Abstract
A leading policy issue of the twenty-first century is escalation of global crisis of population of concern as a result of organized political violence specifically targeting civilian population. There are an estimated 68.5 million population of concern to UNHCR. These include refugees, persons in refugee-like situations, internally displaced persons and returnees, asylum-seekers and stateless persons. The present paper takes the stock of UNHCR’s population of concern in South Asian countries with specific reference to China, Pakistan, Bangladesh, and juxtaposes with Indian subcontinent thereby endorsing India’s surreal picture when accommodating UNHCR’s population of concern in comparison with her counterparts. It further contested India’s own failure to take cognizance of her internally displaced people delineating policy paralysis owing to multifaceted reasons on socio-political and international fronts. Paper further laments comprehensive legislative framework in the context of International human rights laws, UN conventions, South Asian regions’ normative framework along with India’s statutory constitutional provisions and its ad hoc policy decisions while dealing with population of concern. The paper concludes with policy implications of multi-pronged strategies to protect the rights of this unique group of vulnerable population.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
1951 Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees (189 UNTS 150).
- 2.
1967 Protocol Relating to the Status of Refugees (606 UNTS 267).
- 3.
The 1951 Convention relating to the status of refugees and its 1967 Protocol: Signing could make all the difference. http://www.unhcr.org.
- 4.
Afghanistan, Azerbaijan, Bangladesh, Bhutan, Brunei, Cambodia, China, East Timor, India, Indonesia, Japan, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Laos, Malaysia, Mongolia, Myanmar, Nepal, North Korea, Pakistan, Philippines, Singapore. South Korea, Sri Lanka, Tajikistan, Thailand, Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan and Vietnam (UNHCR 2017: population & Geographic Data Section).
- 5.
Japan, Kazakhstan, Korea (South), Kyrgyzstan and Tajikistan.
- 6.
Treaty of Amity and Cooperation in Southeast Asia (1976), Article 2. https://www.aph.gov.au/binaries/house/committee/jsct/9august2005/treaties/tac_text.pdf.
- 7.
Charter of the South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation (1985), Article II. https://www.wipo.int/edocs/lexdocs/treaties/en/saarc/trt_saarc.pdf.
- 8.
Charter of the South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation (1985), Article X. https://www.wipo.int/edocs/lexdocs/treaties/en/saarc/trt_saarc.pdf.
- 9.
- 10.
International Convention on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR-1966). https://treaties.un.org/doc/publication/unts/volume%20999/volume-999-i-14668-english.pdf.
- 11.
International Convention on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR-1966). https://www.ohchr.org/en/professionalinterest/pages/cescr.aspx.
- 12.
Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination (CERD-1965). https://www.ohchr.org/en/professionalinterest/pages/cerd.aspx.
- 13.
Convention Against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman and Degrading Treatment or Punishment (Torture Convention-1984). http://legal.un.org/avl/ha/catcidtp/catcidtp.html.
- 14.
Organisation of African Unity (OAU) 1969 Convention Governing the Specific Aspects of Refugee Problems in Africa. https://www.unhcr.org/about-us/background/45dc1a682/oau-convention-governing-specific-aspects-refugee-problems-africa-adopted.html.
- 15.
Organisation of American States (OAS) 1984 Cartagena Declaration on Refugees. https://www.oas.org/dil/1984_cartagena_declaration_on_refugees.pdf.
- 16.
Non-refoulement is a key principle of international law (see Article 33 of the 1951 Convention) and specifies that a person who seeks asylum and is then determined to be a refugee, cannot be returned or refouled to the country they are originated from, that is state shall not expel or return a refugee ‘in any manner whatsoever to the frontiers of territories where his life or freedom would be threatened on account of his race, religion, nationality, membership in a particular social group, or political opinion’.
- 17.
Gurunathan and others versus Government of India (WP No. S 6708 and 7916 of 1992); A. C. Mohd. Siddique versus Government of India and others [1998 (47) DRJ (DB), p. 74]; Crl. WP No. 243 of 1998; Louis De Raedt vs Union of India 1991, 3SCC 544; State of Arunachal Pradesh vs Khudiram Chakma10 (1994) Supp (1) SCC 615.
- 18.
