Koreans and Palestinians still subject to Article 1 (D). Handbook
on Refugee Status Determination Procedures, UNHCR, para. 142, the Congress of 1951 and the Protocol
(1967) in relation to the Status of Refugees. However, Palestinians living in areas where UNRWA
operates have refugee status under the 1951 Convention. Article 1(F) also excludes the following persons:
Who have compelling reasons to believe that:
(a) He has committed a war crime, a crime against humanity or a crime against peace as defined in
international instruments. To fight such crimes;
(b) before he was admitted as a refugee, he committed a serious non-political crime outside the country of
asylum; and
© He acted contrary to the principles and purposes of the United Nations.
People who voluntarily seek protection from their citizenship or country of residence or those who have
found safety in a third country are also not considered refugees. See the 1951 Refugee Convention, Article
1©
What privileges do refugees have?
Because refugees are fleeing governments that are either unable or unwilling to protect their basic human
rights, international human rights law and refugee law are closely intertwined. International humanitarian
law and refugee law also come into contact when there is a threat to life or safety or fear of persecution
during an armed conflict..

3.4 NON-REFOULEMENT SHOULD BE FOLLOWED BY ALL STATE
GOVERNMENTS
According to Article 33(1) of the Convention on the Status of Refugees of 1951, states are not allowed to
expel or return a refugee to territories where his life or freedom would be threatened because of his race or
religion, nationality, membership. Of a particular social group or political opinion.” Non-refoulement is
arguably an essential human right. Article 3 of the Convention against Torture, as interpreted by the
Committee Against Torture in General Comment 4, and Article 22(8) of the Inter-American Convention
on Human Rights directly mentions it
International and domestic courts have interpreted non-extradition including right to life and non-torture R
(on request) ABC (Minor) (Afghanistan) v Department of State for the. EWHC 2937 (UK) and ECtHR,
in M.S.S Belgium and Greece [GC], no. 30696/09, ECHR 2011, judgment of 21 January 2011 are also
good sources of information. The ban on deportation covers both individual deportations and mass
deportations of refugees. See, for example, Article 12(5) of the African [Banjuli] Charter on Human and
Peoples’ Rights This rule has two important limitations. If there are “reasonable grounds” to suspect that a
person poses a threat to the national security of the host country or to the local community due to a
conviction for a particularly serious crime, he cannot claim protection under this provision. Article 33(2)
of the 1951 Convention..
3.4.1PERMISSION TO MOVE ANY WHERE AROUND THE REFUGEE

COUNTRY
The right to asylum and free movement is handled by the territorial equivalent of the same article. See
Article 22 of the American Convention on Human Rights and Article 12(1) and (3) of the African
[Banjuli] Charter on Human and Peoples' Rights The two rights are intertwined because the 1951
Convention requires leaving a country to obtain refugee status and the inability to return home is the basis
for a claim for asylum.
However, freedom of movement is an essential right of refugees in the host country. See, for example,
Article 12 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. According to Article 26 of the 1951
Convention, states grant refugees the freedom to move and choose their residence within their own
country. Refugees must be issued travel permits to leave the country according to Article 28 of the
Congress, "unless compelling reasons of national security or public order require otherwise."

Freedom of movement is a particularly important issue in protracted refugee situations in countries with
limited national resources and/or with a limited legal framework for refugee protection, but with a large
number of refugees. In these countries, it is a common practice to stockpile refugees, limiting their
employment and educational opportunities by keeping them in refugee camps. US Commission on
Refugee and Immigrant Refugee Studies 2009 (2009). The domestic laws of countries such as Kenya and
Ethiopia explicitly state that the freedom of movement of refugees within the country can be limited and
that they are only allowed to live in certain places, namely refugee camps. National Declaration on
Refugees, No. 409/2004, Article 21(2) (Ethics); Refugees Act (2014), Cap. 173, section 12(3) (Kenya)..
3.4.2 UNHCR’S FUNDAMENTAL MISSION FOR REFUGEES
UNHCR aims to uphold the core values that are considered to protect the rights of refugees. UNHCR
offers its assistance to help countries deal with the social, economic, legal and administrative problems
caused by the refugee crisis. Support for UNHCR’s mission comes from:
UNHCR’s legislation was established by UN General Assembly Resolution 428(V) of December 14,
1950, which established the organization. The 1951 Refugee Convention recognizes UNHCR’s duty to
monitor the application of the Convention under Article 35.
UNHCR’s mandate may be temporarily extended to assist countries with specific refugee problems in
response to specific requests from the General Assembly of UN. Statute of UNHCR or the Secretary
General (Resolution of the General Assembly 48/116 of December 20, 1993).
For several historical reasons, India is concerned about UNHCR’s presence. India did not vote in favor of
the resolution of the General Assembly, which establishes the Office of the United Nations High
Commissioner for Refugees, because it thought that it was not directly related to the problem at the time,
which mainly concerned people of European origin. When the Refugee Convention of 1951 was adopted,
there was a similar perspective. The relationship between India and UNHCR has evolved over time
despite initial opposition. After the Chinese invasion of Tibet in 1959, a significant influx of Tibetan
refugees arrived in India. India has been instrumental in demanding international assistance to the Tibetan
refugees. After the war with China in 1962, India gradually began to seek foreign aid for its Tibetan
refugees; In 1964, UNHCR provided aid but without an institutional presence; In 1969, UNHCR was
allowed to open a branch office in New Delhi to allow greater participation in the Tibetan refugee

assistance program. The next significant refugee flow came from East Pakistan in 1971. UNHCR again
organized a significant part of international assistance despite neglect by the Indian government and
without a significant institutional presence. The UNHCR office was established in New Delhi in 1981 in
response to the growing number of refugees from Afghanistan and Iran. UNHCR was authorized to be in
Chennai in 1992 after the Tamil Nadu state government tried to forcibly deport Sri Lankan Tamil refugee
communities there. India became a member of UNHCR’s Executive Board in 1994. According to
UNHCR’s constitution, which requires that refugee status be verified through an office in New Delhi,
UNHCR is required to adhere to international standards that govern the identification and protection of
refugees. According to the UNHCR statute, the main task of this agency is to protect refugees and seek
long-term solutions, as well as to provide material assistance within a wider program. Operations in
Chennai are limited to monitoring the voluntary return of Sri Lankan Tamil refugees by the Tamil Nadu
state government.
Despite the fact that UNHCR refugee status decisions are not legally binding under Indian law, they are
de facto recognized by the Ministry of Home Affairs, the Regional Office for the Registration of
Foreigners and local police authorities. The Ministry of the Interior also granted them a residence permit.
Only through the UNHCR office in New Delhi can asylum seekers in India submit applications and
receive decisions on their refugee status. UNHCR’s protection activities include conducting status
interviews, issuing certificates to UNHCR-recognized refugees, liaising with the government on
protection issues, monitoring asylum conditions, finding long-term solutions for UNHCR-recognised
refugees and arranging negotiations with the government. Their departure. A UNHCR refugee certificate
does not guarantee deportation, although it is usually recognized by the authorities. It still depends entirely
on the government. The threat of a spirit of persecution is the most important aspect of defining status.
UNHCR’s mandate helps to protect refugees from unauthorized arrest and detention and to rescue a
person once detained. UNHCR’s legal team offers free legal advice to recognized refugees. The
organization legally works with other NGOs to give money to the poor and needy around the world,
including India. In addition, they provide free medical care to sick refugees in public hospitals, focusing
on maternal and child health. UNHCR offers professional training with the help of volunteers, trainees
and non-governmental organizations to help refugees and become self-sufficient. In addition, it provides
basic training and counseling to refugees in need..
3.4.3 RIGHT TO LIBERTY AND PERSONAL SECURITY FOR REFUGEE:

Many nations' national laws allow for the detention of asylum seekers at some time during the review of
their claims. See, for instance, Kenya's Refugees Act (2014) Cap. 173 12(3) and the United States' 8 CFR
235.3(c). The treatment of asylum seekers in the chosen nation of refuge is influenced by their right to
liberty and security.
Greece is particularly impacted by the detention of asylum seekers due to the conditions found in the
detention facilities of several countries. Greece is a country overrun by the number of asylum seekers it
receives, many of whom use Greece as a port of entry as they attempt to enter other European countries.
According to the Dublin Regulation, the State that the third-country national initially passed through to
enter Europe is typically thought of as the State in charge of deciding that person's asylum request. See
Article 10(1) of the Dublin Regulation. Many of these asylum seekers are therefore sent back to Greece to
have their cases decided. Amnesty International and other human rights organizations have written on the
filthy and overcrowded conditions in Greek detention facilities. Amnesty International's 2012 Annual
Report, 157. In addition, asylum seekers have said that while in detention, they were denied access to a
UNHCR representative or information on how to apply for asylum. Id. The European Court of Human
Rights (ECtHR) has ruled in a number of cases that the Greek detention facilities' circumstances violate
people's constitutional rights to decent treatment and dignity. See, for instance, the ECtHR judgment from
2011 in M.S.S. v. Belgium and Greece [GC], no. 30696/09, ECHR.
3.4.4 FAMILIES' RIGHT TO LIFE
According to this perspective, families are "the natural and fundamental group of society and have the
right to the protection of society and the state." See, for example, Article 23(1) of the International
Covenant on Civil and Political Rights Many countries allow the granting of derivative status to
dependent relatives in relation to that right. Therefore, his dependent family members will also be
protected if he is granted asylum. See Refugees Act (2014) Cap. 173 15 (Kenya), 8 U.S.C. 1158(b)(3)(A)
(United States), Immigration Rules, 2012, S.I. 2012/11 (UK), National Refugee Proclamation, No.
409/2004 (Eth.), and Immigration Rules, 2012, S.I.20/20. 11 (Great Britain). However, if the refugee
status of the person concerned is revoked, the status of dependent family members will also be revoked.
Refugees Act (2014) Cap. 173 20(1) (Kenya); National Declaration on Refugees, no. 409/2004, art. 6(1)
(Eth.). Therefore, dependent relatives can still apply for asylum under national law. Refugees Act (2014)
Cap. 173 15(4) (Kenya); National Declaration on Refugees, no. 409/2004, art.
However, the term "dependent relative" may have a different meaning in other nations, depending on the
cultural ideas of family that are popular in the Contracting State. For example, in the UK, a dependent

relative is defined as "the spouse, civil partner, unmarried or same-sex partner or minor child
accompanying [the applicant]", while in Kenya, a dependent relative is defined as "any dependent". a
grandparent, parent, grandchild or ward who lives in the same household as the refugee.".
3.4.5 EXTRA RIGHTS
The 1951 Convention also protects other rights of refugees, such as the right to work, legal protection,
education and other fundamental freedoms and benefits, which are equally protected by international and
regional human rights treaties. Refugees must be treated in the same way as citizens in terms of certain
rights, such as access to justice, while being privileged in other rights, including the ability to obtain
employment and own property.
According to the US Committee on Refugees and Immigrants 2009 Global Survey on Refugees: Ethiopia
(2009), Ethiopia, for example, made reservations to Article 22 (Public Education) and Article 17
(Employment) on the interpretation of these Articles. as a recommendation, not a requirement. Ethiopia
objected to both clauses, although it was not a party to the 1951 Convention.
3.5 IMPLEMENTATION: REQUESTING ASYLUM
The following is a general and simplified overview of asylum procedures in countries with national
refugee status frameworks. Despite differences between states and sometimes within states, these
procedures share many common features.
The Dublin Regulation and the Council Directive 2004/83/EC of April 29, 2004 on the minimum
requirements for the refugee status of third-country nationals or stateless persons do not, despite attempts,
have the power to decide on individual asylum applications. Some countries, especially those belonging
to the Council of the European Union, accept a single asylum system. To understand how these
procedures work, it is first necessary to find out how the key terms of the 1951 Convention are defined in
the legal systems of some countries. Definitions of key terms The definition of refugee in the 1951
Convention is incorporated into the domestic law of the States Parties to the 1951 Convention and/or the
Optional Protocol of 1967. Immigration Regulations, 2012, S.I. 2012/11, art. 334 (Great Britain); CESDA
L711-1 (Fr.) (French); The Immigration and Refugee Protection Act, 8 U.S.C. Asylum seekers are those
who have applied to be recognized as refugees in a Contracting State; if they decide to meet the
requirements for refugee status, they are granted asylum. Individual countries have interpreted the
grounds of the Fear of Persecution Convention (1951) to mean that asylum seekers must prove that they

