NEW DELHI: It has been more than a week since Akbar, a Rohingya refugee in India, has heard his niece’s voice, the longest they have not spoken to each other.

She is among more than 40 Rohingya alleged by the United Nations, family and lawyers to have been forced off an Indian navy ship this month near the shores of war-torn Myanmar with only a life jacket.

“I got her out of the lion’s mouth when we escaped Myanmar almost eight years ago. And now this has happened,” Akbar, whose name has been changed to protect his identity, said of his niece, who is around 20 years old.

Myanmar’s Ba Htoo forces — opposition fighters battling the junta that took power in a 2021 coup — say the group landed on May 9 on a beach in Launglon Township near southern Dawei city, a region that regularly witnesses gunbattles and air strikes.

“We are helping them as human beings and we will let them go where they want if it is safe,” a spokesman for the group said.

The mostly Muslim Rohingya have been persecuted in Myanmar for decades, with many fleeing a 2017 military crackdown. More than a million escaped to Bangladesh, but others fled to India.

There are around 22,500 Rohingya in India registered with the United Nations refugee agency, according to the advocacy group Refugees International.

Two other Rohingya refugees told AFP their relatives were part of the group that was detained by Indian authorities.

Tom Andrews, the UN special rapporteur on human rights in Myanmar, has called the repatriation an “unconscionable” act.

Andrews said he was “deeply concerned by what appears to be a blatant disregard for the lives and safety of those who require international protection.”

New Delhi has not commented on the reports.

Family members say the group was summoned by authorities in New Delhi on May 6, allegedly to collect biometric data.

They were moved to a detention center and then to an airport outside the Indian capital.

From there they were flown to India’s Andaman and Nicobar islands, an archipelago that lies a few hundred kilometers southwest of Myanmar.

Two days after being detained, the refugees called family members back in Delhi saying they had been dropped off in the seas off Myanmar.

The Ba Htoo spokesman said one member of the group was a cancer patient, adding that the “rest of them just feel tired from the long trip.”

AFP could not independently verify the claims.

Dilwar Hussain, a New Delhi-based lawyer representing refugees from the community, said they were “concerned about the safety and well-being of these refugees.”

A petition filed in India’s Supreme Court by two refugees whose family members are among the 43 people allegedly deported said it was carried out illegally.

India is not a signatory to the UN’s 1951 Refugee Convention, which prohibits returning individuals to countries where they face harm.

However, New Delhi rights lawyer Colin Gonsalves, who has challenged the group’s detention and deportation, said India’s “constitutional laws cover protection” of the personal liberty and right to life of non-citizens.

This case is not the first to be reported.

Indian media reported this month that more than 100 Rohingya were “pushed back” across the northeastern border into Bangladesh.

India’s Hindu nationalist government has often described undocumented immigrants as “Muslim infiltrators,” accusing them of posing a security threat.

Yap Lay Sheng, from the campaign group Fortify Rights, said the deportation of the Rohingya group was a “targeted attack against anyone perceived to be Muslim outsiders.”

Ramon, another relative of one of the deported group, said his brother told him he had been verbally abused.

Speaking on condition of anonymity, Ramon said the group was “accused of being involved” in the April 22 attack targeting tourists in Indian-administered Kashmir, in which gunmen killed 26 men. The attack sparked a four-day conflict between India and Pakistan.

“My brother asked me to leave India to avoid being in a situation like his,” said Ramon, who has been in India for more than a decade.

Their mother has been inconsolable since receiving news of her son’s deportation. Ramon struggles with sleepless nights over his brother’s safety.

“They should have deported all of us and thrown us into the sea,” he said. “We would have been at peace knowing we are together.”

BRUSSELS: The EU on Tuesday unveiled plans to make it easier to send asylum seekers to certain third countries, in the latest overhaul aimed at reducing migration to the bloc, sparking criticism from rights groups.
The European Commission said it proposed broadening the so-called “safe third country” concept, which allows member states to “consider an asylum application inadmissible when applicants could receive effective protection” elsewhere.
“EU countries have been under significant migratory pressure for the past decade,” said migration commissioner Magnus Brunner, describing the proposal as “another tool to help member states process asylum claims in a more efficient way.”
Brussels has been under pressure to clamp down on arrivals and facilitate deportations, following a souring of public opinion on migration that has fueled hard-right electoral gains in several member states.
Under current rules, asylum seekers can have their application rejected if they could have filed it in a “safe” third country where they have “a genuine connection.”
This is normally understood to mean a nation where the applicant has lived and worked or has family.
The commission proposal weakens such requirements to include any country that an asylum seeker has transited through on the way to Europe, as long as it is considered safe. This opens the way for failed applicants to be sent there.
The planned reform also says that the safe third country concept can be applied in absence of any connection or transit, if there is a deal between member states and a third “safe nation,” and removes the suspensive effect of appeals.
The change would significantly boost the number of those who could see their applications refused and become eligible for deportation, as many cross numerous borders on their way to Europe.
In April for example, of almost 20,000 people who reached Europe via sea from northern Africa, many came from as far away as Bangladesh, Eritrea, Pakistan and Syria, according to the EU’s border agency.
The proposal needs approval from the European Parliament and member states to become law — but has already triggered fierce criticism.
Sarah Chander, director of the Equinox Initiative for Racial Justice, said the EU was “cynically distorting the concept of ‘safety’ to meet its own repressive ends.”
“It is paving the way for migrants to be removed and deported basically anywhere, putting people in danger,” she said.