A Lifetime in Detention: Rohingya Refugees in India

By Daniel P. Sullivan , Priyali Sur , Ankita Dan | December 16, 2024

The Rohingya people of Myanmar are the world’s largest stateless population, estimated at some 2.8 million people. Denied citizenship and subject to decades of persecution by the military authorities in their home country, most of the Rohingya population was forced by genocidal violence to flee and is now spread across several countries. While the conditions of Rohingya refugees in countries like Bangladesh, Malaysia, Thailand, and Indonesia are widely documented, less attention is given to the approximately 22,500 Rohingya refugees registered with the UN Refugees Agency (UNHCR) who have fled to India. Even less attention is given to the hundreds of Rohingya who are arbitrarily and indefinitely detained in India and the fact that the broader population remains in constant risk of detention or even deportation back to Myanmar themselves.

From May to November 2024, The Azadi Project and Refugees International spoke to Rohingya refugee detainees in India, their families, and lawyers, including a visit to a detention center. The visits and interviews revealed gross violations of constitutional and human rights; and a failure by India to adhere to its commitments to international human rights treaties. Men and women are segregated, and spouses are not allowed time together. Older children are forcefully separated from their parents in a violation of India’s model detention code that states “families should not be separated.” This is just one of many gaps in following the model detention code in detention centers across India. Further, most Rohingya refugees are detained even after they have served their sentences. Children living in these detention centers have no access to formal schooling or playgrounds, and older people with age-related mobility issues are left at the mercy of fellow detainees for food and toilet access. Some of those still detained were infants at the time of their detention and have never had the chance to experience life outside the detention centers.

Poor sanitation and lack of ventilation has also led to severe mental health and physical ailments including temporary paralysis in many cases. There is no access to mental health support and only police-supervised visits to hospitals for physical ailments. Very limited access to legal aid and to international institutions like the UNHCR has meant many Rohingya refugees have been arbitrarily detained for over a decade (with no criminal charges) and with no end in sight. This includes pregnant women, breast-feeding mothers, children, differently-abled people, and older people.

Rather than revictimizing a population that has survived genocide, the Government of India (GoI) should take steps to provide dignified refuge, starting with immediately releasing the most vulnerable Rohingya detainees and ending the arbitrary detention of more Rohingya. In the longer term, India should clarify the legal status of Rohingya, revise the Foreigners Act of 1946, and ensure its policies toward refugees are in line with international standards. In the meantime, the United States and UNHCR should engage India toward the release of detained Rohingya refugees and expansion of registration of refugees, and should support local civil society organizations working in India to improve the living conditions of Rohingya refugees.

Recommendations

The Government of India should:

Release all Rohingya refugees who have been arbitrarily and indefinitely detained, starting with the immediate release of the most vulnerable, including pregnant and breast-feeding women, children, differently-abled people, and older people.
Stop any further arbitrary detention of Rohingya refugees for accusations of being illegal immigrants or under the Foreigner’s Act, 1946. Set up fast-track courts for clearing the long pending backlog of cases concerning arbitrary and indefinite detention of refugees.
Unite Rohingya children forcibly separated from parents and make provisions for families to live together with dignity, both inside and outside of detention.
Clarify the legal status of Rohingya and other refugees by introducing a comprehensive refugee and asylum legislation that outlines a uniform protocol for the humane treatment of all refugees. In the interim, amend the Foreigners Act, 1946, to recognize refugees as a group of foreigners fleeing persecution to prevent their arbitrary detention and deportation.
Align practices with international human rights standards and laws that India has signed or ratified, such as the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR), the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), and the Convention on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination (CERD), which safeguard against arbitrary and indefinite detention. Also, align with UNHCR detention guidelines, which emphasize that indefinite detention is arbitrary and maximum limits on detention should be established in law.
Recognize UNHCR-provided refugee cards as valid identity cards or documents to access essential services and prevent arbitrary detention.
Create alternatives to detention such as community-based living with regular check-ins, supported by UNHCR and local civil-society organizations, which will allow Rohingya refugees to live in the community and access education and livelihood opportunities while their legal status is resolved.
Engage in diplomatic discussions with Myanmar, the United States, and ASEAN and SAARC nations to address the plight of the Rohingya refugees in the region and advocate for ceasing genocidal violence on the Rohingya people.