are likely to be persecuted. if they are returned to their nationality or permanent residence. See Moghrab
question, 19 I and N December. 439 (BIA 1987), for example. This standard is believed to be both
objective and subjective. The Council of the European Union added a non-exhaustive list of activities that
can be classified as persecution to the definition directive to clarify what constitutes persecution that is not
defined in the 1951 Convention or the 1967 Optional Protocol. These activities include: physical or
mental abuse, including sexual abuse; legal, administrative, police and/or judicial actions that are
discriminatory in nature or implemented d. Non-state actors may be entitled to protection under the 1951
Convention in cases where a state is unwilling or unable to protect a person seeking refugee status. Nor
does the persecution in question have to be the fault of a state figure. For example, see id. In practice, this
means that those seeking protection must show that at least one of the five grounds for protection was or
will be a significant factor in the persecution. See, for example, 8 U.S.C. 1158(b)(1)(B)(i) (US). Reason:
There must be a connection between one of the five justifications and persecution. As long as the
persecutor used the race, religion or nationality of the asylum seeker as the basis for the persecution, these
factors do not have to be the real characteristics of the applicant. See, for example, Article 10(2) of the
Specific Directive. In the United States, there is some disagreement about whether neutrality can be
considered a political opinion when applying for asylum. 211 (BIA 1985), Matter of Acosta, 19 I & N 12.
(not persecution based on political opinions where refusal to participate in work resulted in belligerent
threats and violence because refusal was motivated by a desire to earn wages) (not based on persecution) )
of right political opinion, where the refusal to strike led to threats and violence from the activists, because
the reason for the refusal was the desire to earn a salary) According to the Council of the European Union,
people can be classified in a certain social group if they share a certain fixed common characteristic . The
definition of a special social group and whether that definition includes groups of people, including
women and homosexuals, who are persecuted but not covered by the Congress of 1951 are still under
debate. (See below for specific case law.) Particularly serious crime: UNHCR defines a particularly
serious crime as a crime that carries the death penalty or is otherwise very serious and punishable, while
each country has its own definition. However, this balancing criterion is not universally accepted.
UNHCR recommends that the seriousness of the crime be compared to the severity of the feared
persecution. In the case of Ali v. Achim, 468 F.3d 462 (7th Cir. 2006), rejected UNHCR's balancing test.
See more about how states should define war crimes and crimes against humanity under Articles 7 and 8
of the Rome Statute. A. B. in the year Refugee Appeals Tribunal v Minister for Justice, Equality and Law
Reform [2011] IEHC 198 (H. Ct.) (Ir.)..
3.5.1 National Procedures for Submitting a Request for Asylum

The burden of proof rests with the asylum seeker, who is encouraged to provide as much evidence as
possible. States parties must provide in their domestic legislation that the applicant’s irregular arrival (ie
without an entry visa or other documents) does not preclude a claim for asylum under Article 31 of the
1951 Convention. See, for example, Kenya Refugees Act (2014), Cap. 173 11(3) However, some states
set time limits on how soon after entry an asylum seeker can submit an application. 8 U.S.C. 1158,
compare. If someone receives asylum, he will receive a residence permit for himself and for his
dependent family members. See, for example, 8 U.S.C. 1158(b)(3)(A) (United States); The Immigration
and Refugee Protection Act, S.C. 2001, Ch. 27, art. 95 paragraph 1 point a (can.). If the government
rejects an asylum request, it provides that the applicant has the right to a hearing within 30 days of the
rejection. The person has not been extradited or returned to a country where he or she is at risk of torture
or cruel, inhuman treatment. Treatment or degrading treatment or punishment under Article 3 of the
Convention against Torture. States also offer additional protections to individuals who are not eligible for
asylum, such as denial of removal, subsidiary protection, and other more limited forms of protection..
3.5.2 RULES AND GUIDELINES FOR REFUGEES
The 1951 Convention's definition of a refugee has been integrated into domestic law by the states that are
party to the 1951 Convention and/or the 1967 Optional Protocol. Immigration Rules, 2012, S.I. 2012/11,
art. 334 (U.K.); CESDA L711-1 (Fr.) (French); The Immigration and Refugee Protection Act, 8 U.S.C.
Asylum seekers are those who have applied to be recognized as refugees within a State Party; if they are
determined to meet the requirements for refugee status, they are granted asylum.
Individual States have interpreted the 1951 Convention's criteria of a well-founded fear of persecution as
requiring asylum seekers to prove that there is a real possibility, they may suffer persecution if sent back to
their nation of citizenship or place of usual residence. See Matter of Moghrabi, 19 I&N Dec. 439 (BIA
1987), as an illustration. This norm is believed to be both objective and subjective.The Council of the
European Union included a non-exhaustive list of actions that could qualify as persecution in the
Qualification Directive in an effort to clarify what constitutes persecution, which is not defined in the 1951
Convention or the 1967 Optional Protocol. These actions include: acts of physical or mental abuse,
including sexual abuse; legal, administrative, police, and/or judicial actions that are discriminatory in
nature or that are carried out in a dNon-state actors may be eligible for protection under the 1951
Convention in cases where the State is unwilling or unable to protect the person applying for refugee
status. The persecution in question also need not have been committed by a state actor. For instance, see
id. at art.In actuality, this means that those seeking protection must show that at least one of the five

reasons for protection was or will be a significant factor in the persecution. For instance, have a look at 8
U.S.C. 1158(b)(1)(B)(i) (U.S.). Due to: There must be a connection between one of the five justifications
and the act of persecution.As long as the persecutor has exploited the asylum seeker's race, religion, or
nationality as justification for the persecution, these factors do not need to be real features of the applicant.
See, for instance, Article 10(2) of the Qualification Directive.
In the US, there is some disagreement over whether neutrality can count as a political opinion for the
purposes of applying for asylum. 211 (BIA 1985) with Matter of Acosta, 19 I&N Dec. (No persecution
based on political opinion where refusal to join work stoppage resulted in threats and violence from
militants because refusal was driven by desire to earn wages) (No persecution based on political opinion
where refusal to join work stoppage resulted in threats and violence from militants because refusal was
driven by desire to earn wages)
According to the Council of the European Union, people can be categorized as belonging to a certain
social group if they have a certain fixed trait in common. The definition of a specific social group and
whether groups of persons, including women and homosexuals, who are persecuted but are not covered
by the 1951 Convention, fall within this definition are still up for debate. (See below for Selected Case
Law.)Particularly serious crime: The UNHCR defines a particularly serious crime as one that carries the
death penalty or is otherwise extremely serious and punished, while each country has its own definition.
However, this balancing criterion has not been generally accepted. The UNHCR advises weighing the
seriousness of the crime against the severity of the persecution feared. In Ali v. Achim, 468 F.3d 462 (7th
Cir. 2006), the UNHCR balancing test was rejected.For more details on how States should define war
crimes and crimes against humanity in conformity with Rome Statute Articles 7 and 8, see A.B. v.
Refugee Appeals Tribunal and Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform [2011] IEHC 198 (H. Ct.)
(Ir.).
3.5.3 National Procedures for Submitting a Request for Asylum
The burden of proof rests with the asylum seeker, who is encouraged to provide as much evidence as
possible. States parties must provide in their domestic legislation that the applicant’s irregular arrival (ie
without an entry visa or other documents) does not preclude a claim for asylum under Article 31 of the
1951 Convention. See, for example, Kenya Refugees Act (2014), Cap. 173 11(3) However, some states
set time limits on how soon after entry an asylum seeker can submit an application. 8 U.S.C. 1158,
compare. If someone receives asylum, he will receive a residence permit for himself and for his
dependent family members. See, for example, 8 U.S.C. 1158(b)(3)(A) (United States); The Immigration

and Refugee Protection Act, S.C. 2001, Ch. 27, art. 95 paragraph 1 point a (can.). If the government
rejects an asylum request, it provides that the applicant has the right to a hearing within 30 days of the
rejection. The person has not been extradited or returned to a country where he or she is at risk of torture
or cruel, inhuman treatment. Treatment or degrading treatment or punishment under Article 3 of the
Convention against Torture. States also offer additional protections to individuals who are not eligible for
asylum, such as denial of removal, subsidiary protection, and other more limited forms of protection..
3.5.4 SRI LANKAN REFUGEE
Although Sri Lanka has not ratified the 1951 Convention relating to the Status of Refugees and its 1967
Protocol, Sri Lanka has recognized the value of the Global Refugee Convention as a “focus of
multilateralism and solidarity” that can help protect and address needs. Of millions of people forced to
leave their homes due to conflict.
The Sri Lankan government allows refugees and asylum seekers to submit their claims to UNHCR in Sri
Lanka and stay, while a long-term solution is sought on a case-by-case basis, even though the country is
not a signatory to the Convention or the 1967 Protocol. They are granted a residence permit under an
agreement between the government and the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR)
while UNHCR processes your asylum application, which can take between one and a half to two years.
Sri Lanka currently has 844 refugees and 826 asylum seekers waiting for their cases to be resolved. Those
refugees and asylum seekers cannot find work while in Sri Lanka, because Sri Lanka is not a party to the
Congress and thus does not give them recognized legal status. As a result, UNHCR provides them with
livelihoods that they can use to meet their essential needs. But the only people who receive this income
support are refugees. To meet their basic needs, asylum seekers must rely on the help of NGOs such as
ZOA and Muslim Aid, as well as the help of families at home. Children of refugees and asylum seekers
also have limited school attendance. Basic education is offered to refugee children, although children
under five and over 12 are not required to go to school. Asylum seekers must also once again rely on
charities and private donors to provide educational opportunities for their children. The independence and
motivation of Sri Lankan refugees and asylum seekers is significantly affected by the lack of employment
and education opportunities. Especially for juniors and sophomores. The third iteration of the Colombia
Development Dialogues provides a forum where possible solutions can be formulated. UNHCR is
currently exploring ways to increase support for skills development and vocational training for refugees
and asylum seekers in Sri Lanka in collaboration with the Citra Social Innovation Lab..
3.6 UNHRC's Determinations of Refugee Status

