
India intensifies expulsion of suspected foreigners to Bangladesh
GUWAHATI, India, June 10 (Reuters) - India has started to push people it considers illegal immigrants into neighbouring Bangladesh, but human rights activists say authorities are arbitrarily throwing people out of the country.
Since May, the northeastern Indian state of Assam has "pushed back" 303 people into Bangladesh out of 30,000 declared as foreigners by various tribunals over the years, a top official said this week.
Such people in Assam are typically long-term residents with families and land in the state, which is home to tens of thousands of families tracing their roots to Muslim-majority Bangladesh.
Activists say many of them and their families are often wrongly classified as foreigners in mainly Hindu India and are too poor to challenge tribunal judgements in higher courts.
Some activists, who did not want to be named for fear of reprisal, said only Muslims had been targeted in the expulsion drive. An Assam government spokesperson did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
Assam, which has a 260 km (160 mile) border with Bangladesh, started sending back people last month who had been declared as foreigners by its Foreigners Tribunals. Such a move is politically popular in Assam, where Bengali language speakers with possible roots in Bangladesh compete for jobs and resources with local Assamese speakers.
"There is pressure from the Supreme Court to act on the expulsion of foreigners," Assam Chief Minister Himanta Biswa Sarma told the state assembly on Monday. "We have pushed back 303 people. These pushbacks will be intensified. We have to be more active and proactive to save the state."
He was referring to the Supreme Court asking Assam in February why it had not moved on deporting, opens new tab declared foreigners.
Bangladesh's foreign affairs adviser, Touhid Hossain, did not immediately reply to an email seeking comment. Last week, he told reporters that people were being sent to his country from India and that the government was in touch with New Delhi over it.
Aman Wadud, an Assam-based lawyer who routinely fights citizenship cases and is now a member of the main opposition Congress party, said the government was "arbitrarily throwing people out of the country".
"There is a lot of panic on the ground - more than ever before," he said.
Sarma said no genuine Indian citizens will be expelled. But he added that up to four of the people deported were brought back to India because appeals challenging their non-Indian status were being heard in court.
One of them was Khairul Islam, a 51-year-old former government school teacher who was declared a foreigner by a tribunal in 2016. He spent two years in an Assam detention centre and was released on bail in August 2020.
He said police picked him up on May 23 from his home and took him to a detention centre, from where he and 31 others were rounded up by Indian border guards and loaded into a van, blindfolded and hands tied.
"Then, 14 of us were put onto another truck. We were taken to a spot along the border and pushed into Bangladesh," he said. "It was terrifying. I've never experienced anything like it. It was late at night. There was a straight road, and we all started walking along it."
Islam said residents of a Bangladeshi village then called the Border Guard Bangladesh, who then pushed the group of 14 into the "no man's land between the two countries".
"All day we stood there in the open field under the harsh sun," he said.
Later, the group was taken to a Bangladesh guards camp while Islam's wife told police in Assam that as his case was still pending in court, he should be brought back.
"After a few days, I was suddenly handed back to Indian police," he said. "That's how I made my way back home. I have no idea what happened to the others who were with me, or where they are."
It is not only Assam that is acting against people deemed to be living illegally in the country.
Police in the western city of Ahmedabad said they have identified more than 250 people "confirmed to be Bangladeshi immigrants living illegally here".
