The Rohingya Muslims in India seem to be fighting on two fronts-avoiding deportation, and trying to dodge the reputation of being a violent, terrorist group. Add to this, the occasional rumour of cow slaughter.

The Jammu Chambers of Commerce and Industry, the Jammu and Kashmir National Panthers, the Vishwa Hindu Parishad and Bajrang Dal have all issued aggressive statements against the Rohingya Muslim community in Jammu.

Identify and kill movement

This year, on April 7, Rakesh Gupta, president of the Jammu Chamber of Commerce and Industry, threatened to launch an “identify and kill movement”, if the government did not take immediate action to deport the Rohingyas. According to Gupta, the Rohingyas’ inability to co-exist with the ‘non-violent’, ‘peace-loving’ Buddhist community in Myanmar is a mark against them.

“Why should we entertain these people who have not only crossed the border illegally but also settled here illegally? Moreover, why Jammu? If they wanted to feel secure they should have gone to Kashmir. Why are there no Rohingyas there?” asked Gupta.

For Gupta, there is no room for tolerance in this case. He said that he had been repeatedly asking the government to take this matter seriously but after many failed attempts he issued a threat to identify and eliminate all Rohingyas in Jammu.

When Newslaundry asked him if he would have gone ahead with their plan had the government not responded, Gupta dismissed it by saying, “Killing is an extreme step.”“The spirit of the threat was not to kill them but to take immediate steps to deport them. Killing is the job of the security (forces), not us,” said Gupta.

‘Wake up Jammu’

Earlier this year, in February, the Jammu and Kashmir National Panthers put up several billboards around Jammu, which said “Quit Jammu.” The billboard asked the people of Jammu to “wake up” and save the history, culture and identity of the Dogras.

Harsh Dev Singh, president of the Jammu Panthers, has been organising protests and ‘awareness programmes’ to ‘educate’ locals in Jammu about the immediate need to deport the Rohingya Muslims as they’re a threat to security. Singh believes that if the Rohingyas are not ‘removed’, the peaceful atmosphere in Jammu will be in jeopardy.

When asked if the claim that the Rohingyas were involved in terror activities was backed by any evidence, he said, “Once the intelligence has confirmed it, the media reports it and nobody denies it, then isn’t that enough proof to confirm something as the truth?”

Misunderstanding the law

Both Gupta and Singh made the argument that as India is not a signatory to the 1951 Refugee Convention, the Rohingyas are illegal migrants, not refugees and must be deported with immediate effect.

Described as the most persecuted community, the Human Rights Watch (HRW) claims that around 40,000 Rohingyas have settled in India. The United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) has registered close to 14,000 Rohingya as refugees in India. Of them, 7,000 are currently residing in Jammu. The Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA) declared that the recognition provided to Rohingyas by the UNHCR in India is irrelevant because New Delhi is not a signatory to the refugee convention.

However, senior advocate Prashant Bhushan argued, “Even if the Rohingya can no longer be considered as a refugee, India cannot merely deport them.” Bhushan, who along with two other registered and recognised Rohingyas, filed a petition asking to prevent the deportation of the community. The principle of non-refoulement prohibits the deportation of a refugee community to a territory where their life or freedom is under threat. The non-refoulement law is customary international law. This means that all states are bound by this law whether or not they’re a signatory to the 1951 Convention.

‘International law does not apply in J&K’

After clarifying the scope of international law, Gupta argued that Jammu and Kashmir’s special status makes the state ‘totally unique’. “International law does not apply here,” he said.

Singh added that, according to Article 370, only state subjects–that is, a permanent resident of Jammu and Kashmir–can settle in the state. Article 35A states that non-permanent members cannot acquire land in Jammu and Kashmir. “Settling down means living here and enjoying the facilities meant for our people. So the Rohingyas cannot be here. Moreover, this is a sensitive state, why should we take such a risk with these people?” Singh asked.

Bhushan’s response was, “The Rohingyas are not ‘settling’ in Jammu, they’re simply taking refuge. By their argument, nobody should be allowed to travel to Jammu and Kashmir or stay there for a long period of time.”