The United Nations Refugee Agency (UNHCR) in India should:

Advocate with the GoI and local state governments for visiting rights at all places where Rohingya refugees are detained to carry out a census of Rohingya refugees in detention in India and determine the exact number of detained refugees, vulnerabilities, number of years spent in detention, and asylum seeking status.
Carry out refugee registration and set up legal aid camps with partner organizations at detention centers to ensure that no Rohingya refugee is left without a refugee card, and to provide legal aid access to all Rohingya refugee families in detention.
Advocate with the GoI and local state governments to start refugee registration and refugee status determination in key locations where Rohingya refugees enter the country, such as Assam, so that they are not arbitrarily detained by the police before they can even get to New Delhi for registration purposes.
Collaborate with local NGOs and civil society organizations to enhance service delivery to detained Rohingya refugees, while working closely with local authorities to improve the conditions in detention centers by providing basic life necessities, psychosocial support, skills-training, legal aid, and formal education.

The Government of the United States should:

Engage directly with the Indian government during bilateral meetings and through diplomatic channels to advocate for the release of Rohingya refugees who are detained arbitrarily and unlawfully. In the interim, push for improved conditions at the detention centers and immediate family reunifications.
Raise the issue of unlawfully detained Rohingya refugees in international forums, such as the United Nations, urging collective action and highlighting India’s obligations under international law.
Provide financial assistance to non-profit and civil society organizations working in India to improve the living conditions of Rohingya refugees, including those in detention.
Encourage U.S. corporate and multinational organizations working in India to fund non-profit and civil society organizations working for Rohingya refugees as part of their Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR).

Methodology

The Azadi Project and Refugees International team conducted in person and virtual interviews between May and November 2024 with detained Rohingya refugees, their family members, lawyers representing some of them, and representatives of other civil-society organizations. The team also visited a detention center in India where Rohingya refugees are held. This addendum report is further substantiated by a 2023 joint report, A Shadow of Refuge: Rohingya Refugees in India, as well as other interviews with Rohingya refugees, local and international NGOs, lawyers, and refugee-led organizations by The Azadi Project and Refugees International over the years.

Background

The Rohingya people are an ethno-religious minority group from the Rakhine State of Myanmar, and make up the world’s largest stateless population, estimated at 2.8 million people. Decades of institutionalized violence, curtailment of citizenship rights, and mass persecution of the population by Myanmar’s military junta has caused more than 1 million Rohingya people to flee in successive waves of displacement since the 1990s. The population seeks refuge in various neighboring countries. The majority of these refugees now live in Bangladesh after more than 700,000 Rohingya fled genocidal violence in Myanmar starting in August 2017. Several other countries host a significant number of Rohingya today, including an estimated 200,000 living in Malaysia and several thousand living in Indonesia and Thailand. In India, there are an estimated 22,500 Rohingya refugees registered with UNHCR.

With Bangladesh closing its entry points to Rohingya refugees in 2013, a multitude of Rohingya families sought entry through other routes, such as the India-Myanmar border, the India-Myanmar-Bangladesh tri-junction, as well as various pathways opening into Northeast India. Many more have crossed into India from Bangladesh since the genocidal violence against the Rohingya in Myanmar in 2017 and deterioration of conditions in the camps in Bangladesh. They are dispersed across a broad region, establishing makeshift shelters in several states, including Assam, West Bengal, Haryana, Uttar Pradesh, Delhi, Telangana, and Jammu and Kashmir.

Rohingya have become one of the most neglected and persecuted groups within India’s refugee populations, largely due to the decade-long Modi government’s Islamophobic rhetoric and anti-immigrant policies. There is a stark disparity in the way Rohingya refugees are treated compared to other refugee groups, such as those from Sri Lanka and Tibet, as outlined below. Their plight is compounded by unique vulnerabilities such as the lack of access to shelter, nutrition, tertiary healthcare and higher education, and livelihood opportunities. They are also at constant risk of violence from the authorities as well as from host communities and political groups.