"The process to deport them is in progress," said senior police officer Ajit Rajian.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Telegraph
4 hours ago
- Telegraph
Lord Hermer handed biggest increase in spending review
Lord Hermer has emerged as one of the big winners from Rachel Reeves's spending review. The budget for the Government's law officers will soar by 5.3 per cent between 2025-26 and 2028-29, at a time when many of his colleagues are facing real-terms cuts. It comes despite the Home Office facing a cut of 1.4 per cent over the same period, putting plans to increase the number of police on the streets at risk. The Attorney General has attracted huge controversy since he was unexpectedly appointed to the post after Labour's election victory last July. During his time as a barrister, he defended Abid Naseer, the Islamist terrorist who plotted an attack on a Manchester shopping centre, and Gerry Adams, the former Sinn Fein leader. The peer was recently forced to apologise after seeming to compare those who want to leave the European Convention on Human Rights with Nazis. He has also angered Cabinet colleagues by taking a long time to sign off legislation to show it complies with human rights and other laws. As Attorney General for England and Wales, Lord Hermer advises the Government on the way its legislation is framed. He also has other powers, such as being able to increase the length of a prison sentence he believes is 'unduly lenient'. The Telegraph reported earlier this week that Lord Hermer declined to review at least three sentences given to a rapist, a paedophile and a terrorist sympathiser. All three had received shorter sentences than Lucy Connolly, who had been jailed for 31 months for a tweet about last year's Southport attacks. But the peer was happy to sign off on her prosecution, even though he had the constitutional power to prevent it. He did not have any say over her sentence. Although Lord Hermer's budget has increased, the actual amount given to the law officers' department is much smaller than some of the larger departments. It is believed some of the rise is down to the fact that the Government has decided to bring more legal work in house rather than outsourcing it to external consultants. Although the number of lawyers will increase, the department is expected to save money on consultants in the long term.


BreakingNews.ie
5 hours ago
- BreakingNews.ie
Genocide Convention not considered by Central Bank when approving Israel Bonds
The Central Bank of Ireland does not consider the Genocide Convention when approving prospectuses for Israel bonds, the bank's governor has said. However, Gabriel Makhlouf said the intensity of the conflict in Gaza does put 'a question mark over whether the financial viability' of Israel remains secure. Advertisement The Central Bank is the designated authority in relation to the sale of Israel Bonds in the EU, and has determined the securities meet the standards of the bloc's prospectus regulations. Israel Bonds have been advertised as supporting the country's economy, and more recently, websites promoting the securities emphasise their role in supporting Israel's military operations in Gaza. Protesters and opposition parties have called for legislation that would give Ireland the power to refuse the sale of Israeli 'war bonds' over human rights concerns. They say the bonds are intended to fund the war in Gaza, while Ireland has an obligation under the Genocide Convention to use all means likely to have a deterrent effect on those suspected of preparing genocide. Advertisement Demonstrators rallied outside Leinster House on Wednesday as the head of the bank appeared before the Finance Committee, before a Dáil vote calling on the Government to take action to prevent the approval of the bonds. Mr Makhlouf said the Central Bank must carry out the statutory tasks and functions it has been assigned. He said it was 'incorrect' to say the bank could refuse to approve the Israeli bond prospectus on the basis of international law rulings and opinions. 'The Central Bank cannot impose sanctions on Israel, for example by refusing to approve the Israeli bond prospectus, in circumstances where the EU has not imposed any such sanctions itself.' Advertisement Asked by Sinn Féin finance spokesman Pearse Doherty if the Central Bank subscribes to the Genocide Convention, the governor said the authority has to operate within the legal framework allocated to it, but added that the Genocide Convention does not feature in the EU prospectus regulation. Pressed on whether it applied to the bank overall, Mr Makhlouf said 'it applies to the state' and added that, with regard to approving prospectuses: 'In that sense no, it doesn't.' Under similar questioning from Social Democrats' deputy leader Cian O'Callaghan, deputy governor Mary-Elizabeth McMunn said: 'Ireland is the contracting party under the Genocide Convention. It does not explicitly say the Central Bank is a contracting party under the Genocide Convention.' Asked if he believed what was happening in Gaza was genocide, Mr Makhlouf said that