Egypt, Jordan, India, Malaysia, Lebanon and Pakistan are just a few countries in the Middle East and Asia
that host significant numbers of refugees but are either not parties to the 1951 Convention and the 1967
Optional Protocol or have no laws. Or policies. Process asylum applications (see UNHCR, States Parties
to the 1951 Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees).
UNHCR’s Refugee Status Assessment (RSD) is done in the same way as asylum determination at the
state level. After registering with the local UNHCR office, asylum seekers meet with an eligibility officer
who reviews their application and accompanying evidence. Every asylum seeker has the right to an
interview and the opportunity to be accompanied by a legal representative. Procedural Standards for
Refugee Status Determination under UNHCR Mandate 4.3.1-3 (2003). Although asylum seekers can
bring witnesses, it is against UNHCR policy that witnesses testify in front of the applicant and never in
front of other witnesses or outsiders. Id. At 4.3.9. The Selection Officer will notify all applicants of their
decision in writing. Id. At 6.1 In such cases, the applicant must receive an explanation of the eligibility
officer’s decision not to grant refugee status. Id. A rejected refugee applicant has the right to appeal. Id. At
7.1.1.
Id. At 8.1 Unfortunately, in reality, obtaining a refugee certificate does not necessarily guarantee a person’s
ability to find work or protect him from arrest in the host country. Global Focus: Malaysia 2016.
Operation of the year, UNHCR. All refugees and dependent relatives receive a refugee certificate from
UNHCR, which states that the holder is a refugee and thus entitled to protection, including protection
against refoulement and expulsion.
UNHCR (2011), Resettlement Handbook, Chapter 3, p. 77. UNHCR’s decision in 2007 to grant
presumptive refugee status to asylum seekers from southern and central Iraq is a recent example. Id.
Normally, UNHCR examines a person’s refugee status on an individual basis, but in situations where
large numbers of people have been displaced and the need for protection is particularly urgent, the
organization grants temporary refugee status to groups.
In addition to the implementation of RSD, assistance to refugees and other vulnerable people and
organization of resettlement to third countries where voluntary return or local integration is not possible..
3.6.1 Focus of UNHCR
As of January 31, 2022, more than 46,000 refugees and asylum seekers, mostly from Afghanistan and
Myanmar, have been registered with UNHCR in India. In India, refugees and asylum seekers usually live

in urban areas next to their host communities. 36 percent of refugees are young people and 46 percent are
women and girls.
India has hosted many groups of refugees over the years and helped many internally displaced people find
new homes. UNHCR works closely with a range of partners, including ministries, community
organizations and NGOs, and supports the efforts of the government and its citizens to help refugees in 11
states.
UNHCR emphasizes the need for protection in registration and RSD, encourages solutions and
independence. According to the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees, between
2002 and February 2022, 17,933 Sri Lankan refugees returned voluntarily and with the help of the
organization.
The Maldives is covered by the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees
(UNHCR) in India, where it works closely to address the needs of displaced people in terms of capacity
building, promotion of inclusion and international protection..
3.6.2 Reports about refugees:
With a relatively relaxed visa policy, many people arrive in Sri Lanka fleeing persecution in neighboring
countries. After arrival, a person must go through several stages - from being recognized as a refugee to
becoming an asylum seeker - before they can move abroad. This is because Sri Lanka has not ratified the
1951 Refugee Convention. It can only temporarily host migrants because it has no rules or mechanisms to
permanently resettle incoming refugees.
According to the UNHCR, just over 800 people, mainly from Pakistan and Afghanistan, are now seeking
resettlement in Sri Lanka. About 600 of them are refugees and 160 are asylum seekers seeking refugee
status, which would entitle them to a minimum monthly aid from the organization. According to refugee
families, after the terrible economic collapse of the island nation, the UN refugee agency realized the need
to quadruple this monthly allowance to just over 40,000 LKR (about 9,000 USD).
It should be remembered that asylum seekers and refugees lack the normal safety nets and social
networks of nationals, including the right to work. Therefore, they are more vulnerable, explained the
UNHCR representative in an interview with The Hindu newspaper.

Certified esthetician Riffat Foredune. Her husband Foredune Saeed ran a modest business in Karachi.
Negombo's refugee community includes teachers, software engineers and marketing experts. However,
they are unable to earn a living in Sri Lanka using their skills. UNHCR provides refugees with a monthly
stipend to help cover housing costs such as rent, healthcare and other living expenses, all of which have
exploded due to the unrest in Sri Lanka. The price of all food has doubled in the last year, which can be
seen in September, when food inflation accelerated to 95 percent. Some families manage with the help of
local organizations or charities that serve refugees. Both are inadequate and unsustainable.
"A handful of us refugee families bought large quantities of atta to save a few hundred dollars. That's how
terrible it is," added the refugee, who requested anonymity. "Many of us have had terrible experiences and
serious health problems. Recent medical research expenses were [LKR] 7000 rupees or about $1560 and
added a lot to our monthly budget as a family. The 27-year-old man, looking exhausted, stated: "I am also
trying to deal with depression.
The refugee families have made friends with the locals and appreciate their stay in Sri Lanka, but there
has also been hostility, they fear that they will again become easy targets of suspicion or resentment,
especially if the locals face increasing economic hardship against migrants, whom some outraged locals
saw as "Muslims" after the Easter 2019 terror attacks, one of which took place at a church in Negombo, a
Catholic area - despite the refugee community consisting of many different religions and sects. Another
immigrant who lived there recalled: "When the Sri Lankan leader was hanged in Sialkot [Pakistan] last
year, we were afraid and stayed indoors, expecting attacks on us. We were told to stay home even during
anti-government protests and violence. Ruki Fernando, human rights defender working with refugee
groups pointed out that Sri Lanka's contribution to the global refugee crisis was small compared to
Pakistan, Bangladesh, Nepal, India, Thailand and other asylum countries, adding that seekers and refugees
are the most . socially and economically marginalized groups in Sri Lanka, and we temporarily left with
very little official and civil support. "Very little attention is paid to their rights, dignity and well-being."
Soon, Mr. Fernando said, the Sri Lankan government must include the children of refugees and asylum
seekers in its free education policy and support programs. He also called on the UNHCR to speed up the
processing of asylum seekers' requests. In the long term, the government, like other countries, must
provide permanent resettlement for at least a small number of refugees through a domestic process.
At the same time, refugee families can only rely on their optimism and strength. Riffat Foredune urged
her husband in Urdu, "Janu (my life), bring this file." She proudly displays her daughters' school
certificates, turning the laminated slots one by one. The girls, now aged 11 and 13, excelled academically

and won prizes in chess and storytelling competitions. In between is a slightly faded certificate from 1995.
She earned it herself after completing cosmetology training in Karachi.
"I lived a happy life there. She laughs looking at her husband. "The beauty salon, our family car that I
used to drive, and our love story from the days of basic cell phones." All I have left from that past is this
wonderful man. He still has my undying love..
3.7 CASE LAW
The following cases address the most divisive issues in current refugee law:
The Supreme Court of India heard the Chakma Refugees case, which addressed the rights and status of
Chakma refugees living in northern Indian states. -In East and West Bengal for more than 50 years. The
case specifically concerned a situation where, according to the 2011 census, there were 47,471 Chakmas
living in the state of Arunachal Pradesh. In 2015, the Supreme Court ordered the central government to
grant citizenship to both Chakma and Hajong refugees. This case highlighted the legal and humanitarian
aspects of the long-term stay and status of refugees in India and emphasized the importance of
considering their rights and integrating them into society.
In the case of Sadikou Gnandi v État belge heard by the Court of Justice of the European Union on 19
June 2018, this case likely involved a legal dispute between Sadikou Gnandi and the Belgian state. The
Court of Justice of the European Union is the highest court of the European Union in matters concerning
European Union law, which interprets EU law to ensure its equal application in all EU member states. In
this case, the ECJ would have examined the relevant EU laws and regulations to determine the rights and
obligations of Sadikou Gnand in relation to the Belgian state. The judgment would clarify how EU law
applies to the specific circumstances of the case and set a precedent for similar cases in the future.
The Gauhati High Court case Involving detained Burmese refugees is believed to have involved a legal
matter involving the arrest or detention of Burmese refugees within the jurisdiction of the Gauhati High
Court, the highest court in the northeastern region of India. In that case, the court would have examined
the circumstances surrounding the detention of the Burmese refugees, including the reasons for their
detention, the conditions of detention and the legality of the detention under Indian law and international
human rights standards. The Gauhati High Court judgment would have dealt with issues such as the rights
of refugees, the principle of non-refoulement, the right to seek asylum and the treatment of refugees under

Indian law. The decision of the court would have had consequences for the protection of refugees in India
and the realization of their rights within the legal framework of the country.
In the case MA v. The International Protection Appeal Tribunal, Minister for Justice and Equality,
Minister for Justice and Ireland (Case C-661/17), heard by the Court of Justice of the European Union on
23 January 2019, ruled that the Court is likely to deal with Irish international protections and asylum
claims. The case may have involved a legal dispute involving a decision of the International Defense
Appeal Tribunal and the Irish Minister for Justice and Equality, the appellant being MA. The ECJ would
have examined the relevant EU legislation and regulations on international protection and asylum
procedures to determine whether the decisions taken by the Irish authorities comply with EU law, in
particular with regard to the rights and standards of asylum seekers. On granting international protection.
Judgment in this case would have guided the interpretation and application of EU law in the context of
asylum and international protection complaints, setting a precedent for similar cases in the European
Union..
3.7.2 A SPECIFIC SERIOUS CRIME
The Council of State granted asylum to an Iraqi citizen who participated in an honor killing as a minor on
April 7, 2010, Rec. LeBron 2010, IX-X, 319840 (Fr.), arguing that the Commission des Recourse des
Refuges should have considered whether family pressure reduced his free will and whether his youth
made him particularly vulnerable to such pressure. (The judgment is only available in French, but an
English summary is available.).
The Home Secretary must take into account all the circumstances of the case, Including: English law and
the law of the country where the offense is alleged to have occurred; factual matrix of the alleged crime,
including possible defenses; age and circumstances of the applicant; and any material known to the Home
Secretary which justifies a serious belief that the person seeking protection has committed a serious
offence. A large-scale crime requires considerable responsibility from the suspect. In this case, the Home
Secretary erroneously concluded that there was reason to believe that the applicant had committed a
particularly serious crime, even though he found that the applicant, an Afghan minor, probably committed
the alleged crime by accident. And negligence. Considering his age and circumstances.
Ri Afero de Carballe, 19 IandN 357 (BIA 1986), which affirmed the decision of the BIA that the Attorney
General can treat other crimes not covered by the INA as especially serious crimes in order to avoid denial

of deportation (if aliens convicted of especially a serious crime in the United States, believed to be
dangerous to the United States).
This case primarily involved an application for a mandatory injunction ordering the Commonwealth to
fulfill its duty under section 198 of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth) to remove BHL19 from Australia as
soon as possible, and a finding that the Commonwealth had failed. Comply with that duty (as well as
“[other] with such order as the court thinks fit”). BHL19 spent more than eight years in immigration
detention. The minister refused to grant BHL19 a protection visa because of his character, even though the
parties agreed to Australia’s protection obligation towards him. The parties also agreed that BHL19 fell
within the scope of section 198(6) of the Act (detained as a foreign national whose application for a
substantive visa had been refused) and that a Commonwealth officer therefore had to remove him from
Australia as soon as possible. . as was reasonably practicable. Referring to section 197C(1-2) of the Act,
the court noted that, until recently, those provisions required officials to deport an illegal alien from
Australia, even if doing so violated Australia’s international non-refoulement requirement. ..
3.7.3 AFRICAN COMMISSION ON HUMAN AND PEOPLES’ RIGHTS
That complaint concerns alleged violations of the African Charter on Human and Peoples' Rights (the
African Charter) by the Egyptian authorities in their treatment of refugee and asylum seeker protesters at
UNHCR offices in Egypt in 2005. The protesters, made up of Sudanese asylum seekers and registered
refugees, gathered for several months in a park near the offices of the United Nations High Commissioner
for Refugees to express their dissatisfaction with conditions for Sudanese refugees in Egypt, including
barriers to safe work, education. and health care. Egyptian riot police reportedly arrived at the park on the
night of the 29th-30th. in December 2005 when protesters refused to leave. They are said to have been
equipped with clubs, sticks and gas canisters. 53 protesters, including men, women and children, are
believed to have died in the ensuing violence either as a result of being beaten by the police or trampled
by other protesters. The applicants also claimed that many of the protesters arrested by the police during
these events were denied access to contact information of family members, food and medical care.
In this case, the appellant was an Iraqi national who claimed that he would face persecution and serious
harm if he returned to Iraq because the sale of alcohol there was illegal under local law and considered
"immoral" and "inappropriate". -Islam" in some places. He referred to section 36(2) of the Immigration
Act 1958 (Cth), which allows a protection visa to be granted to someone who is considered to be a
"refugee" (the "refugee criterion") or if that person does not meet that definition for a person who is
nevertheless entitled to protection under Australia's non-refoulement obligations ("further protection