India lacks a standardized refugee policy and instead addresses refugees through domestic regulations, leading to an ad-hoc and often arbitrary approach. This has yielded very disparate treatment of different refugee populations based on India’s shifting geo-political and diplomatic interests. Consequently, while refugee groups such as Tibetans, Sri Lankans, and Afghans are granted refugee certificates or long-term visas (LTVs) by the GoI, most Rohingya refugees, despite being registered with the UNHCR, face arbitrary detention and criminal imprisonment as the Indian authorities selectively choose not to recognize their UNHCR cards. As the former Minister of State Home Affairs and current Cabinet Minister Kiren Rijuju stated in 2017, “I want to tell the international organizations whether the Rohingyas are registered under the United Nations Human Rights Commission or not, they are illegal immigrants in India.”

This lack of clear legal status leaves Rohingya refugees in India vulnerable to both arbitrary detention and deportation. From 2017–2022, 16 Rohingya refugees were deported to Myanmar from India. A significant number of Rohingya refugees, including pregnant women and children,¹ are also unlawfully and indefinitely detained in jails and detention centers across India. Due to their already disadvantaged status, their plight is exacerbated in these detention centers as they face dehumanizing living conditions and have minimal access to legal aid. Taking into account the deplorable conditions at the Matia Transit Camp, the Supreme Court on October 4, 2024, ordered the Assam State Legal Services to make surprise visits to inspect the living conditions of the refugees.

Legal Background

India is not a signatory to the 1951 Refugee Convention or its 1967 Protocol, and Rohingya refugees in India are detained under archaic domestic legal frameworks, namely the Foreigners Act, 1946 and the Passport Act, 1967. These legislations grant broad executive powers to deal with foreigners and allow the authorities to classify Rohingya refugees as ‘illegal migrants.’ Most Rohingya refugees are sentenced to imprisonment under section 14 (a)(b) of the Foreigner’s Act 1946 (maximum sentence of eight years) and Rule 6 of the Passport Act, 1980. But the latter was omitted in 1985, implying that under India’s own law, the indefinite detention of Rohingya refugees is illegal and arbitrary.

India has acknowledged the ethnic persecution of the Rohingya population in Myanmar (Indian Union Muslim League v. Union of India, Writ Petition 2019), but the GoI raises national security as an issue when it comes to Rohingya refugees in India. Prominent officials have often labeled them as ‘terrorists’ and ‘termites.’ Furthermore, the enactment of the Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA) 2019, which accelerates Indian citizenship for persecuted religious minorities from Pakistan, Bangladesh, and Afghanistan—excluding Muslims—worsens the discriminatory experiences Rohingya Muslims face based on their Islamic identity in India. while reinforcing their arbitrary and indefinite detention.

The Union Government has further argued in the Priyali Sur v. Union of India (UOI) case that Rohingya refugees have only the right to life under Article 21 of the Indian Constitution, but not the right to reside and settle. However, this argument is undermined by the indefinite incarceration and inhumane conditions Rohingya refugees are exposed to, which indeed violate Article 21 that protects the right to live with dignity, the right to livelihood, and the right to a healthy environment.

Furthermore, India is party to several core international treaties like the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR), International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), Convention on the Elimination of all forms of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW), and Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC) that obligate states to uphold basic human rights and dignity for all individuals, including asylum seekers. While the Indian Judiciary has often interpreted the fundamental rights enshrined in Part III of the Indian Constitution in light of these international standards, the state’s approach to follow these international obligations falters when it comes to Rohingya refugees.

The lack of legal frameworks in India further exacerbates the difficulties for legal representation. Numerous cases concerning the release of Rohingya refugees are currently pending in Indian courts, alongside troubling reports of violence and deaths within detention facilities.

Matia Transit Camp: India’s largest detention center in the state of Assam. Photo by The Azadi Project and Refugees International.

