Tuesday 22 May 2018 ,
Tuesday 22 May 2018 ,
Latest News
  • British PSVI experts to train orgs working on Rohingyas: Report
  • Ecnec clears revised Padma Bridge Rail Link Project
  • Myanmar to sign deal with UN resolving Rohingya crisis
  • CNG stations to remain open for 24 hrs during Eid: Quader
  • 10 killed in separate ‘gunfights’ early Tuesday
27 October, 2017 00:00 00 AM
Print

Permanent solution to Rohingya crisis

Bangladesh government’s primary duty is to protect the Rohingya refugee’s life and dignity
Ujjal Kumar Biswas
Permanent solution to Rohingya crisis

People become refugees when their basic human rights and dignity are not ensured in their home country owing to a well-founded fear of being persecuted for reasons of race, religion, nationality, membership of a particular social group, or political opinion.

Regarding the Rohingya refugee issue, Bangladesh government’s primary duty is to protect the Rohingya refugee’s life and dignity. They also have to ensure that the refugees aren’t forced back to Myanmar as long as they remain at risk of serious human rights violations. This protection is found in the expression of the principle of “Non-Refoulement” which is widely accepted by the international community. Non-Refoulement is a principle of customary international law prohibiting the expulsion, deportation, return or extradition of an alien to his state of origin or another state where there is a risk that his life or freedom would be threatened for discriminatory reasons. Under international law, Non-Refoulement shall be considered as a peremptory norm. The forcible return of refugees violates the principle on non-refoulment, an absolute prohibition in international treaties and customary international law on returning people to a territory where they could face a risk to their lives or other serious human rights violations.

Though, according article to 33 of the 1951 Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees explicit that “No Contracting State shall expel or return (‘refouler’) 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 of a particular social group or political opinion.” Since, Bangladesh is not the signatory state of 1951 Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees for that reason Bangadeshi legal framework does not explicitly recognise the concept non-refoulment. Therefore, not being state parties of the refuge convention Bangladesh complied to uphold the Non-Refoulement principle as a pre-emptory norm and also obliged to provide shelter and protection to Rohingya refugee.

So, for the protection of Rohingya refugee and to solve the ongoing crisis Bangladesh and Myanmar government’s must need to take initiative for durable solutions. Recently, the government of Bangladesh and Myanmar has announced that they will work for permanent or durable solution of the current crisis by returning back of Rohingya refugees to the Myanmar. In order for this returning process have to be truly voluntary, including the option to seek international protection. The ultimate goal of refugee protection is to find durable solutions which will enable refugees to live in safety and rebuild their lives. United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) attempts to secure one of three durable solutions for refugees around the world is voluntary repatriation, local integration or resettlement.

According to UNHCR the process of voluntary repatriation involves refugees returning to their country of origin, based on a free and informed decision. Voluntary repatriation is the most desirable solution for the largest number of refugees. However, it is only promoted when conditions in a refugees’ country of origin are considered conducive to a safe and dignified return. It is really a positive sign that Myanmar and Bangladesh are discussing for repatriation of Rohingya to their homes in Myanmar this must be a voluntary process and not lead to a hasty and reckless effort to push people back against their will. No one should be forced back to a situation where they will continue to face serious human rights violations and systemic discrimination and segregation. The second durable solution process is local integration it means who are unable to return home will be integrated within the host community. This is often a complex process which places considerable demands on both the individual and the receiving society. Forasmuch Bangladesh is already a over populated country and also not economically strong for that reason local integration is more or less impossible for Bangladesh.   

Another process of durable solution prescribed by UNHCR is resettlement. It is a process when   refugees cannot return home due to fear of persecution and have protection needs which cannot be addressed in their country of first asylum, resettlement may be the only safe and viable solution available. It involves resettling refugees from the country in which they have sought asylum to another country which has agreed to provide them with protection. Resettlement is rare, and only 1% are resettled by the UNHCR.  Most of the refugees are resettled to the United States, Canada, Australia or Scandinavia. The resettlement country provides legal and physical protection to the refugee and should allow the refugees to become naturalized citizens. The Bangladesh government’s recent initiative to temporary resettling in some isolated island in district of Noakhali is not rational according to UNHCR mandate. Because if the Rohingya’s are resettled in such an isolated islands their basic human rights will be violated.

 Even if Resettlement will always be a challenging process, the United Nations Refugee Agency need to negotiate with developed countries for resettling the Rohingya refugee to another country. To conclude, Bangladesh and Myanmar should uphold the international law principle for solving the ongoing Rohingya refugee crisis permanently by upholding the fundamental principle of international law and the process of Durable Solutions.

    

    The writer is a lawyer

Comments

Poll
Today's Question »
Civil rights body Shujan claims that Khulna city elections were a questionable election, which was not completely free, fair and flawless. Do you agree?
 Yes
 No
 No Comment
Yes 0.0%
No 33.3%
No Comment 66.7%
Most Viewed
Digital Edition
Archive
SunMonTueWedThuFri Sat
0102030405
06070809101112
13141516171819
20212223242526
2728293031
More Editorial stories
Addressing the scourge of cyber-crimes A survey of more than one hundred cyber-crime victims confirms the long standing fear that around seventy four per cent fall in the 18-30 age bracket with women constituting more than fifty per cent.…

Copyright © All right reserved.

Editor : M. Shamsur Rahman

Published by the Editor on behalf of Independent Publications Limited at Media Printers, 446/H, Tejgaon I/A, Dhaka-1215.
Editorial, News & Commercial Offices : Beximco Media Complex, 149-150 Tejgaon I/A, Dhaka-1208, Bangladesh. GPO Box No. 934, Dhaka-1000.

Editor : M. Shamsur Rahman
Published by the Editor on behalf of Independent Publications Limited at Media Printers, 446/H, Tejgaon I/A, Dhaka-1215.
Editorial, News & Commercial Offices : Beximco Media Complex, 149-150 Tejgaon I/A, Dhaka-1208, Bangladesh. GPO Box No. 934, Dhaka-1000.

Disclaimer & Privacy Policy
....................................................
About Us
....................................................
Contact Us
....................................................
Advertisement
....................................................
Subscription

Powered by : Frog Hosting