criterion") the unsuccessful refugee claim of The Immigration Assessment Authority (IAA) has been
upheld the applicant's refusal to grant protection visa, among other things, that he will stop selling alcohol
when he is returned to Iraq..
3.7.4 Minister for Immigration, Citizenship,
In this case, it was a request to cancel a visa. The Iraqi national, who held an overseas humanitarian visa,
arrived in Australia in 2007 aged 16 and was a first responder. After being found guilty of a crime
punishable by at least 12 months in prison and having his visa revoked under Section 501 of the
Immigration Act of 1958, he tried unsuccessfully to reverse the revocation. Later, he submitted a request
to the Administrative Court to review the decision not to revoke the suspension of the visa. He claimed he
was worried he would probably be killed if sent back to Iraq. According to the court, those arguments
“cannot be ignored” and “weigh more or less” in favor of the accused, but making a specific conclusion
was neither necessary nor in his power. In reaching this conclusion, it was noted that if the revocation of
the previous visa remains valid, the accused is free to submit a new application for a protection visa. On
appeal, a single judge in the Federal Court overturned the court’s decision because it made a jurisdictional
error by ignoring the possibility that claims for damages would be considered a “second ground” for
overturning visa cancellations if returned to Iraq. A decision in accordance with applicable law.
3.7.5 AUSTRALIA
The appellants in this case argued that they had a legitimate fear of persecution in Pakistan because they
belonged to a special social group, namely homosexual men in Pakistan. They appealed the decisions of
the lower court, which rejected their request for review of the decisions of the Administrative Appeals
Board, which upheld those decisions to deny them protection visas.
The Court rejected the appellants' claims that they were homosexual and engaged in a homosexual
relationship and did not find them credible witnesses. Appellants argued that the court committed
jurisdictional error due to legal absurdity and/or unreasonableness. Since the judgment was based on the
appellants' claims of unreasonableness and illogicality, it was ultimately unnecessary to resolve the debate
on the relevant principles of legal unfairness and whether they apply to the judgments in this case.
3.7.6 AFRICAN COURT ON HUMAN AND PEOPLES’ RIGHTS

This case concerns the right to nationality under the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights
(African Charter), International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and Universal Declaration of
Human Rights (UDHR). The applicant in this case was the holder of Tanzanian citizenship and a
Tanzanian passport. In 2012, his passport was confiscated and his Tanzanian citizenship withdrawn on
suspicion that they had been obtained fraudulently. The applicant was deported to Kenya which, in turn,
deported him back to Tanzania. The applicant applied to the African Court on Human and Peoples’ Rights
for relief in relation to violations of his right not to be arbitrarily deprived of nationality and not to be
arbitrarily expelled.6
3.7.7 COURT OF JUSTICE OF THE EUROPEAN UNION (CJEU)
Number of interpretive matters including article 17, the best interests of the child, and effective remedy.7
Regarding, among other things, Dublin transfers in light of the United Kingdom's withdrawal from the
European Union (Brexit), and considerations surrounding article 17 of the Regulation (EU) No 604/2013
of the European Parliament and of the Council of June 26, 2013, establishing the standards and
mechanism, the CJEU rendered its decision in Case C-661/17, MA v. International Protection Appeals
Tribunal, Minister for Justice and Equality, Attorney General, and Ireland, on January 23, 2019.
After residing in the UK for six years, the applicants—two parents and a child (born in the UK in
February 2014)—applied for asylum in Ireland. The UK acknowledged a takeback request that the Irish
government had sent. The petitioners attempted to argue against their return to the UK on the basis of their
medical condition as well as the possibility of the nation's eventual separation from the EU. In the end, the
case was heard by the High Court, which made the decision to halt the proceedings and request a ruling
from the CJEU on the pertinent Brexit consequences as well as a number of interpretive matters including
article 17, the best interests of the child, and effective remedy.8
Regarding, among other things, Dublin transfers in light of the United Kingdom's withdrawal from the
European Union (Brexit), and considerations surrounding article 17 of the Regulation (EU) No 604/2013
of the European Parliament and of the Council of June 26, 2013, establishing the standards and
mechanism, the CJEU rendered its decision in Case C-661/17, MA v. International Protection Appeals
Tribunal, Minister for Justice and Equality, Attorney General, and Ireland, on January 23, 2019.
6
Anudo Ochieng Anudo v Tanzania (Judgment) African Court on Human and Peoples’ Rights, App No 012/2015 (22 March 2018)
7
Sadikou Gnandi v État belge (19 June 2018)
8
Case C-661/17 MA v International Protection Appeals Tribunal, Minister for Justice and Equality, Attorney General, and Ireland (23
January 2019)

After residing in the UK for six years, the applicants—two parents and a child (born in the UK in
February 2014)—applied for asylum in Ireland. The UK acknowledged a takeback request that the Irish
government had sent. The petitioners attempted to argue against their return to the UK on the basis of their
medical condition as well as the possibility of the nation's eventual separation from the EU. In the end, the
case was heard by the High Court, which made the decision to halt the proceedings and request a ruling
from the CJEU on the pertinent Brexit consequences as well as a
3.7 INTERNATIONAL LEGAL FRAMEWORK REFUGEE CONVENTION,

1951 AND INDIA'S APPROACH
None of the SAARC nations have ratified the 1951 Convention, despite the region's refugee crisis.10
India is under a lot of criticism and pressure to ratify the 1951 Refugee Convention and its 1967 Protocol
because it now receives a lot of refugees from all over the world. Any person who flees their own country
in search of safety while facing ongoing persecution is considered a refugee. Due to the fact that he still
has a de jure national status, this person should be treated differently from a Stateless person. However,
the 1951 Convention's widely accepted definition of a refugee is as follows: "...owing to a well-founded
fear of persecution for reasons of race, religion, nationality, membership of a particular social group, or
political opinion, is outside the country of his nationality and is unable or, owing to such fear, is unwilling
to avail himself of the protection of that country" The criteria used to assess a person's refugee status are
based on that person's mental condition and are supported by objective factors. India has refused to ratify
the 1951 Refugee Convention on the grounds that it is European-centric and exclusively handles post-
World War II refugee issues. Another viewpoint is that the definition of a refugee is too limited and
individualistic, focusing primarily on the infringement of civil and political rights while ignoring the
fundamental causes of refugee flows in South Asia. Additionally, it excludes the great majority of people
who are compelled to from their homes due to conflict, loss of employment, natural or man-made
disasters, and internally displaced people.
Additionally, ratification will result in increased obligations to grant its refugees more rights and
advantages. It is challenging for a developing nation like India, which struggles to give its own population
the most basic necessities. People from all over the world move to India in search of opportunity.
Ratifying the Convention will make the problem of migrant workers worse since they will try to take
advantage of it improperly by claiming refugee status in order to take advantage of better possibilities.
India is concerned about the 1951 Convention's potential to infringe on state sovereignty. It encourages a
bilateral strategy between the involved States. The perception of terrorists, criminals, and other risks to
national security as a result of India's open borders is another factor. India's record of accepting and
integrating refugees is impressive. In India, according to UNHCR, local integration rather than
repatriation has traditionally been prioritized as a solution, leaving India with far more than its fair share of
the world's refugee burden.
The Indian government is worried that joining the 1951 Convention would erode its authority over its
refugee program and make the issue worse. India continues to aid refugees despite not being a member
nation because "India has its own unique problems due to its geopolitics and history with neighboring
countries: Therefore, the ratification of a universal convention on refugees is not politically feasible." India
has confidence in its ability to handle large-scale influxes of migrants in an efficient and humane manner
on an as-needed basis since it has experience managing numerous significant refugee crises, both before
and after the UNHCR was established. It eliminated the need to adhere to the system of international
refugee law or to enact its own domestic system. Therefore, the decision-makers think that the
Convention's ratification by India is still up for debate.
3.8 CONCLUSION:
A person who is recognized as a refugee is entitled to specific rights and support under international law.
Depending on the country they are in and the resources available, the specific assistance and support that
refugees receive may vary. Here are some instances of the kind of help that refugees might get:
a) Protection and Legal Rights: Refugees are entitled to protection from being forcibly deported
to their country of origin, legal status as refugees, and access to a fair and efficient asylum
procedure.
b) Shelter and lodging: Refugees typically receive help identifying and securing suitable
housing, either through support with community integration or through government-run refugee
camps.
c) Basic Needs and Essentials: Either directly by humanitarian organizations or through

government programs, food, fresh water, clothing, and personal hygiene goods are given to
refugees.

d) Medical care: A lot of host nations offer medical care services that are especially adapted to
the requirements of refugees, such as access to medical facilities, vaccinations, and emergency
medical care.
e) Education: Refugee children and occasionally adults have the right to receive an education,
which may entail enrolling in regular classes or participating in programs created expressly for
them in accordance with their linguistic and cultural needs.
f) Employment and means of subsistence: Some countries provide opportunities for

employment or vocational training to help refugees become self-sufficient and integrate into the
local workforce.
g) Refugees who have been through terrible events and may require mental health treatment in
order to recover and come to grips with their situation are routinely offered counseling, therapy,
and psychosocial support programs.
h) Legal Assistance: Legal aid or counsel may be made available to assist refugees with legal
processes including family reunification, residency permits, or acquiring social benefits.
CHAPTER 4
FROM ASYLUM TO INTEGRATION: ANALYSING NATIONAL LAWS AND

REFUGEE RIGHTS
4.1 INTRODUCTION:
India has taken in refugees since gaining its independence from many other nations, including Nepal,
China, Iran, Iraq, Sri Lanka, Burma, Bangladesh, Somalia, Sudan, Afghanistan, and Bhutan. People who
crossed the newly drawn borders between India and Pakistan during the Partition of India did not lose
their nationality. They continued to be compelled to live like refugees. Refugee camps spread out over
north India provided housing for those who had been uprooted as a result of Partition. The newly
independent India automatically granted these refugees citizenship. Rehabilitating the Partition refugees
presented an unusual challenge to the newly elected government, which was made more difficult by the
1948 war with Pakistan.