Detention of Rohingya in India

As of September 2024, the latest numbers available, UNHCR estimates that there are 676 Rohingya refugees in immigration detention across India, and 608 of them have no ongoing court cases or sentences pending. Almost 50 percent of those detained are women and children, according to data collected by The Azadi Project and Refugees International from interviews and accessing detainee list data. Such estimates are subject to the ambiguous definition of ‘detention’ by Indian authorities, since facilities labeled by GoI as holding centers and transit centers also serve as places of detention for Rohingya refugees. Across the country, the Rohingya refugees are primarily held in jails or detention facilities labeled as ‘sewa kendra’ or service center, ‘holding centers’ or ‘transit camps.’ These are essentially jail-like facilities where Rohingya people are cut off from outside interactions. These detentions exist in Delhi, Jammu, Hyderabad, West Bengal, and Assam. Additionally, they are also detained in Bangalore (Karnataka), Chennai (Tamil Nadu), Kochi (Kerala), Uttar Pradesh, and Bihar at the discretion of local police forces.² However, located in Assam, the Matia Transit Camp stands out as the country’s largest detention center, where around 103 Rohingya women, children, and men are detained along with another 171 detainees who are Bangladeshis or Indians declared as foreigners.

Delhi hosts two ‘sewa kendras’ or detention centers: the Lampur Detention Center and the Seva Kendra in Sarai Rohilla, Shahzada Bagh. Both facilities house Rohingya refugees, including women and children, who have been detained for more than three years. Many of these detainees were infants at the time of their detention and have never had the chance to experience life outside the detention centers or access educational opportunities.

In Jammu, the Kathua Holding Center, formerly known as the Hira Nagar sub-jail, functions as a detention center for Rohingya refugees. In March 2021, the Jammu & Kashmir Union Territory administration reclassified the sub-jail as a holding center. Conditions there, according to detainees’ families, are reportedly worse than those in a prison.

In West Bengal, hundreds of Rohingya refugees have been detained for years now in the Dum Dum Central Jail. Some have been recently released only to be housed in women and children shelter homes such as Women Union home, Kolkata and Sukanya Home for children. With this transfer, the numbers in the jail have dropped, but the numbers in the shelters have increased. In most cases, the period of detention has surpassed the sentencing. Those who are out of jail but suffering in homes and shelters say the conditions are no better than detention, and they remain separated from their families. As one lawyer the team interviewed said, “My client [a Rohingya refugee woman] after years has been released from the Dum Dum central jail in Kolkata but unfortunately she can’t unite with her family in Hyderabad. She is forced to live in a woman’s shelter home where she feels her liberties are as restricted as in the jail.”

Findings

These findings are based on in depth in-person and telephonic interviews with Rohingya detainees, their families, lawyers, and human rights activists and a visit to a detention center in India where Rohingya refugees, including women and children, are detained.

Arbitrary and Indefinite Detention

The research team, during their visit to a detention center and interviews with detainees, found that despite serving their sentence period, many Rohingya refugees continue to languish in detention for more than a decade with no criminal charges even after having served their initial sentence period. Places where Rohingya are detained are often not labeled as detention centers by Indian authorities, and the proper implementation of the model detention code provided by the Ministry of Home Affairs is questionable. Moreover, despite the model detention code guidelines stating that ‘families should not be separated,’ families are kept separately in certain detention centers.

Treatment of Children

Those in detention include lap children (children under 5 years of age) and adolescents who are growing up without access to formal education, proper nutrition, and other essential developmental needs. They are all separated from at least one parent and sometimes from both and sent to shelters. Older children are forcibly separated from their parents and placed in juvenile detention centers or orphanages. These children seldom see their parents and often endure prolonged periods with little to no contact with them (see case studies for examples).

Based on interviews with detainees and human rights lawyers, the team recorded many instances where children are forcibly separated from parents. In one particular incident revealed in detainee interviews during a visit to a detention center, two children belonging to a Rohingya family were separated from their parents and kept in a separate shelter home, while their parents were moved from one detention to another. Finally, when the parents requested to be reunited with their children, the authorities claimed that they could not track which shelter or where their children were.

Further, no access to formal education and limited social interaction hinder the cognitive and intellectual development of Rohingya children.

