Cong. skips question on Omar's tweet on Rohingya crisis

New Delhi [India], September 19 (ANI): Former External Affairs Minister Salman Khurshid refused to give any comment on ex- Jammu and Kashmir chief minister Omar Abdullah's tweet on Rohingyas issue.

Asserting that one who deals with the situation would know better Khurshid said, "When someone speaks of territory or land and people that they are associated with very closely as he is with the people of Jammu and Kashmir and the ground situation of the state. I want to leave the field to them because they know better."

"This threat, at least in J&K, is a post 2014 development. No such intelligence reports ever came up for discussion in Unified HQ meetings" Abdullah tweeted soon after the Centre filed an affidavit in the Supreme Court on deportation of Rohingya Muslims from India and said that the illegal influx of the refugees will adversely affect the fundamental rights of Indian citizens and cause a threat to the national security.

This threat, at least in J&K, is a post 2014 development. No such intelligence reports ever came up for discussion in Unified HQ meetings. https://t.co/xLM0qWQBXL

— Omar Abdullah (@OmarAbdullah) September 18, 2017

The apex court had told the government to submit the affidavit after a plea was filed before it against the deportation of the illegal immigrants to Myanmar.

"In light of what is stated hereinabove, as the subject matter of the petition is not justiciable, as the fundamental rights of Indian citizens would be adversely effected, as there is serious national security threat or concern and when a just and fair procedure prescribed by law exists for deportation," the Centre said, in the affidavit.

It further stated that as evident from Article 19(1) of the Constitution, the right to reside and settle in any part of the territory of India as well as the right to move freely throughout the territory of India - is available only to the citizens of India and no illegal immigrant can file a plea in the apex court demanding the same.

"India, as a sovereign nation, has the first and the foremost Constitutional duty and obligation towards its citizens to ensure that the demographic and social structure of the country is not changed to their detriment due to the influx of illegal immigrants into the territory of India," the affidavit added.

Some Rohingyas are indulging in illegal and anti national activities such as mobilisation of funds through hundi or hawala channels, procurring fake or fabricated Indian identity documents for other Rohingyas and also indulging in human trafficking, the Centre added.

"Illegal influx of Rohingyas, in significant numbers, has started into the territory of India since 2012-13 and the Central Government has contemporaneous from security agencies inputs and other authentic material indicating linkages of some of the unauthorised Rohingya immigrants with Pakistan-based terror organisations and similar organisations operating in other countries," the Centre said.

It further said that there is an organised influx of illegal immigrants from Myanmar through agents and touts facilitating illegal immigrants Rohingyas into India via Benapole-Haridaspur (West Bengal), Hilli (West Bengal) and Sonamora (Tripura), Kolkata and Guwahati.

In its affidavit, the Centre also submitted that many of the Rohingyas figure in the suspected sinister designs of the ISIS and other extremist groups want to achieve their ulterior motives in India including that flaring up communal and sectarian violence in sensitive areas of the country.

"Stating that there are more than 40,000 Rohingyas in India, the Centre said that the illegal immigrants entered India from Myanmar using porous border between India and Myanmar.

Taking note of the Centre's affidavit, the apex court has adjourned the hearing in the matter to October 3.

The plea filed by the two Rohingya immigrants, Mohammad Salimullah and Mohammad Shaqir, who are registered refugees under the United Nations High Commission of Refugees (UNHCR), earlier stated that "this act (deportation) would be in contradiction with the Principle of Non-Refoulement, which has been widely recognized as a principle of Customary International Law". (ANI)