The Dalai Lama, the spiritual and political head of the Tibetan population, escaped Tibet and entered
Indian territory to seek political asylum in 1959, almost ten years after Partition. He was accompanied by
more than a million of his supporters at the time. Tibetan refugees moved in northern and northeastern
Indian States, and Dharamshala, Himachal Pradesh, became the Dalai Lama's official residence. The
Tibetan refugees still coexist peacefully, primarily with other indigenous Indian communities in the area,
and as a community.
Millions of migrants fled the Bangladeshi government's foreign policy and political expediency during the
country's War of Independence in 1971, which was the next significant refugee crisis. The UNHCR is
active in India and predominantly does business out of its offices in New Delhi and, to a lesser extent,
Chennai in the Tamil Nadu state. UNHCR in India enjoys some independence in carrying out activities
under the mandate specified in its Statute, including making determinations of refugee status through its
New Delhi office, despite the lack of official recognition by the Indian Government or a legal foundation
for its aid program.
4.2 REFGEES TO INDIA FROM EIGHBOURING COUNTRIES
India has taken in refugees since gaining its independence from many other nations, including Nepal,
China, Iran, Iraq, Sri Lanka, Burma, Bangladesh, Somalia, Sudan, Afghanistan, and Bhutan. People who
crossed the newly drawn borders between India and Pakistan during the Partition of India did not lose
their nationality. They continued to be compelled to live like refugees. Refugee camps spread out over
north India provided housing for those who had been uprooted as a result of Partition. The newly
independent India automatically granted these refugees citizenship. Rehabilitating the Partition refugees
presented an unusual challenge to the newly elected government, which was made more difficult by the
1948 war with Pakistan.
The Dalai Lama, the spiritual and political head of the Tibetan population, escaped Tibet and entered
Indian territory to seek political asylum in 1959, almost ten years after Partition. He was accompanied by
more than a million of his supporters at the time. Tibetan refugees moved in northern and northeastern
Indian States, and Dharamshala, Himachal Pradesh, became the Dalai Lama's official residence. The

Tibetan refugees still coexist peacefully, primarily with other indigenous Indian communities in the area,
and as a community.
In 1971, during Bangladesh's War of Independence, there was another significant refugee crisis as
millions of people fled Bangladesh for India. More than 10 million Bangladeshi refugees fled their home
country to India in 1971; the majority of them resided in northeastern states like Assam, Tripura, and
Manipur. Local communities and tribal groups in these States claim that the influx of illegal immigrants
and Bangladeshi refugees has changed the social demographics of the region, turning the native
population into a minority in their own country.
Tamils from Sri Lanka made up a sizable portion of the refugees who left the island nation after the Sri
Lankan Civil War. In the State of Tamil Nadu, more than a million refugees from Sri Lanka have
relocated. During the initial phase, between 1983 and 1987, more than 1.34 lakh Tamils from Sri Lanka
crossed the Palk Strait into India. Numerous further refugees entered India in three additional periods to
seek safety there.
Following the 1979 Soviet invasion of Afghanistan, a lot of Afghans fled to India as part of the subsequent
refugee wave. Afghan migrants continued to arrive in India in small groups even in the years that
followed. Most of these refugees were based in and around Delhi. Many of the Afghan Hindu and Sikh
refugees who migrated to India in the early 1990s have received citizenship in the last ten years, according
to UNHCR.
For more than 50 years, many members of the Chakma and Hajong communities, who formerly resided
in the Chittagong hill tracts, have been living as refugees in the Indian States of North-East and West
Bengal. 47,471 Chakmas reside alone in the State of Arunachal Pradesh, according to the Census of 2011.
The Central Government was ordered by the Supreme Court in 2015 to provide citizenship to both
Chakma and Hajong refugees.
When almost 40,000 Muslims from the Rohingya ethnic group fled Myanmar for India, the argument
over refugees attracted widespread attention. About 16,500 Rohingya refugees in India received identity
cards thanks to actions taken by the UNHCR office, which helped "prevent harassment, arbitrary arrests,
detention, and deportation" of these refugees. However, India has viewed Rohingya as both illegal
immigrants and a threat to national security. Because India is not a party to the 1951 Refugee Convention,
the Indian Government has argued that the concept of nonrefoulement does not apply to Indian officials
urged Myanmar to accept the Rohingya refugees back. It is clear that, with very few exceptions, India

continues to accept refugees from its neighboring nations despite not being a signatory to the 1951
Refugee Convention. India has generally abided by the nonrefoulement principle, and in the majority of
situations, refugees have been accommodated and locally assimilated into Indian society.
India, the greatest democracy in the world, is home to a sizable community of refugees looking for safety
inside its borders. An extensive review of India's legal system and refugee policies is given in this article.
We can learn more about India's approach to refugee protection by looking at the legal system, laws, and
difficulties that refugees encounter there. Since the beginning of time, India has hosted a sizable
population of refugees from all over the world, not just from its immediate neighbors. The enormous
number of refugees in India is due to a variety of factors, including its geographic location, democratic
government, tolerant society, and goodwill. India is appealing to many asylum seekers because to a
confluence of geographical, social, and political reasons. These include more or less open border policies
with nations where oppressive regimes and racial strife have driven many people from their homes. The
multicultural and secular nature of Indian culture and government is another influence. Additionally, India
has welcomed particular refugee groups with a tolerant and liberal attitude. However, not all people of all
nationalities have been treated equally by this mentality.
Because of this legal void, refugees are frequently handled on an as-needed basis. They are susceptible to
the fluctuating political expediency and foreign policy goals of the Indian government. The UNHCR is
active in India and predominantly does business out of its offices in New Delhi and, to a lesser extent,
Chennai in the Tamil Nadu state. UNHCR in India enjoys some independence in carrying out
programmers under the mandate specified in its Statute, including making determinations of refugee
status through its New Delhi office, despite the lack of official recognition by the Indian Government or a
legal foundation for its aid programmed.
The Citizenship Amendment Act, which the Indian government passed in 2019 and which amended the
Citizenship Act of 1955, created chaos and discontent among the Muslim refugees residing in India. The
government took this action in response to the current influx of Rohingya Muslims into the nation who
had escaped from Myanmar after being persecuted there, although the Amendment affects all refugees
who fled to India from surrounding nations decades ago, not only the Rohingyas.
a) LEGAL FRAMEWORK:
There is no national legislation relating to refugees in India. Instead, its legal system is based on
national statutes, international agreements, and governmental regulations. The Indian Constitution

guarantees each person certain fundamental rights, such as the right to equality, life, and personal
freedom. In addition, India is a signatory to a number of international agreements that indirectly
support refugee protection, including the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and the
Universal Declaration of Human Rights.
b) REFUGEE RECOGNITION:
With regard to refugees, India takes a prima facie stance, offering them certain rights and protection
based on humanitarian concerns. The United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR), in
collaboration with the Indian Government, is largely responsible for determining a person's refugee
status. However, the lack of a distinct legal framework for refugees has made it difficult to ensure
uniform and regular procedures for the recognition of refugees.
c) RIGHTS AND PROVISIONS:
Refugees in India are entitled to certain rights and rules regardless of their legal status. They are
entitled to protection against refoulement, which prevents them from being forcibly sent back to a
nation where their life or freedom might be in danger. Access to primary healthcare and educational
institutions is also provided to refugees. However, due to their legal situation, refugees may have
limited access to various social welfare programs, including employment and public distribution
networks.
d) LONG-TERM REFUGEES:
Long-term refugees are a large component of the population of India, particularly Tibetans and Tamils
from Sri Lanka. For many years, these people have lived in India, where they have built their own
institutions and villages. The Indian government has given these communities some assistance and
latitude, enabling them to retain their cultural and religious customs while encouraging independence
and integration.
e) CHALLENGES:
Despite the lack of a thorough legal framework for refugees, India still has a number of difficulties in
providing appropriate protection and assistance. Different levels of protection and access to rights

result from the absence of established processes for the identification and documentation of refugees.
The inability of refugees to get legal documentation might obstruct their access to necessary services,
work opportunities, and educational opportunities. In addition, there's a chance that refugees will be
subject to prejudice, exploitation, and a lack of job possibilities.
f) PROTECTION GAPS:
Specific legal frame work was not there for refugees in India has resulted in significant protection
gaps. While refugees are provided with some basic rights and humanitarian assistance, there is a lack
of comprehensive policies addressing their long-term needs, including durable solutions such as local
integration, resettlement, or voluntary repatriation. The absence of a legal framework also affects the
ability of refugees to obtain legal employment, leading to their vulnerability in the informal sector.
G) INTERNATIONAL COOPERATION IN INDIA
In the past, India has always taken a practical stance on refugee issues, emphasizing voluntary
repatriation and encouraging regional peace. The nation has granted temporary asylum to refugees
who needed it, especially those from nearby nations experiencing political turmoil and persecution.
India has also participated in international discussions and regional programs like SAARC to address
the problems associated with refugees as a whole.9
H) CIVIL SOCIETY AND NON-GOVERNMENTAL ORGANIZATIONS:
The help of refugees in India is greatly aided by non-governmental organizations (NGOs) and civil
society organizations. In addition to the efforts of the government and international organizations, they
offer refugees support, legal aid, education, and healthcare services. NGOs support policy changes
and educate the public about refugee concerns in India.
4.3. PRINCIPLE OF NON-REFOULEMENT FOR REFUGEES
Because it has attained the stature of jus cogens, the principle of nonrefoulement is likewise binding on
India as a norm of customary international law. Both human rights and refugee law have outlined the
concept of nonrefoulement. No nation must, without the will of the refugee or if there is a justifiable threat
9
Heather Alexander & Jonathan Simon, "Unable to Return" in the 1951 Refugee Convention: Stateless
Refugees and Climate Change,26, Florida Journal of International Law, 555

to his life, liberty, or freedom, deport, expulse, or forcefully return the refugee to his original territory. This
definition is not final and is up for review by "national security" and "public order."
As a part of customary international law, the norm of nonrefoulement is binding on all States, and there is
sufficient evidence and state conduct to support this conclusion. India expressly complies with this
requirement through a number of case laws. The Gujarat High Court ruled in Ktaer Abbas Habib Al
Qutaifi v. Union of India that the two Iraqi nationals would not be sent back to their home country as long
as they feared for their lives and freedom, upholding the principle of nonrefoulement under the broad
purview of Article 21 of the Constitution. They were instead delivered to UNHCR in India. In another
instance, a decision was made to deport Burmese refugees based on comparable tendencies.
The ratification of any treaty or Convention is not necessary for the application of the nonrefoulement
principle because it is an absolute rule. This principle is applicable as soon as the refugee decides against
returning to his or her place of origin due to a "threat to life." When repairs are made, they must pass the
"voluntary/ nature repair" test. It is important to take into account the person's mental health when
deciding whether to repatriate them.
PROTECTION UNDER HUMAN RIGHTS INSTRUMENTS
India accepted a number of other international human rights documents with commitments to protect
refugees, despite not being a signatory to the 1951 Refugee Convention. The 1967 UN Declaration on
Territorial Asylum is just one of several international documents. The International Covenant on Civil and
Political Rights, signed in 1966, and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, adopted in 1948. All of
the human rights guaranteed by these international treaties are applicable to state-recognized refugees. As
a result, India has a duty to provide sanctuary to those who fear persecution at the hands of them
government. There may be no exceptions made to any treaty, convention, or regulation that protects the
human rights of refugees.
The Contracting States are obligated by the Convention on the Rights of the Child to offer state-
recognized refugee children the necessary protection and humanitarian aid. The Committee on the
Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination has acknowledged the significance of the
nonrefoulement principle and the many rights of refugees and displaced people in its General
Recommendations. These rights consist of the right to a safe return and the right to have the property of
refugees returned to its original state. Provisions pertaining to the protection of State-recognized refugee
women are also found in the 1979 International Convention on the Elimination of Discrimination Against

