Blog

Refugees vs. Infiltrators: The Need for a Clear and Humane Policy

Reference Article: The Hindu

UPSC Relevance:
– GS Paper II: Government Policies and Interventions, Citizenship, Refugee and Immigration Issues
– GS Paper III: Internal Security, Border Management, Migration

Union Home Minister Amit Shah’s statement stressing the need to distinguish between refugees and infiltrators underscores a vital yet complex issue in India’s governance and humanitarian policy. While the distinction is valid, the absence of objective criteria and a uniform refugee law leaves room for inconsistent and arbitrary treatment of vulnerable groups.

India’s Legal and Policy Framework

  • India is not a signatory to the 1951 UN Refugee Convention or its 1967 Protocol.
  • There is no comprehensive national refugee law defining who qualifies as a refugee.
  • Refugees are governed under general immigration laws, including:
    • The Citizenship Act, 1955
    • The Passports Act, 1967
    • Until March 2025: The Foreigners Act (1946), Registration of Foreigners Act (1939), and Passport (Entry into India) Act (1920)
    • From April 2025: The Immigration and Foreigners Act, which replaced older colonial-era laws and absorbed the Immigration (Carriers’ Liability) Act, 2000

While this streamlined the legal framework, the lack of a refugee-specific policy results in ad hoc treatment of refugee groups.

Inconsistent Approach to Refugees

  • Tibetan refugees: A rehabilitation policy exists (since 2014) for about 63,000 individuals.
  • Sri Lankan Tamil refugees: Nearly 90,000 refugees live without a formal rehabilitation document.
  • As of June 2023, India hosted over 2.11 lakh refugees and persons of concern, including those from Myanmar, Afghanistan, Bangladesh, Africa, and West Asia.
  • Many undocumented or overstaying refugees risk being branded as illegal migrants or infiltrators under the Citizenship Act, blurring humanitarian and security concerns.

The Citizenship (Amendment) Act, 2019 (CAA)

  • The CAA sought to provide citizenship to six religious minorities from Pakistan, Bangladesh, and Afghanistan.
  • However, it excluded Muslims, Sri Lankan Tamils, and Rohingya refugees, leading to criticism that it was discriminatory and religion-based.
  • A 2025 notification exempted Tamil refugees (who took shelter before January 9, 2015 and registered with authorities) from penal provisions under the Immigration and Foreigners Act.
  • Despite such selective relief, religion-based exclusions persist, weakening the principle of equal humanitarian protection.

The Way Forward

  • A National Refugee Policy is urgently needed to:
    • Establish clear, humane, and consistent criteria for refugee recognition.
    • Differentiate security threats from genuine asylum-seekers through due process.
    • Align India’s domestic framework with international humanitarian norms while safeguarding national security interests.
  • Religion-neutral and transparent rules will ensure fairness and uphold India’s constitutional and moral commitments.

Conclusion

While distinguishing refugees from infiltrators is essential, the absence of a coherent refugee law allows for inconsistency and arbitrary action. India’s approach must evolve from selective relief to a principled, humane, and uniform policy that balances security, sovereignty, and compassion.

UPSC Mains Practice Question (GS Paper II):

“India’s refugee policy remains fragmented and ad hoc. Critically examine the need for a comprehensive refugee law that balances humanitarian obligations with national security.”