Indias Position on Refugee Law: Should India Adopt a Formal Refugee Law Framework?

Abstract

India has a long history of hosting refugees from Tibet, Bangladesh, Sri Lanka, Afghanistan, Myanmar, and other neighbouring regions, yet it remains outside the 1951 Refugee Convention and the 1967 Protocol and lacks a dedicated domestic refugee law. Instead, refugee protection is governed through general immigration laws and discretionary executive policies, resulting in inconsistent treatment of different refugee groups. This paper examines the evolution of international refugee law, India's historical experience with refugee protection, and the structural deficiencies of its existing legal framework. It analyses India's obligations under international human rights law, the constitutional protection of life and personal liberty, and judicial responses to refugee issues despite the absence of specific legislation. The study also explores the reasons behind India's refusal to accede to the Refugee Convention, including concerns relating to national security, sovereignty, demographic pressures, and regional geopolitics. By comparing India's approach with regional refugee frameworks in Africa and Latin America, the paper argues that the current ad hoc system creates legal uncertainty, unequal treatment, and inadequate procedural safeguards for refugees and asylum seekers. It concludes that India should enact a comprehensive domestic refugee law that incorporates internationally recognised principles such as refugee status determination, non-refoulement, and minimum standards of protection while remaining tailored to India's constitutional values and security concerns. Such legislation would provide greater legal certainty, improve administrative consistency, and balance humanitarian obligations with legitimate state interests.