Women. Additionally, Article 3 of the 1984 Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman, and
Degrading Treatment or Punishment, to which India is a signatory but has not yet ratified, contains the
nonrefoulement principle.
India is a signatory to the Bangkok Principle, which states that "a refugee shall not be deported or returned
to a state or country where his life and liberty would be threatened for reasons of race, color, religion,
politics, or national origin, except in the national or public interest." The Bangkok Principle was adopted
by an intergovernmental agreement by the Asian-African Legal Consultative Committee in 1966.
1) DOMESTIC LEGAL FRAMEWORK
There is no established process or legal foundation for determining a person's status as a refugee in
India because there is no national statute. The Foreigners Act of 1939, the Passport (Entry into India)
Act of 1920, the Passports Act of 1967, and the Extradition Act of 1962, among others, apply to
refugees as foreigners under municipal law and as such, they are subject to their requirements.
Refugees are entitled to all fundamental liberties guaranteed by the Constitution.
2) CONSTITUTIONAL LAW
India's broad and liberal constitutional framework, which provides a number of fundamental rights
under Part III of the Constitution, makes up for the lack of a specialized legal structure for the
protection of refugees. Foreigners were formerly denied access to the Constitution's core rights. These
rights, however, are expressed in a fashion that clearly distinguishes between those that are open to
everyone and those that are only available to citizens. According to the Supreme Court of India's
ruling in the Chakma Refugee case, the language of Articles 14 and 21 makes the rights listed therein
available to citizens as well as to foreigners, and thus also to refugees. Every person has a right to
equality before the law and equal protection under the law, as stated in Article 14. Additionally,
according to Article 21, "No person shall be deprived of his life or personal liberty except in
accordance with the procedure established by law.
Together, these two articles have the effect of requiring the state to defend the life and liberty of every
person, whether or not they are citizens. Articles 14, 21, 22, 25–28, 32, and 126 of the Constitution are
some of the essential rights that are available to everyone, including refugees. The Supreme Court ruled in
another instance that even people who are not citizens have a fundamental right to life, liberty, and dignity.
The right against arrest and detention flows from this right to life. In another case, the Gauhati High Court

granted incarcerated Burmese refugee’s interim bail; the court showed consideration by n3.ot demanding
local sureties. The courts have similarly applied a lax interpretation in contentious circumstances so that
UNHCR can decide the refugee's status.In another instance, the court ruled that inmates should be given
access to food and medical care because these are the absolute necessities for living. In addition to the
rights already listed, refugees are also granted the freedom to practice and proclaim their own faith,
subject to reasonable limitations that are applicable to everyone, including foreigners.
3.) STATUTORY LAW
In the absence of specific enactment relating to the protection of refugees, domestic legislations in force
are applicable to deal with refugee protection. The laws include the Passport (Entry into India) Act, 1920;
the Passports Act, 1967; the Registration of Foreigners Act, 1939; the Foreigners Act, 1946; the
Foreigners Order, 1948. Domestic legislation draws no distinction between a "foreigner" and a "refugee,"
which leads to a number of problems. The Passport (Entry into India) Act of 1920 and the Passports Act
of 1967 make no difference between genuine refugees and other categories of foreigners like tourists,
economic migrants, and students. As a consequence, the refugees are at risk of being arrested by
immigration authorities and illegal deportation due to the lack of a valid passport." In the absence of a
valid passport, the penalty should not be imposed on refugees because they may have left their own
country in chaos and had no time to get a passport issued from the passport office. Further, access to
passport offices may not be possible due to the lack of infrastructure and distance. As per the Passports
Act, 1967, once the refugee arrives the Indian territory, they may get valid passports and identity cards
only when the criteria of public interest are fulfilled." Under the Passports Act. Valid passports have been
issued only to Tibetan refugees. The Central Government is authorized to make rules for foreigners under
the Registration of Foreigners Act of 1939. The Government is empowered to make rules regarding
where and whom to report, provisions about the proof of identity and registration certificate." The
Registration of Foreigners Act of 1939 should not apply to refugees as they have already suffered at the
hands of their government, and various technical formal- cities enhance the suffering of the refugee.
Additionally, in the absence of checks and balances on the power of the Central Government, it can be
used in an arbitrary manner to harass genuine refugees. The Foreigners Act of 1946 imposes some more
restrictions on refugees, like defining whom to meet and the routes only through which they can enter the
country. One of the significant problems with the Act is that the 43 authorities have "unlimited power" to
arrest and detain any foreigner on mere suspicion of non-compliance with the provisions of the Act.

However, some decisions of the judiciary restrict the power of authorities by stating that to penalize under
the Act, there should be actual contravention of the provisions of the Foreigners Act of 1946.
The Central Government is empowered to expel foreigners from India and has wide discretion to regulate
the conditions of their stay. It also contains a registration regime for foreigners in India and restrictions on
work permits. The Foreigners Order of 1948 authorizes the Government to "grant or refuse" a foreigner
entry into the Indian territory on grounds like invalid passport, unsound mind, public safety, etc." The civil
authority can refuse permission if the formalities are not fulfilled under the Foreigners Act." This rule is
arbitrary because the condition of a refugee is different, and he deserves to be treated on compassionate
grounds. In most cases, refugees are detained in transit areas like airports and sea costs before their entry
into Indian territory, which is treated as "International Zones," where domestic law does not apply. In this
situation, a refugee can only seek administrative remedies and not legal remedies, as he is deemed not to
have entered the territory of India officially. Refugees are handled by bureaucrats or customs officials
who, in most cases, lack the legal knowledge and competence to deal with them, which poses a
significant danger of deportation and, ultimately, persecution of the refugees. It also leads to a violation of
the principle of non-refoulement. A refugee may be penalized for cheating, fabricating documents, and
forgery under the Indian Penal Code."
4.3.7 ROLE OF JUDICIARY
Prior to being a part of municipal law, international treaty obligations had to be implemented by a
legislative enactment. However, Article 253 of the Constitution gives the Indian Parliament the authority
to pass legislation enacting a treaty's stipulations. Even in the absence of their legislative adoption, the
Indian judiciary has relied on rights outlined in international instruments in a number of judgements.The
Supreme Court has not conclusively ruled on the issue of whether the principle of nonrefoulement and the
right to UNHCR assessment of refugee status can be interpreted as judicially enforceable rights in the
Constitution. However, the Gujarat High Court concluded in the Ktaer Abbas case that the concept of
nonrefoulement was covered by Article 21 of the Constitution, provided that the refugee's presence did
not compromise India's security, law, or order. The right to non-refoulement in this instance relates to a
person who is awaiting the UNHCR's decision of their status.
In another instance, the court ordered a stay on the deportation of the Burmese refugees from the
Andaman Islands because their application for refugee status was still being processed and a prima facie
case had been established for granting refugee status. Similar to this, the Imphal Bench of the Gauhati
High Court specifically acknowledged both ongoing national laws and international treaty duties when it

held that anyone claiming to be a refugee may have the right to be freed on bail and have the UNHCR
verify their status.
The Gauhati High Court gave a Burmese refugee the right to seek political asylum by having UNHCR
evaluate his status, as well as the right to wait until his status is confirmed before being deported. The
Supreme Court ruled that in cases where refugees had been in India for a considerable amount of time,
they were entitled to protection and fair treatment until their case was resolved in accordance with
government policy." The refugees in question in this instance were tribal Chakmas from Bangladesh's
Chittagong Hill Tracts, who had been granted protected status by the government. In the Nedumaran
case" and the Gurunathan case, the Madras High Court came to the conclusion that Sri Lankan Tamil
refugees in Tamil Nadu had a right not to be forcibly deported. Repatriation was not to be carried out in
certain situations unless UNHCR determined that the return was voluntary.
In addition to the judiciary's involvement in defending refugees, the Protection of Human Rights Act of
1993 established the National Human Rights Commission, State Human Rights Commissions, and
Human Rights Courts in India. According to this Act, these national bodies possess the same authority as
a civil court and are able to suo moto investigate any petition, intervene in legal actions defending a party
from violations of their human rights, research international agreements, and create reports. Since the
beginning, they have taken a leading role in the protection of refugees.
In 1000, the NHRC put forth a model law for refugees with the assistance of Justice P.N. Bhagwati. The
NHRC also advocated for revisions to the antiquated Foreigners Act of 1946, which denies refugees
protections provided by the 1967 Additional Protocol, 1951 Refugee Convention, and 1949 Geneva
Conventions. The Refugees and Asylum Seekers (Protection) Bill, 2006, is a model law created by the
Public Interest Legal Support and Research Center (PILSARC). The Asylum Bill 2015 was tabled in the
Lok Sabha by Shashi Tharoor in late 2015,"
4.3.8 India’s engagement:
Without a national policy governing the handling of refugees, India has engaged in the practice of offering
temporary sanctuary to refugees from neighboring states. The ethical treatment of refugees are a matter
that demands significant consideration, especially as India is not a party to either the 1951 Refugee
Convention or its equivalent 1967 Protocols. This article examines how Sri Lankan Tamil refugees are
treated in India and the rise in their criminalization.

The phrase "Crim migration" was created to describe the growing overlap between criminal and
immigration law. Without providing immigrants with the procedural protections that inmates of the
criminal justice system are entitled to, immigration law has recently acquired perceptions, methods, and
practices that are predominantly associated with the criminal justice system. The criminalization of
refugees is the result of this intersection that is most obvious. This happens as a result of the demonization
of refugees in the media, which is encouraged by discriminatory refugee policies and state-sponsored
discrimination.10
Since 1983, there has been a civil war in Sri Lanka between the Sri Lankan Military and the Liberation
Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LLTE), who were created as a response of the ongoing persecution of Sri Lankan
Tamils (SLT). SLT refugees fled to India in waves as a response of the persecution and racial brutality.
However, there has been an increase in antagonism toward SLT people during the course of successive
waves of immigration into India. 29 SLT refugees in custody attempted mass suicide in 2021 in protest of
their legal situation in India, creating serious concerns about the manner in which they were treated as
refugees and their legal rights.
The Indian Citizenship Act of 1955 (the Act), which governs citizenship and refugee status in major part.
Even if they qualify for citizenship under the Act, the majority of SLT refugees are still considered "illegal
immigrants" because India is not a signatory to the 1951 Refugee Convention and only welcomes them
for "humanitarian reasons." Additionally, the current Citizenship (Amendment) Act 2019 worsens the
hazards associated with the status granted to SLT refugees by limiting the eligibility for citizenship for
persecuted minorities to only some religious communities and a small number of nations, including
Bangladesh, Pakistan, and Afghanistan. While SLT are a persecuted minority in their home country and
otherwise belong to the religious groups stated in the Amendment, Sri Lanka is not included in the full list
of origin nations.11
Instead of being included into criminal custody procedures, immigration detention should continue to be
an administrative role. In the criminal justice system, suspects are held on specific charges for certain
amounts of time. They are entitled to legal remedies if this is tainted. A refugee, on the other hand, may be
held for a wide variety of reasons that are entirely undefined: if traveling without documentation, they are
automatically held in harshly repressive refugee camps for indefinite amounts of time. Although both
groups are liable to detention, since refugees and non-citizens lack legal clarity regarding their identities,
10
OHRH Sri Lankan refugees
11
OXFORD HUMAN RIGHT HUB, Crim migration

they must obviously be treated more negatively than criminals. They therefore frequently lack the same
legal protections as criminals.12
The treatment of SLT refugees exemplifies this effect of crime migration. The public's image of them is
shaped by the bad media depictions that they endure. Additionally, the Q-branch police (a specialized
police force) is in charge of handling refugees, and the design of the detention facilities perpetuates a
system of exclusion from full social inclusion. Direct detention facilities for undocumented refugees are
located in remote areas with scant resources. Due to this, they experience social marginalization for an
illogically long amount of time. The Indian State further delays the granting of citizenship to SLT refugees
and even the processing of applications for remission. Furthermore, they are susceptible to needless
confinement in addition to being unfairly singled out for criminal accusations. Even those who have been
cleared of all charges but are still being held in detention are refugees who have been charged with crimes.
Each of these problems contributes to a system in which refugees are exposed to the outcomes of the
criminal justice system without even having the protections to which offenders in custody are entitled.
Crim migration only makes things worse for refugees who are already escaping persecution since it works
against the whole objective of granting asylum. By looking into alternatives to detention that lessen the
negative effects of detention and by altering the structure and very character of refugee rehabilitation as
we currently know it, such an impact may be lessened.13
4.4 THE CITIZENSHIP (AMENDMENT) ACT, 2019
In India, in the absence of formal legal systems, refugees are dealt with by ad hoc administrative
judgments. There is now no national law on refugees, the Indian government acknowledged in front of
the legislature. The Ministry of Home Affairs only issues Standard Operating Procedures to deal with
foreign people in India who assert their status as refugees. The Citizenship (Amendment) Act of 2019
(CAA), which addressed illegal immigration and the assertion of an Indian identity, sparked a national
discussion. Part II of the Constitution and the Citizenship Act of 1955 both contain regulations pertaining
to obtaining citizenship. Citizenship is defined at the outset of the Constitution in Articles 5 through 9. The
Constitution recognizes birth, descent, naturalization, and incorporation of territory as different ways to
become a citizen. Parliament passed the citizenship once the Constitution went into effect.
Act of 1955, which establishes guidelines for obtaining citizenship. The Citizenship (Amendment) Act
1019 amends the Citizenship Act of 1935 to grant Indian citizenship to minority communities fleeing
12
OXFORD HUMAN RIGHT HUB, Crim migration
13
The crimmigration of srilankan refugees

