Rohingya Refugee Education in Bharat: A Legal and Humanitarian Debate

Paromita Das

New Delhi.

The issue of providing education to Rohingya refugee children in Bharat has sparked a complex legal and humanitarian debate. The Supreme Court of India, on February 12, 2025, heard a petition filed by the Rohingya Human Rights Initiative (R4R), which sought government benefits and free-of-cost school admissions for Rohingya children residing in New Delhi. The ruling highlighted the fundamental principle of non-discrimination in education, emphasizing the need for humanitarian consideration while also raising questions about legal rights and national security concerns.

This case has once again brought attention to the broader debate over the status of Rohingya refugees in Bharat, their rights, and the government’s responsibility toward them. It has also underscored the intersection of legal obligations, international treaties, domestic policies, and political considerations.

The Supreme Court’s Ruling and Its Implications

A Supreme Court bench comprising Justice Surya Kant and Justice N. Kotiswar Singh directed the petitioner NGO to submit address proof of Rohingya immigrants residing in Delhi to assess possible relief measures. However, the court made it clear that before deciding on granting government benefits to the refugees, the status of their residence needed to be ascertained. The bench also directed the petitioner not to disclose the details of minor children in public.

This ruling raises critical questions: Should Rohingya children in Bharat be denied education on account of their refugee status? Is it the Bharatiya government’s responsibility to provide free education to individuals who are in the country illegally? The Supreme Court’s approach reflects an effort to strike a balance between humanitarian considerations and legal frameworks governing citizenship and refugee rights in Bharat.

Legal Framework for Education and Refugee Rights in Bharat

Bharat is not a signatory to the 1951 UN Refugee Convention or its 1967 Protocol, which defines the rights of refugees and the obligations of states to protect them. However, Bharat has endorsed the 1966 Bangkok Principles, which advocate for humane treatment of refugees. These principles include the commitment to provide basic human rights to refugees without discrimination.

Under the Right to Education (RTE) Act of 2009, every child between the ages of 6 and 14 has the right to free and compulsory education. However, the law primarily applies to Bharatiya citizens, and its extension to refugee children remains a contentious issue.

Moreover, the Bharatiya Constitution guarantees the right to life and personal liberty under Article 21, which has been interpreted by courts to include the right to education. Legal experts argue that denying education to Rohingya children would contradict Bharat’s constitutional commitment to upholding human dignity.

Challenges Faced by Rohingya Children in Accessing Education

Despite legal provisions, Rohingya children face multiple barriers in accessing education in Bharat:

1. Lack of Official Documentation: Schools require Aadhaar cards or other identification documents for enrollment, which most Rohingya children do not possess.
2. Language Barriers: Many Rohingya children and their families do not speak Hindi or English, making it difficult for them to integrate into the Bharatiya education system.
3. Socio-Economic Hardships: Rohingya families live in extreme poverty, with limited access to stable housing and basic necessities. This directly impacts their ability to prioritize education for their children.
4. Discrimination and Social Stigma: Many local communities and educational institutions hesitate to admit Rohingya children due to their refugee status, fearing political or administrative consequences.

Role of NGOs and Civil Society in Supporting Refugee Education

Several NGOs and civil society organizations have stepped in to bridge the gap, offering informal education and skill development programs for Rohingya children. Organizations like the Rohingya Human Rights Initiative (R4R) and other advocacy groups have been actively involved in providing educational resources, but their efforts are limited by financial constraints and legal challenges.

Senior advocate Colin Gonsalves, representing the petitioner NGO, argued before the Supreme Court that despite possessing UNHCR refugee cards, Rohingya children were denied access to schools and healthcare facilities. However, it is crucial to note that a UNHCR refugee card does not grant legal status under Bharatiya law. This raises a larger question: Should NGOs and advocacy groups demand that Bharat treat Rohingya refugees on par with its own citizens, despite their lack of legal recognition?

Government Policies and Their Impact

The Bharatiya government has taken a firm stance against illegal immigration, classifying the Rohingya as illegal migrants rather than refugees. The Ministry of Home Affairs has consistently maintained that the presence of Rohingyas poses security threats and that their continued stay in Bharat could lead to demographic and political challenges.

In 2021, the central government stated in the Supreme Court that Rohingya refugees should not be granted any special status, arguing that they entered Bharat illegally and must be deported. This position aligns with the broader national security narrative that has linked Rohingyas to potential extremist elements.

At the same time, Bharat has been cautious about openly violating international human rights norms. The Supreme Court has repeatedly upheld the principle of non-discrimination, ensuring that Rohingya refugees are not subjected to inhumane treatment. However, the question remains: Can the government balance its security concerns while upholding humanitarian obligations?

The Unintended Consequence: Rohingyas and the NRC Debate

One unintended consequence of Rohingya advocacy efforts is their inadvertent role in the National Register of Citizens (NRC) debate. While NGOs and activists demand rights for Rohingya refugees, they are also identifying them as non-Bharatiya, thereby indirectly contributing to the documentation of illegal immigrants in Bharat.

The NRC, aimed at identifying legal Bharatiya citizens and detecting illegal migrants, has been a controversial subject. Opposition parties and activists have resisted its implementation, arguing that it disproportionately targets Bharatiya Muslims. However, the legal battle over Rohingya rights is inadvertently helping the government in distinguishing citizens from non-citizens.

A Balanced Approach is Needed

The debate over Rohingya education in Bharat is not merely a legal issue but a test of Bharat’s commitment to both its sovereignty and its humanitarian responsibilities. While denying children access to education on the basis of their refugee status contradicts Bharat’s constitutional principles, providing full government benefits to Rohingya refugees without legal recognition raises concerns about national security and the rights of Bharatiya citizens.

A middle-ground approach must be adopted:

• Education Without Citizenship Benefits: Rohingya children should be allowed access to education but without the accompanying government benefits reserved for Bharatiya citizens.
• NGO-Government Collaboration: The government should collaborate with NGOs to provide basic education without extending long-term residency rights.
• Stronger Border Controls: While humanitarian aid is necessary, Bharat must strengthen border security to prevent further illegal immigration.

Conclusion: A Delicate Balancing Act

The Supreme Court’s ruling on Rohingya children’s education highlights the ongoing struggle between legal sovereignty and humanitarian obligations. While education is a fundamental right, extending it to illegal immigrants raises complex questions about national policy and legal frameworks.

As Bharat navigates this issue, it must ensure that its policies are in line with its constitutional principles while safeguarding its national interests. The challenge lies in crafting a response that is both humane and practical, addressing the immediate needs of Rohingya children while maintaining the integrity of the nation’s legal and security frameworks.