Hunger Challenges

The detainees’ (including children detainees) days are marked by a monotonous routine with insufficient food. They mostly begin their day with a sparse breakfast of black tea and dry bread at 7:00 a.m., followed by a meager lunch of rice and lentils at 10:30 a.m, and dinner at 4:00 p.m., leaving them hungry after this hour. Both adults and children report that they suffer from inadequate nutrition. In the team’s conversations with several Rohingya refugee mothers, they shared how several times they have had to see their children starve solely because of no access to food. “The quality of food is unpalatable and there simply isn’t enough. We can’t give our children more food even when they cry for it. Where will we get it?” said a mother breaking down. From September 9 to 16, 2024, Rohingya refugees in one of the detention centers staged a collective hunger strike, demanding to be released and handed over to UNHCR in Delhi and subsequent resettlement.

Poor Conditions

The detainees reported that the conditions within the cells are inhumane and dire. There is a severe lack of basic sanitation. The toilets often have water shortages, and the detainees are forced to use unclean toilets. In detention centers across India, detainees complained of poor ventilation and lack of access to proper medical care. Both former and current women detainees in their interviews complained of poor sanitation leading to serious reproductive and menstrual health issues (refer to case in section ‘Deaths in Detention’). The team was also informed of older detainees at detention centers who have age-related mobility issues and have no support to even use the toilet. Additionally, exposure to indoor pollutants and lack of exposure to natural sunlight have resulted in respiratory illnesses, skin-related issues, and mobility issues such as temporary paralysis.

Gender Separation

Men and women are housed in separate spaces in most detention facilities, which results in spouses being kept apart. This separation is violative of fundamental rights and Article 21, enshrined in the Indian constitution, that guarantees the right to start a family and that cohabitation of two individuals of opposite sex is not illegal. One detention officer interviewed for this report indicated that these separations are intended in part to control population growth amongst detained Rohingyas. This forced separation is also against the GoI’s own model detention manual that states families cannot be separated. Forced separation disrupts family unity. Also power dynamics within the detention centers reinforce gender power dynamic, because men and male children typically have more of an area to roam as opposed to women and girls who are limited to a tighter and more restrictive space.

Mental Health

Along with the obvious curtailment of personal liberty, Rohingya refugees bear the brunt of physical and psychological abuses. Indefinite detention with no end in sight severely impacts the mental health of the detainees. A history of trauma and violence, coupled with the inhumane conditions of the camp, forced isolation, inadequate necessities, and the lack of legal aid, intensify their mental health issues. According to documents from a detention center seen by the research team, it was recorded that a ‘regular supply of psychiatric medication’ was a consistent challenge. Detainees also reported symptoms of anxiety, such as shortness of breath. Detainees interviewed at one of the detention centers reported observing a range of mental health challenges, from depression and anxiety to more severe apparent symptoms, as well as a lack of any access to professional mental health support.

Lack of Access to Legal Representation and Barriers to Legal Aid

Based on interviews with lawyers and detainees, there is minimal to no legal aid available to the Rohingya refugees inside detention centers. According to UNHCR, there are 676 Rohingya refugees detained in immigration centers across India, but 608 of them have no ongoing court cases or pending sentences. The few non-profit organizations that did support with legal aid have had their foreign funding licences [FCRAs – Foreign Contribution (Regulation) Act] cancelled by the Indian government, severely curtailing their capacity to support Rohingya refugees. The situation is further complicated by a growing number of unfavorable legal rulings regarding the release of detained Rohingya refugees or the halting of their deportation. This has made lawyers reluctant to take on cases involving the Rohingya, fearing negative outcomes and possible repercussions. For example, in a 2021 case, the Supreme Court of India declined to stop the deportation of 170 Rohingya refugees detained in Srinagar, Kashmir. In the case of Mohammad Salimullah and Anr. v. Union of India (2017), former Chief Justice S.A. Bobde, along with three other judges, ruled that since India is not a signatory to the 1951 Refugee Convention, the principle of non-refoulement (the prohibition against deporting refugees to countries where they face danger) does not apply. However, the Supreme Court has previously held, as in Vishaka v. State of Rajasthan (1997), that international conventions consistent with India’s Fundamental Rights must be read into the Constitution. Additionally, several High Courts in India have interpreted the principle of non-refoulement as being part of Article 21 of the Constitution, which guarantees the right to life and personal liberty. Notable examples include the Gujarat High Court’s decision in Ktaer Abbas Habib Al Qutaifi v. Union of India (1998) and the Delhi High Court’s ruling in Dongh Lian Kham v. Union of India (2015), both of which involved refugees from different countries seeking protection from deportation.