repression in neighboring nations. Hindus, Parsis, Buddhists, Sikhs, Jains, and Christians from
Bangladesh, Afghanistan, and Pakistan are among the groups it intends to grant citizenship to. Its obvious
purpose is to provide citizenship to Hindus who are fleeing persecution in Muslim-majority nations that
border India.
People who were "forced or compelled to seek shelter in India due to persecution on the basis of religion"
are included by the amendment. Such individuals are shielded from unlawful immigration procedures.
For applicants who practice one of these six religions and come from one of three nearby countries, the
change reduces the naturalization period from 11 to 5 years. The candidate must have arrived in India on
or before December 31, 2014, as that is the deadline for citizenship. According to the Act, once they
become citizens, they are assumed to be Indian citizens as of the day they entered the country, and all legal
actions taken against them over their citizenship or illegal migration are dropped.
Many academics contend that the amendment, because it combines citizenship with religion, breaches the
secular norms and fundamental foundations of the Constitution. India had maintained Policies that
provided those fleeing persecution with at least formal security, while not being a signatory to the 1951
Refugee Convention and its Protocol.
Prior to the passing of the CAA, the Indian government had established a system for granting long-term
visas to specific migrants, which assisted them in obtaining Indian citizenship as well. The Office of the
High Commissioner for Human Rights has denounced the latest Citizenship Act modification because it
discriminates on the basis of religion. Additionally, it "undermines" India's adherence to international
duties under numerous human rights accords and the Constitution's guarantee of equality before the law.
4.4.1 HOW REFUGEES ARE BEEN TREATED IN INDIA
The way Sri Lankan refugees are treated in India has changed over time and is influenced by a number of
variables, including governmental policies, public opinion, and the unique circumstances of each refugee.
Here is a summary of how Sri Lankan refugees are treated in India:
• Refugee Status: The Indian government frequently grants refugees from Sri Lanka refugee
status. They now have various rights and legal protections under Indian law as a result of this
recognition.

• Government Support: Sri Lankan refugees are given some essential government support by
the Indian government, in coordination with the UNHCR. In addition, financial assistance for
food and shelter through refugee camps or settlements is provided.
• Camps and Settlements: Many Sri Lankan refugees in India reside in camps or settlements
that have been set aside for them. These camps offer the most fundamental comforts and
services, but the circumstances might change, and in certain instances, resource scarcity and
congestion present problems.
• Healthcare and Education: Children from Sri Lanka who have fled to India have a legal
right to an education, and efforts are made to set up educational facilities for them inside or close
to the refugee camps. In a similar vein, refugee patients frequently have access to healthcare
facilities.
• Livelihood and Employment: Finding employment prospects for Sri Lankan refugees in
India might be difficult. Due to constraints on their mobility and employment permissions, they
might have few possibilities for sustainable livelihoods.
• Legal Obstacles: Sri Lankan refugees in India may have obstacles in acquiring citizenship or
long-term residency due to their status. These obstacles may make it more difficult for them to
get certain rights and services.
• Social Acceptance and Integration: There are varying degrees of social acceptance and
integration of Sri Lankan refugees in Indian society. While some communities could be
accepting, others might see refugees as outsiders, which presents difficulties for refugees in
terms of acceptance and assimilation on a social and cultural level.
4.5 CITIZENSHIP AS PER INDIAN LAW
The Citizenship Act of 1955's Sections 3 to 7 set forth the various ways to obtain citizenship, including
birth, descent, naturalization, and incorporation of territory. Part II of the Indian Constitution's Articles 5 to
11 set forth the rules and provisions of citizenship at its inception.
The laws governing the status of stateless people are still up for dispute and questioning, despite the
legislature having created such complex and comprehensive legislation about Indian citizens. Despite
having lived in India for decades, they are still seeking an identity.

The Citizenship Amendment Act, 2019, sought to recognize the citizenship of refugees who had long
before arrived in India, but the government's preference for non-Muslim groups sparked outrage and
demonstrations across the nation.
Who is a refugee?
Refugees are people who have fled war, violence, conflict, or persecution and have crossed an
international border in search of refuge in another nation, according to the United Nations High
Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR).
International law defines and protects refugees. A refugee, according to the 1951 Refugee Convention, is
"someone who is unable or unwilling to return to their country of origin owing to a well-founded fear of
being persecuted for reasons of race, religion, nationality, membership of a particular social group, or
political opinion."
The definition of status or the term "refugee" has not been included by India in any Act or Law, and is
instead primarily determined by the level of protection provided by the government. The two years when
the Indian subcontinent was divided in 1947 and when Bangladesh gained independence in 1971 saw the
highest single bilateral influx in South Asia. Seven million or so Bengali Hindus crossed the border into
West Bengal, Tripura, and Assam to live in refugee camps that the Indian government had established and
was still funding. Several waves of refugees have sought safety and shelter in India since its
independence.
During the partition of India and Pakistan, thousands of individuals entered India either voluntarily or
under duress. Although they sought to find safety in the newly created India, they were obliged to accept a
life as refugees even if they did not lose their nationalities. Around 1959, the Dalai Lama and over
100,000 other Tibetans left Tibet in search of safety in India, beginning the second significant movement
of refugees. He and hundreds of other Tibetans were given sanctuary in India's north and east, and the
Dalai Lama's seat was constructed in Dharamshala, Himachal Pradesh, where he oversees the
government of Tibet while living in exile.
When Bangladesh was vying for independence in the early 1970s, there was a third significant influx of
refugees into India. Millions of Bangladeshis moved into India and settled in the states close to
Bangladesh as a result of the conflict between the Pakistani army and Bangladeshi forces. Conflicts
between Bangladeshi refugees and natives of the states have been ongoing as a result of their settlement in

the northeastern states, primarily Assam, Tripura, and Manipur. They claim that the influx of refugees into
their states has changed the demography and turned them into a minority. When Sri Lankan Tamils fled
prejudice in Sri Lanka and migrated to India, it was the next significant refugee movement. They settled in
Tamil Nadu after realizing they were Tamils, which made things easier for them.
During the first inflow, more than 1.34 lakh Tamils from Sri Lanka crossed the Palk Strait into India
between 1983 and 1987. Numerous more refugees reached India in three additional periods. More than
60,000 refugees from Sri Lanka's civil conflict are being housed in 109 camps in the Tamil Nadu region
of southern India. Around 1980, there was a small but noticeable influx of migrants from Afghanistan into
India who primarily settled in the northern states. When the government felt that they were residing in
India illegally in 2019 and that legislation needed to be enacted to restrict the movement of fleeing
Rohingya Muslims into India, it was the influx of Rohingya Muslim refugees into India about 2017. As
per the report published by UNHCR as on 31st January 2020, the total number of refugees and asylum
seekers in India was calculated to be 210,201. They are divided according to their country of origin as
follows:
 Tibet – 108,005
 Sri Lankans – 95,230
 Myanmar – 21,409
 Afghanistan – 16,333
 Others – 3477
4.6 CITIZENSHIP AMENMEND ACT AND NRC
A person may apply for citizenship by registration or naturalization under the modified Act. A person can
register for Indian citizenship, for instance, if they have been in India for a year and one of their parents is
an Indian citizen. But when the naturalization process was based on discrimination, there was unrest all
over the nation. It changed a rule that stated applicants for citizenship had to have lived in India for at least
11 years or worked for the federal government. However, there was an exception for communities like
Hindus, Sikhs, Buddhists, Jains, Parsis, and Christians if they were from Pakistan, Afghanistan, or
Bangladesh.
The government's discriminatory actions towards the aforementioned communities led to demonstrations
against CAA around the nation because they only needed to work or reside there for five years before they
could apply for citizenship. Additionally, it states that holders of Overseas Citizen of India (OCI) cards,

which allow foreign nationals of Indian descent to live and work in India permanently, risk losing their
status if they break local laws for both serious offenses and infractions. Additionally, it stated that the
Bengal Eastern Frontier Regulation of 1873's "The Inner Line" and the tribal areas of Assam, Meghalaya,
Mizoram, and Tripura would not be subject to the Constitution's restrictions regarding illegal immigrants.
4.7 CONLUSION:
Despite the fact that the word "refugee" is not used anywhere in the constitution, those who come from
outside India and reside there are referred to as "aliens" and are granted certain constitutionally guaranteed
rights. The first and most important right granted to them is equality before the law under Article 14,
which stipulates that no state shall deny anyone equality before the law or the sprotection under the law in
India. Protection of life and liberty is guaranteed under Article 21, which states that no one may be
deprived of their life or personal freedom unless a legal process has been followed. They also have the
right to file legal complaints under Articles 32 and 226 when the state violates one of their other rights and
they need the courts to defend them. The Supreme Court ruled in Louis De Raedt Vs. Union of India that
everyone has the fundamental right to life, liberty, and dignity. The right against arrest anddetention
follows this right to life.
CHAPTER 5
CONCLUSION AND SUGGESTIONS

Refugees all over the world are fleeing every day from their home place of stay their country for various
reasons. They are literally forced to move from their county and they have to do it because the place in
which they stay is not much safer for their livelihood they have to leave all their belonging and assets they
have and take all their family members along with them they have to move to a place which they have not
been before they have to experience the new way of their life with what so ever they have. They have to
adapt to the situation there, and they have to live with what so ever they have. The have to go to refugee
camps at the end of the day their life becomes more miserable they will start to lose their hope on the
country and fellow humans around them. Being a refugee is irrespective of who you are, where you come
what your background nothing is going to work on it.
Refugee camps are been allotted by the UNHRC and its also funded by UNHRC they move to their
closest refugee camps based on their vacancy there. In the refugee camps some basic things are been
provided by the state government in which the camps are and also maintained by international law. The
basic need is probably provided by the respective authorities but that doesn't make them feel sufficient for
the day-to-day basis. At this stature children are the most affected one in this scenario the loose their
childhood days they have to suffer a lot they won't be getting a proper education which they get in schools
but they may be given some standard of education will not be able to state they were for them is been
done but they may be getting some or the other needs which they require but not in the fullest form. They
won't be having access for doing their higher studies.
Getting themselves identified as refugees is the biggest task for them to accomplish and complete the
process stated by UNHRC is quite simple but the system followed by the state governments is not the
same as we see in the paper and document for guidelines stated by the UNHRC for the refugees for the
registration of refugees. While this process is being delayed for a longer period, they are been refused to
get out of the place from which they live they are been kept under one circle they can't easily have access
to the general public they won't be able to Rome around after a particular time they are been forcibly kept
there. When the refugee status is been denied to them, they become stateless people neither of the country
accepts them as a refugee or as a citizen of their country. It is very tough for a individual to get the status
of a refugee. No state is ready to give a status of refugee to a person in his own state.
5.1 FINDINGS OF THE NEEDS OF REFUGEES