P. Nedumaran and Dr. S. Ramadoss versus The Union of India and the State of Tamil Nadu (1992); Crl WP No. 125 and 126 of 1986; N. D. Pancholi versus State of Punjab and others [WP (civil) No. 1294 of 1987].
- 19.
SAHRDC, Refugee Protection in India, October 1997. Writ Petition nos. 450/83; 605–607/84; 169/87; 732/87; 747/87; 243/88; 336/88; A. D. Cri No. 48 of 1994.
References
Ashraful, M.Z. (2014). Status of Treaty under the Constitution of SAARC Countries: An Approach Towards Bangladesh and India Perspective. Mediterranean Journal of Social Sciences, 5(2), 129.
Bangamwabo, F.X. (2008). The Implementation of International and Regional Human Rights Instruments in the Nambian Legal Framework. In Human Rights and the Rule of Law in Namibia. Windhoek: Macmillan Education, 167.
Basu, Durga Das. (1999). Constitutional Remedies and Writs. Kamal Law House Publishers, 23–48, 51–88.
Basu, Durga Das. (2013). Introduction to the Constitution of India. 21st Edition. New Delhi: LexisNexis Publisher.
Bhattacharjee, Saurabh. (2008). India Needs a Refugee Law. Economic and Political Weekly, 43(9), 71–75.
Davies, Sara. (2008). Legitimising Rejection. International Refugee Law in Southeast Asia. Boston: Martinus Nijhoff Publishers.
Diego, Alburez-Gutierrez and Carlota Segura García. (2018). The UNHCR Demographic Projection Tool: Estimating the Future Size and Composition of Forcibly Displaced Populations. UNHCR STATISTICS TECHNICAL SERIES: 2018/1.
Gupta, A. (2017). Demographic Alterations in West Bengal During Late 20th Century. Journal of Bengali Studies, 6(1).
Gupta, A. (2018). Politics of Perception: Recent Indian Experiences. New Delhi: DPS Publishing House.
Mshraful, M.Z. (2016). Legal Status of International Human Rights Instruments in the Domestic Legal System of South Asian Countries. Metropolitan University, 5(1), 101–115.
Muni, S.D. and L.R. Baral. (1996). Refugees and Regional Security in South Asia. New Delhi: Konark Publishers.
Nasreen, Chowdhory. (2018). Refuges, Citizenship and Belonging in South Asia Contested Terrains. New Delhi: Springer Publishers.
Neudorfer, S. and C. Wernig. (2010). Implementation of International Treaties into National Legal Orders: The Protection of the Rights of Child within the Austrian Legal System (A. Bogdandy & R. Wolfrum, Eds.). Max Plank Institute Year Book of United Nations Law, 14, 409–444.
Parikh, Sanjay. (2001). Refugees in the International and National Framework. In Indian Society of International Law Yearbook on International Humanitarian and Refugee Law.
Pejovic, C. (2001). Civil Law and Common Law: Two Different Paths Leading to the Same Goal. https://www.victoria.ac.nz/law/research/publications/aboutnzacl/publications/nzacl-yearbooks/yearbook-6,-2000/Pejovic.pdf.
Pooja, Faculty of Law, DU. (2018). India’s Refugee Policy. https://www.indianbarassociation.org/indias-refugee-policy/, December 2018.
UNHCR. (2000). The State of the World’s Refugees (2000). New York: Oxford University Press, 102.
UNHCR. (2016). Submission by the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees For the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights’ Compilation Report Universal Periodic Review: 3rd Cycle, 27th Session INDIA.
UNHCR. Global Trends: Forced Displacement in 2017. https://www.unhcr.org/en-us/statistics/unhcrstats/5b27be547/unhcr-global-trends-2017.html. Accessed on 30 December 2018.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Appendix
Appendix
See Table 18.3.
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2020 The Author(s)
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Gupta, A., Jadhav, U. (2020). UNHCR’s Population of Concern: Where Does India Stand?. In: Gao, J., Baikady, R., Govindappa, L., Cheng, SL. (eds) Social Welfare in India and China. Palgrave Macmillan, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-15-5648-7_18
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-15-5648-7_18
Published:
Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, Singapore
Print ISBN: 978-981-15-5647-0
Online ISBN: 978-981-15-5648-7
eBook Packages: Social SciencesSocial Sciences (R0)