Moreover, the application of indefinite incarceration to Rohingya refugees, is fundamentally incompatible with the principle of proportionality, which as the former Chief Justice of India, Justice D Y Chandrachud stated in Puttaswamy is an ‘essential facet of the guarantee against arbitrary state action…’. The principle of proportionality requires a rational link between the means employed and the legitimate aim pursued. In the case of Rohingya refugees, indefinite detention serves no legitimate purpose, as these individuals are stateless and cannot be deported. Holding them in detention centers does not facilitate their identification or deportation, rendering such detention unnecessary and unjust.

The research team spoke with a lawyer who was representing two Rohingya refugees, including an octogenarian Rohingya woman in detention. The lawyer was initially supported by a nonprofit organization that provides free legal aid. Unfortunately, the organization’s FCRA was cancelled in 2022, and lawyers like the one we spoke to were left to work pro bono while representing Rohingya refugees. When asked if they would continue the case or represent more Rohingya refugees, they stated “these cases are dead cases since the system will never let them out of detention.” Another lawyer who works with an organization providing free legal services to detainees mentioned that they never take up cases of Rohingya refugees since they fear the consequences they themselves and their organization will face for working to represent detained Rohingya people. However, few pro bono lawyers continue to represent a handful of Rohingya refugees in local courts and high courts of India.

Legal victories for Rohingya detainees are rare. The Telangana High Court recently ordered the release of five Rohingya refugees, but such instances are exceptions. In another troubling development, recently, a Rohingya family detained for over 12 years was denied permission by the GoI to be interviewed by the Canadian High Commission for resettlement in Canada (refer to Case Study 1 below.) Another example of an unfavorable judgement is when the Supreme Court of India in August 2020 permitted the deportation of Rohingya refugees to Myanmar, despite the dangerous conditions they face there.³ Similarly, a Delhi High Court’s decision in 2018 denied bail to detained Rohingya refugees, maintaining their prolonged detention under harsh conditions.⁴ These cases highlight the broader legal and systemic barriers preventing the protection of Rohingya refugees in India.

Deaths in Detention Centers

Prolonged and indefinite detention under terrible conditions has meant that many detainees report poor health and also severe ailments such as kidney stones, respiratory and breathing problems, and tuberculosis. During an interview with a woman who was formerly detained, she revealed that despite repeated pleas for health checks, the authorities rarely took the detainees to hospitals or severely delayed in taking them. She also mentioned that most detainees suffer from kidney stones, mobility issues, and breathing difficulty. The former detainee also referred to knowing and being detained with an unaccompanied minor girl – Hamida Begum. Earlier this year in March, Hamida Begum mysteriously died at the Shahzada Bagh detention center in Delhi. The research team spoke to Hamida’s relative who spent a month trying to retrieve her body from the authorities. “I’d go everyday but they were reluctant to give her body. She was a healthy child when she was detained. She suddenly fell sick and kept requesting to be taken to see the doctor. In the last 24 hours before her death, she had stopped urinating as well. Finally they took her to see the doctor but it was too late,” said the relative. (See Annex: copy of the discharge of Hamida Begum’s body.)

Based on interviews and media reports, the team found that since 2021, at least seven Rohingya refugees have died in detention in Jammu. Most recently in September, Lalu Bibi, a 75-year-old woman, died after 1,287 days in indefinite detention. The tragic death of a five- month-old infant in the Jammu detention center in July 2023 following use of teargas was a particularly harrowing example of this. The researchers spoke to the Senior Superintendent of Police, Mr. Shivdeep Singh Jamwal, who was in charge of the detention center in Jammu when tear gas was used in an enclosed space. He admitted to the use of tear gas while children were present, “Yes, a bit of tear gas was used, while they were pelting stones. This is a normal issue.” The death of the infant was followed by distressing visuals of the mother being walked to her baby’s funeral in handcuffs and iron chains. In 2019, a minor detainee at a home in West Bengal had no access to menstrual products. Interviewees reported to the team that she ultimately was taken to the hospital in a critical condition with maggots found in her vagina. There is no further information regarding what happened to her. With the GoI and authorities treating Rohingya as “illegal immigrants,” no one is accountable for what happens to them inside a detention center, be it while they are alive or in death.