At the initial stage any person who enters into a border of a state that particular person is only considered
as an illegal migrant and they are been not treated as refugees they are considered as trespassers in
someone’s land without any access to it.
Indian government treatment over the refugees as the topic mainly deals about Sri Lankan refugees. The
Sri Lankan refugees flee to Tamil Nādu which is the nearest port for them to escape and survive. Once
they reach Rameswaram from Sri Lanka the coastal guards over there take them into control and they are
been treated as illegal migrants.
Illegal migrant: People who come without a proper travel document is considered as a illegal migrant the
will not be having vis or anything to enter into their country. India and Sri Lanka also called as Shelon
shares a very close water border which is about 20 nautical miles from each other people over there where
initially fleeing away from their place due to internal aggression and the conflict between the Sri Lankan
government and the minority Tamils who were there. There was a dominance of the Sri Lankan
government over these people and due to uncontrollable act of them they were a rebellion group which
started in the name of LTTE (Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam) it was started by one MR.
PRABHAKARAN who was a leader of this group. At the period of his troops people over there felt safe
and secure there. They initially treated as illegal migrants they are been sent to the refugee camps but they
are not considered as refugees they are made treated by the foreigner’s act and other acts.
As there is a denial for the grant of refugee status to them they can’t freely move around. As per the
refugee’s act given by the UNHRC a refugee must be given and treated by the same way it treats its
Citizen all rights which are given to a Citizen must be given to the refugee also and that may be the reason
for the denial of refugee status to them.
As they don’t get the status of refugee the denied in various places, they will not be getting proper
treatment in hospital. Giving education for their children is a biggest task. Educational institutions ask for
proper documents for the joining of schools moreover they won’t get a proper identity in the society. The
children there don’t even get the basic knowledge in the society and they are denied of their rights by the
government of the states. This affects them even in getting job and working and areas they will not be
having proper identity even in mere future this will be happening for generations and if they are been
forced to leave the county which they stay now and they are not been recognized by any other states while
they get can’t go to the place of their origin, they become stateless people. They don’t belong to any group
any culture any region there is no particular race for them and proper place to live in the society which we
have made for the benefits of the rich we are as an individual and as a group should be ashamed of what

so ever is happening to the fellow human. The only way through which it can be sighted out is through
basic humanity of every individual and the states.
The findings from the research work which has been done and the hypothesis which was made on the
basis there a lot of beneficial laws and provisions which are made. The findings which are been from the
research done on refugee laws and UNHRC and the Indian national law for refugees UNHRC has made
provision and laws and their basic needs for the betterment of the refugee people but it is not been
followed by the said methods and ways in which it has to be followed. Getting the refugee out of the
problem would be much easier and grateful if the states come front and do the required need for them as
per the said principles.
It is completely based on the humanity basis every individual should take initiative to make our fellow
people live the life which is given to them. As per the guidelines given by the UNHRC refugees must be
treated as they treat their citizens of that state all the rights which are given to a citizen is to be given to a
refugee but it’s not followed in these circumstances. There is no proper education which is been given,
they have a very low living standard they don't have proper identity because in India they are been treated
as per the foreigner’s act and they are considered as illegal migrants who are entering into the boundaries
of the state without proper travel document.
The process of getting themselves identified as refugees is a big problem in India. As Sri Lankan refugees
are they are people who came to India before 2000 and they also have an history of domicile in the state
of Tamil Nādu during the period of births these people were taken to Sri Lanka as there was a shortage of
labor for the plantation work and the reason for their minority issue. They are been under pressure because
of this minority problem. They have an ethnicity of Indian domicile. They also know one of the languages
which is stated in the eight schedules of the constitution. Language spoken is also a key factor of
providing citizenship.
As per the third schedule of the CAA act it is stated that it requires 12 years of a person to be residing in
India for the grant of Indian citizen ship to that person. Citizenship must be granted to the person by
means of place of birth. So that the future generations get the fullest rights for their survival.

LOCAL INTEGRATION IS A BEST POLICY FOR REFUGEES
Local integration is yet another type of long-term remedy for the refuge issue. The settling of refugees
with full legal rights in the nation they have fled is what is meant by this phrase. Millions of refugees
throughout the world endure year after year with little hope of ever going back home. Some people are
able to do this because their nations are embroiled in protracted wars or because they fear persecution if
they go back home. Finding a home
In the nation of asylum and assimilating into the local community could provide a long-term solution to
their problem and the opportunity to start a new life in situations when deportation is not an option.Three
dimensions are combined using local integration. First of all, it is a legal procedure that grants refugees a
wider range of rights in the host State. The host State provides refugees with an increasingly wide variety
of rights and privileges in order to facilitate local integration. Second, it is a process that benefits the host
community economically by developing a quality of living equivalent to the social and cultural processes
of adaptation and acceptance. To contribute to the social life of the host nation without fear of
discrimination is the third goal. Local integration is a difficult and complex process for refugees that
involves both the refugee and the host society making social, economic, and cultural adjustments.
The local grate of refugees was also envisioned as one of the long-term remedies in the 1951 UN Refugee
Convention. The Convention's Article 34 states that the Contracting States "shall facilitate the assimilation
and naturalization of refugees to the greatest extent practicable." They will specifically try their hardest to
speed up the naturalization process. Although local integration has a well-established theoretical
foundation in international refugee law, its actual use has been somewhat constrained.
The United States usually welcomed asylum seekers from the 1960s until the mid-1990s, allowing them
to stay on their soil indefinitely, obtain a variety of rights and privileges, and eventually become citizens.
Local integration is still a viable option for people who are recognized as refugees, typically in wealthy
nations, and such a strategy has not been completely abandoned. With the expectation that they will return
to their country of origin as soon as the conditions are favorable, whether voluntarily or at the request of
the authorities, the States have, however, demonstrated a growing tendency to grant limited and
temporary forms of asylum.

REFERENCES
1. Human Rights Watch. (2019). World Report 2019: India Events of 2018. Retrieved
from https://www.hrw.org/world-report/2019/country-chapters/india
2. United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees. (2018). Global Trends: Forced Displacement
in 2018. Retrieved from https://www.unhcr.org/globaltrends2018/
3. Refugee Rights Initiative. (2017). Refugee Rights in India: Legal and Policy Perspectives. New
Delhi: Oxford University Press.
4. Marwein, E. (2016). Human Rights and Refugee Protection: A Comparative Analysis. Journal of
Refugee Studies, 29(3), 385-401
5. Satyogi, P. (2024). Domestic violence laws in India and the discourse around fabricated cases:
implications for women's human rights. International Journal of Human Rights & Constitutional
Studies, 11, 14.
6. Bembibre, J., & Higueras, L. (2011). Comparative analysis of true or false statements with the
source monitoring model and the cognitive interview: special features of the false accusation of
innocent people. Psychology, Crime & Law,
18(10), https://doi.org/10.1080/1068316X.2011.589387
7. United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees. (2019). Global Trends: Forced Displacement
in 2019. Retrieved from https://www.unhcr.org/globaltrends2019/
8. Amnesty International. (2020). Annual Report 2020: India. Retrieved
from https://www.amnesty.org/en/countries/asia-and-the-pacific/india/report-india/
9. International Committee of the Red Cross. (2018). Annual Report 2018: India. Retrieved
from https://www.icrc.org/en/document/annual-report-2018-india
10. International Organization for Migration. (2017). Migration Profile: India. Retrieved
from https://www.iom.int/countries/india/migration-profile
11. United Nations. (2019). Sustainable Development Goals Report 2019. Retrieved
from https://unstats.un.org/sdgs/report/2019/
12. World Health Organization. (2018). Health Profile: India. Retrieved
from https://www.who.int/countries/ind/en/
13. International Labour Organization. (2019). Labour Overview: India. Retrieved
from https://www.ilo.org/global/countries-and-territories/india/lang--en/index.htm
14. United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization. (2017). Education for All:
India. Retrieved from https://en.unesco.org/countries/india

15. International Monetary Fund. (2020). Economic Outlook: India. Retrieved
from https://www.imf.org/en/Countries/IND
16. World Bank. (2019). Poverty and Equity: India. Retrieved
from https://www.worldbank.org/en/country/india/overview
17. Transparency International. (2018). Corruption Perceptions Index: India. Retrieved
from https://www.transparency.org/en/countries/india
18. International Criminal Court. (2016). Country Profile: India. Retrieved from https://www.icc-
cpi.int/india
BIBILOGRAPHY:
1) WWW.EPW.IN
2) WWW.FMREVIEW.ORG
3) WWW.RESEARCHGATE.NET
4) HTTPS://FORTLINE.IN
5) WWW.ROUTLEDGE.COM
6) WWW.STATECRAFT.COM
7) HTTPS://NHRC.NIC.COM
8) WWW.BARANDBENCH.COM

VISSNU

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

VISSNU

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

“EXPLORING THE SRILANKAN REFUGEE CRISIS IN INDIA: A HUMAN

Bachelor of Law (BBA. LLB) Batch of 2019

Under the Supervision of

MS. EUGRATIA MARWEIN

School of Law, Presidency University, Itgalpura, Yelahanka, Bangalore-560064.

PRESIDENCY UNIVERSITY, BANGALORE

PAGE \* MERGEFORMAT 2 | Page

CRISIS IN INDIA: A HUMAN RIGHT STUDY " submitted by VISSNUPRIYAN (I.D:

PAGE \* MERGEFORMAT 2 | Page

PAGE \* MERGEFORMAT 2 | Page

PAGE \* MERGEFORMAT 2 | Page

S.NO TITLE PG.NO

1.2 SIGNIFICANCE OF STUDY 9

1.3 REVIEW OF LITERATURE 10

1.4 OBJECTIVE OF STUDY 13

1.5 STATEMENT OF PROBLEM 13

1.7 RESEARCH QUESTION 14

1.8 SCOPE OF STUDY 14

1.9 RESEARCH METHEDOLOGY 15

1. UNHRC ACTION TOWARDS REFUGGES LEGAL

2.2 CHALLENGES FACED BY REFUGEES 17

2.3 STATISTICS OF SRI LANKAN REFUGEES 18

2.4 PLANTATION TAMILS 29

3. SEEKING PROTECTION: EXAMINING 32

PAGE \* MERGEFORMAT 2 | Page

3.2 LEGAL DEFENCES FOR REFUGEE PEOPLE 33

3.3 LEGLITY FOR REFUGEES UNDER CONVDNTION 34

3.4 NON REFOULMENT SHOULD BE FOLLOWED BY 36

3.6 UNHRC AND REFUGEE 49

3.7 CASE LAWS 53

4. FROM ASYLUM TO INTEGRATION: ANALYSING 67

4.2 REFUGEES IN INDIA 68

4.3 PRINCIPLE OF NON REFOULMENT 74

4.4 CITIZENSHIP AMENDMENT ACT 82

4.5 CITIZENSHIP AS PER INDIAN LAWS 85

5. CONCLUSION AND FINDINGS 90

PAGE \* MERGEFORMAT 2 | Page

UNHRC ACTION TOWARDS REFUGEE LAW:

1.1 DEFINITION/ DESCRIPTION OF THE TOPIC:

PAGE \* MERGEFORMAT 2 | Page

1.2 SIGNIFICANCE OF STUDY:

1.3 OBJECTIVES OF THE STUDY:

PAGE \* MERGEFORMAT 2 | Page

1.6 RESEARCH QUESTIONS :

1.7 SCOPE OF STUDY:

PAGE \* MERGEFORMAT 2 | Page

1.8 RESEARCH METHODOLOGY:

CHAPTER -2 UNSETTLED LIVES: ASSESSING THE HUMAN RIGHTS SITUATION OF SRILANKAN

CHAPTER -3 SEEKING PROTECTION: EXAMINING INTERNATIONAL LAW ON REFUGEES

CHAPTER – 4 FROM ASYLUM TO INTEGRATION: ANALYSING NATIONAL LAW AND REFUGEE

CHAPTER 5: CONCLUSION AND SUGGESTIONS

1.10 REVIEW OF LITERATURE:

PAGE \* MERGEFORMAT 2 | Page

PAGE \* MERGEFORMAT 2 | Page

3. A. Anitha and K. Sivaraman. “Socio-economic Challenges and Livelihood

4. S. Aravindan and A. Saravanan. “A Study on the Socio-economic Conditions of

The work by S. Aravindan and A. Saravanan titled “A Study on the Socio-economic

UNSETTLED LIVES: ASSESSING THE HUMAN RIGHTS SITUATION OF SRI LANKAN

PAGE \* MERGEFORMAT 2 | Page

Displacement Factors: Armed conflict, persecution, breaches of human rights, and

PAGE \* MERGEFORMAT 2 | Page

2.4 SRI LANKAN REFUGEES:

HISTORY OF PEOPLE WHO ARE NOW CALLED REFUGEES.

PAGE \* MERGEFORMAT 2 | Page