Sunil Sethi, an advocate and chief spokesperson of BJP in Jammu and Kashmir, has been arguing in the Jammu and Kashmir High Court for the deportation of the Rohingyas from the state. There have been questions if the state’s special status makes it immune to the international law. Sethi weighed in on this, saying that Article 370 lay within the ambit of the Indian Constitution, which meant that just like India, Jammu and Kashmir is also obliged to abide by international law.

However, with regard to the non-refoulement law, Sethi also denied its applicability in India since it is not a signatory to the Refugee Convention. “No community can simply be thrust upon India,” Sethi said.

Bhushan told Newslaundry that J&K’s special status is irrelevant because “nothing is above the international law”. The non-refoulement law is being majorly misunderstood or consciously misconstrued.

VHP and Bajrang Dal on Rohingyas

Rakesh Sharma, Vice President of the Vishwa Hindu Parishad in Jammu, said, “The only thing left to do is deportation.”

On August 9, 2017, the Union Minister of State for Home Affairs Kiren Rijiju told Parliament that the Central government had directed state authorities to identify and deport “illegally staying foreign nationals”.

When asked why only the Rohingya Muslim were being asked to leave, Sharma said that other refugees such as Pakistani Hindus (also known as West Pakistan Refugees) cannot be compared to Rohingyas. “Has any Pakistani Hindu destroyed anybody’s mosque? Have any of them tried to convert Muslims to Hindus? Or kidnapped Muslim girls?” he asked.

Sharma said that he hoped the government hurries up and makes sure the “cleansing” is done quickly. “Finally after 70 years, the government is doing something. I don’t know if any of our steps can or should be taken in society but if the government needs our help to do it, we will do whatever it takes,” he said, without clarifying what exactly he meant.

Sharma said the Rohingyas were not “sophisticated human beings” and that in their own country “these people [were] called jungle criminals”. “They come here, kill our cows, become terrorists and create trouble. Why should we keep them knowing they’re criminals? India must get rid of this nuisance immediately. We must wipe our slate clean. India must be prepared for everything nationalistic,” he said.

On being asked if the anti-Rohingya stance was due to Islamophobia, Sharma denied being averse to Muslims. “This is not about them being Muslim. This is about them being terrorists. And why Jammu? Why didn’t they go to Saudi [Arabia] or Syria where I’m sure their Muslim brothers would have welcomed them more warmly?” he asked.

Echoing these statements, Rajesh Bajrangi, a member of the Bajrang Dal in Jammu, added that many “anti-national Muslim elements in Kashmir” were funding the Rohingyas. “They all seem to have expensive vehicles. If they don’t have proper jobs here, where is the money for that coming from?” he asked.

Bajrangi asked, “Even after the Burmese leader has decided to accept them as citizens, these people are still staying here. Why? There is a plan and we need to find out what that plan is.” Burma has not actually issued any official statement claiming to welcome the Rohingya as citizens.

He also added that if the government doesn’t take action, following a “core committee meeting” the Bajrang  Dal will. He was also silent on what precisely he meant by “action”.

Fact Check

One of the exceptions to the non-refoulement law is that if a refugee community poses a threat to national security, then deportation may be considered.

So far the Rohingya in Jammu have 17 FIRs filed against them. Nevertheless, none of these is related to terror or militancy. An NDTV report stated that of the 17 FIRs, two were against Bangladeshis and one against a Pakistani national. That means the 14 FIRs constitute a crime rate of 0.24 per cent.

In January, Chief Minister Mehbooba Mufti told the State Assembly: “No Rohingya has been found involved in militancy-related incidents. However, 17 FIRs have been registered against 38 Rohingyas for various offences.”

Dr SD Singh Jamwal, Inspector General of Police of Jammu Range, also confirmed, “There still is no concrete evidence of the Rohingyas in Jammu having terror links.” Jamwal also added that by far, there were no reports of the Rohingyas being funded by any Muslim agencies.

As no official FIR has been filed against any Rohingyas as a security threat, everyone that we spoke to making this claim only had the intelligence report to go by.

So far, the Centre has not taken any steps to explain the contents of the report.

Neither Singh, Gupta, Sharma or Bajrangi admit they’ve never visited a Rohingya Muslim camp or met anyone from the community. “We’re a Hindu Sanghatan, what is the need to meet them?” asked Bajrangi.

The author can be contacted on Twitter @nidhisuresh02