Access for UNHCR

UNHCR in India has not visited many detention facilities including the largest one in India. Many detainees interviewed across different detention centers expressed the desire to have the UNHCR team visit to register those detainees who are still without UNHCR cards, discuss resettlement opportunities for the others, and improve living conditions. Some women detainees expressed their disappointment that the UNHCR officials had stopped responding to their calls as well. However, most recently UNHCR was permitted to carry out virtual interviews with some detainees to issue them UNHCR cards, and they have successfully resettled a few families to the United States and Canada from detention centers in Delhi.

Case Studies

Names and locations have been changed to protect the identity of people the team interviewed.

Case Study 1: Minara Begum (Detention Center in India)

“We have done nothing wrong. Our villages were being burned, and we came here (India) to save our lives”, said Minara Begum, a 45- year-old mother of three from Buthidaung, Myanmar.

She and her family fled the violence in her hometown and came to India for refuge in November 2012. She was traveling with her family, which included four adults and six children. On reaching a local railway station, they innocently walked up to the police to ask for help stating that they were fleeing persecution. They were instead detained. Minara’s youngest child was just a two-month-old infant then. Her other two children were seven years and 18 months old. They were initially sent to a jail, and her 7-year-old was forcefully separated from her and sent to an orphanage. After two years of being in the jail, Minara and her two younger children were transferred to a second jail, and their seven-year-old (now nine) was sent to the men’s prison with Minara’s husband in a different jail. After another two years of languishing in this jail, the authorities then transferred the entire family together to a third jail, where they met a lawyer, but the husband and eldest son were still kept in a separate area. In 2023, after more than ten years of living in jails in India, Minara and her family were moved to a fourth detention center where they completed another two years. In all these 12 years, she has forcefully been kept separated from her husband and her first child. Minara’s youngest child, who was two months old when they fled Myanmar, is 12 now and does not know of a life outside of prisons and detentions. Through UNHCR, the Canadian High commission requested to interview Minara and her family for resettlement. This gave a glimmer of hope to Minara after years of despair. But authorities denied their request to be interviewed either virtually or at the Detention Center for resettlement in Canada, stating that the GoI is not willing to allow them to seek asylum in a third country. This decision was upheld by the High Court. “Our lives have passed (in jails). We want to save our children’s lives…so they can live freely. Help us!,” said Minara when informed about the rejection.

Case Study 2: Lily Begum (Detention Center in India)

Lily Begum is an 82-year-old Rohingya refugee from Mondu, Myanmar who fled her country due to persecution. She migrated to Jammu, India in 2002 and was granted a refugee card by UNHCR in 2009. However, on January 21, 2019, when Lily Begum and a few fellow Rohingya refugees were traveling back to Jammu from Tripura where they had come to look for work, she was arrested in Karimganj, Assam. A First Information Report (FIR) against Lily Begum and 30 other Rohingya refugees was lodged at the Bazaricherra Police station in Karimganj under Section 14 of the Foreigners Act, 1946. She was charged with an imprisonment of one year and six months. Her family has also been in detention since the same year. Nevertheless, her entire sentence of imprisonment was completed on August 20, 2020. However, Lily Begum has been kept under detention until today at the Silchar Detention Center, housed within the Silchar Central Jail. She was moved to the Matia Transit Camp in Goalpara, Assam last year. Despite being severely paralyzed by her age and health issues, the detention authorities pay no heed for her safety and health. She is left unattended by the authorities, with mostly women detainees within the camp helping her with her basic bodily functions and needs. Lily’s lawyer told the team, “If they are victims of persecution and cannot be safely repatriated and also cannot be kept here, then other options must be explored. One option could be engaging in consultations with other countries who might be willing to accommodate them and finding solutions accordingly.”

