The State Cabinet’s decision to recommend the release of all seven convicts in the former Prime Minister Rajiv Gandhi assassination case has raised questions about what would happen to the four Sri Lankan convicts, as and when they walk out of prisons. The four—Murugan (Nalini’s husband), Santhan, Robert Payas and Jayakumar—had entered India without a passport and visa.
Experts familiar with the case say that the possibilities of “local assimilation” and “third country resettlement” exist in respect of the four in the event of Governor Banwarilal Purohit accepting the recommendation of the Cabinet to set them free.
Besides, there is the possibility of the Centre sending back the four to Sri Lanka, the country of origin.
High-profile nature
However, one more view that also prevails among a section of experts is that in case the convicts do not prefer to return to Sri Lanka, they cannot be given the status of refugees, considering their criminal track record. Two of the convicts—Robert Payas and Jayakumar—registered themselves in September 1990 as refugees when they landed in India.
Regardless of the scenarios, it is the Central government that will decide the fate of these convicts, given their high-profile nature, asserted E.M. Sudarsana Natchiappan, former Union Minister of State and senior advocate in the Supreme Court with specialisation in international law. Ordinarily, persons who have stayed in a foreign country for long do get an opportunity to pursue their own course of action. But this principle may not work in the given case, felt Mr. Natchiappan.
‘Non-camp refugees’
An official source, who is familiar with the Sri Lankan system of immigration, said that if the convicts are returned to the neighbouring country, they will have no problem in leading their lives as normal citizens of the island nation provided there are no cases pending against them there. If they do not have any valid documents, one-time passports will be issued by the Sri Lankan High Commission in India to enable their return.
A senior official in the State government also said that the chances of the four persons getting even the status of non-camp refugees appear to be remote. Even though the authorities have stopped according the status of refugees, camp or non-camp, on any person coming from Sri Lanka since January 2013, they do not normally deport any illegal migrant from the island nation and this practice does not operate in respect of people from other countries.
If any Sri Lankan national is allowed to remain here as a non-camp refugee, he or she has to register himself or herself with the local Foreigners’ Registration Regional Office (FRRO), which is normally the office of the district Superintendent of Police, the official said, adding that in the last five years, no camp refugee had been allowed.
K.M. Parivelan, Associate Professor, School of Law, Rights and Constitutional Governance, Tata Institute of Social Sciences, Mumbai, asserted that as long as the Central government does not regard the four persons as a threat to the national security or as people who would cause disharmony, it has to go by the customary international law of “non-refoulement,” despite India not being a signatory to the 1951 Refugee Convention, which deals with the concept. The principle of “non-refoulement,” as spelt out in Article 33 of the Convention, broadly pertains to restrictions on countries to expel or return a refugee to the frontiers of territories where his or her life or freedom would be threatened on account of race, religion, nationality, membership of a particular social group or political opinion, Dr. Parivelan added.
But V. Suryanarayan, former Director, Centre for South and Southeast Asian Studies, University of Madras, is clear that in view of their antecedents, the convicts cannot be treated like refugees. He also felt that in view of the changed circumstances in Sri Lanka, they have no reason to say ‘no’ to any move to send them back, even though it remains to be seen whether they would like to go.
Meanwhile, the State government on Monday sent detailed proposals on the Cabinet recommendation to the Governor. The Cabinet resolution was submitted to the Governor on Sunday evening itself, sources said.
