India can’t mistreat refugees by not signing refugee convention: HRW

Refugee Rights Programme Director says customary international law prohibits returning Rohingya to Burma

In response to Indian Home Minister Rajnath Singh's statement claiming New Delhi was “not violating any international law” if it deported Rohingya refugees, Refugee Rights Programme Director at Human Rights Watch (HRW) Bill Frelick has said “when your neighbour flees his burning house, you are not at liberty to push him back into the flames because you consider him a trespasser.”

By deporting them we are not violating any international law as we are not a signatory to 1951 Refugee Convention.

— Rajnathsingh_in (@RajnathSingh_in) September 21, 2017

According to Frelick, “The Rohingya are literally fleeing their burning homes. The obligation not to push them back stems less from a signature on a piece of paper than from the fundamental principles of our shared humanity.”



“If India had not signed the Convention Against Torture would Indian authorities have carte blanche to torture and ill-treat anyone in custody?,” he asked in a HRW report. “Of course, not,” Frelick then said.

“India knows full well that certain principles of international law are considered customary international law – they are unlawful because states have long prohibited the practice as a matter of law. It doesn’t matter whether or not the country has ratified a treaty on the subject. And, if it is wrong to torture or persecute someone, forcing someone to return to a place where they face these abuses is also unacceptable.”

Frelick said, “He [Rajnath Singh] could also have cited the 1984 Convention Against Torture, which prohibits the return of anyone to another country where there are the substantial risks of torture. There are also other regional conventions and declarations that endorse the principle, such as the 1969 OAU Refugee Convention, the 1969 American Convention on Human Rights, and the 1966 Bangkok Principles on Status and Treatment of Refugees.”

Certain rules of customary international law are so important that no government can violate them even if a treaty existed that would allow them to do so, he maintained.



“The Indian government says it is worried about the entry of refugees with links to Rohingya militants. If that’s the case, they should produce evidence and prosecute individual suspects. While a Rohingya militant group attacked security posts in Burma, it is the campaign of ethnic cleansing by the Burmese military that has caused Rohingya to flee, most to Bangladesh but some to India,” Frelick continued.

The latest violence in western Myanmar’s Rakhine State began on August 25 when ARSA militants attacked about 30 police posts and an army camp, killing about 12 people. The United Nations (UN) has described as ethnic cleansing a sweeping government offensive in the north of Rakhine State in response to those attacks.