Case Study 3: Farid (Detention Center in India)

Farid, 34, indigenous to Maungdow, was a victim of the genocide in Myanmar. Forced to flee his native land, he sought refuge in Kolkata, India, in 2015. Here, he secured his UNHCR refugee card and was relocating to Bangladesh when he was detained in Kolkata under Section 14 of the Foreigners Act, 1946. He was sent to jail and sentenced to six months of imprisonment. Despite completing his sentence period of six months, he has continued to remain in detention for the last eight years. Farid shares that there are currently 20-25 Rohingya men and 15 women in the jail with him who have been held for years beyond their sentence. Apart from the adult detainees, there are several children there as well. He explained that a lot of the Rohingya previously detained in the jail have been transferred to shelter homes, where the situation is as dehumanizing as in these detention centers.

Way Forward

Addressing the dire situations of the detained Rohingya refugees in India requires a coordinated effort by the GoI, the United States and other influential governments, UNHCR, and international and local civil society organizations. This coordinated approach should be focused on immediate relief for Rohingya refugees in India, legal protections against arbitrary detention, and long-term solutions through integration and/or resettlement to third countries.

First and foremost, the GoI should have a legal framework in place that treats all refugees equally—irrespective of their country of origin, religion, or ethnicity. Next, the GoI, along with state governments and local authorities, should work together to urgently release arbitrarily detained Rohingya refugees, starting with those with UNHCR cards. Granting temporary legal status or providing refugee identification documents can protect them from being detained again and deportation. Moreover, establishing a mechanism for judicial review and fast track courts for detention and deportation related cases can ensure that everyone is treated fairly by law and in a time-bound manner.

In the interim, the central and local governments, in collaboration with NGOs and international organizations like UNHCR, should prioritize improving the living conditions in detention centers. Immediate humanitarian aid and health services should be provided to address basic needs, especially for vulnerable groups such as women, children, people with disabilities, and the elderly.

Community-based living and shelters outside of detention in safe neighborhoods should be established for Rohingya refugees; along with integrated facilities for access to education, vocational training, and healthcare where they can live with dignity, integrate with the host community, and participate in the economy of the country, while their legal status is being resolved.

The engagement of the GoI with UNHCR and INGOs can bring in additional resources and technical expertise, while grassroots-level organizations can be brought in for regular monitoring. India should also diplomatically engage on the safety of Rohingya refugees with Myanmar, SAARC, and ASEAN nations. A regional approach can lead to more effective and coordinated responses, reducing the burden on individual countries like India and Bangladesh.

Meanwhile the United States can leverage its diplomatic influence to encourage India to adopt humane policies towards arbitrarily detained Rohingya refugees by releasing them and facilitating third country resettlement where possible. The United States can also increase its financial assistance for organizations working with Rohingya refugees in India and expand resettlement programs for Rohingya refugees.

International and local media and nonprofit organizations can play a crucial role in highlighting the need for urgent relief as well as leading the relief effort on the ground, pushing for long-term policy changes, and launching campaigns to promote understanding and acceptance of the Rohingya people among the local population.

The Rohingya people in Myanmar continue to experience attacks and persecution today. Sustained attention and global efforts will be needed to address the broader plight of the Rohingya population. But, more immediately, much more can and should be done to protect those Rohingya who have fled to countries of refuge. Ending arbitrary detention and improving policies toward Rohingya in India is a good place to start.

Endnotes

[1] Priyali Sur vs Union of India.

[2] Priyali Sur vs. Union of India.

[3] *I.A. No. 56695/2019 in Writ Petition (C) No. 131/2019*

[4] *M.A. No. 138/2018 in W.P.(C) No. 12413/2018*

About the authors

Daniel Sullivan is the director for Africa, Asia, and the Middle East at Refugees International. Follow him on X at @endgenocidedan.

Priyali Sur is the founder and executive director of The Azadi Project. Follow her on X at @priyalisur.

Ankita Dan is a junior research associate at The Azadi Project.

Featured image: Rohingya woman in Hyderabad, India. Photo by Refugees International.