was a legal concept determined by the ICJ and no one at the Central Bank could comment authoritatively as experts on that matter. Advertisement He added: 'But what's clear is that what is happening in Gaza is appalling, horrific.' The governor said everyone at the Central Bank wants to see 'an immediate end to hostilities by all parties'. The Israel Bond prospectus is up for renewal in September. Asked by Labour finance spokesman Ged Nash what factors the bank would be looking for in engagements with Israel at that point, Mr Makhlouf replied: 'I think the intensity of the conflict in in Gaza probably does put a question mark over whether the financial viability of the state still remains secure. Advertisement 'The fact that the European Union has indicated that it's going to look at its co-operation agreement of Israel, I think that's a factor. The fact that the [Israeli] finance minister has just been sanctioned by a number of countries, that may be a factor.' He said it would be up to Israel to assess whether these factors affect its financial standing when putting together the prospectus, but added that the bank would be required to approve the next prospectus if all matters are completely disclosed. Meanwhile, Mr Makhlouf said national restrictive measures could be imposed by the Oireachtas to stop the approval of the prospectuses, if they were consistent with EU law. However, he said he would find it 'difficult' to say that it is 'possible' to do that in this case, because one member state acting on its own would undermine the whole prospectus regulation. He said he had not taken legal advice on this and added that he was 'not ruling out' the possibility. 'Prospectus regulation doesn't just apply to states, it applies to corporates, it applies to anybody who wants to issue a regulation in certain circumstances. 'So what I'm not ruling out is the possibility that some domestic legislation could prevent an individual corporate being able to issue security in certain circumstances, but this is real hypothetical stuff.' Mr Doherty asked if the Central Bank would deem the ICJ findings a 'risk' for an investor who wishes to purchase Israel Bonds. Mr Makhlouf said the case taken by South Africa against Israel was included in the September prospectus that was approved by the bank. Gerry Cross, the bank's director of capital markets and funds, added that it was the authority's belief that it was articulated and disclosed to the level that is required. Mr Cross later told the committee that the Bank had made approximately 13,300 euro in fees through its work relating to the bonds since October 2023.


The Independent
6 hours ago
- The Independent
Curbing free speech at WC a ‘betrayal of the spirit of football' – fans' chief
Any attempt to curb fans' rights to free speech by the Trump administration at next year's World Cup finals will be 'a betrayal of the spirit of football', a fans' group chief has warned. The United States is co-hosting the 2026 tournament alongside Canada and Mexico, with FIFA's Club World Cup starting in the US on Saturday. Policies adopted by the US government under the presidency of Donald Trump have raised concerns among human rights group, particularly around immigration and the right to peacefully protest. A travel ban for citizens of 12 countries – including World Cup qualifiers Iran – came into effect earlier this week, while the federal government's response to civil unrest sparked by immigration raids in Los Angeles has also drawn criticism from human rights groups and California governor Gavin Newsom. The Rose Bowl in Pasadena, a city in Los Angeles County, will host six matches in the Club World Cup starting from Sunday, and the SoFi Stadium in Inglewood, also in Los Angeles County, will host eight matches at next summer's World Cup. The Sport and Rights Alliance is concerned at what it sees as 'escalating crackdowns' on freedom of expression by the US government, particularly protests related to Palestine. Ronan Evain, the executive director of Football Supporters Europe, said: 'Fans travel to the World Cup to celebrate and express their passion and any attempt to curtail our fundamental rights, including the right to free speech, is a betrayal of the spirit of football. 'We're particularly concerned about the potential for selective enforcement and discrimination against fans based on our perceived political views or national origin. ' FIFA must obtain the necessary guarantees to ensure fans from all over the world are able to safely travel and attend the games.' The US government has said the travel ban will not affect players or support staff of any qualified nations, but it will make it impossible for fans to travel from Iran to watch the team. Minky Worden, director of global initiatives at Human Rights Watch, said: 'FIFA should publicly acknowledge the threat US immigration and other anti-human rights policies pose to the tournament's integrity and use its leverage with the US government to ensure that the rights of all qualified teams, support staff, media and fans are respected as they seek to enter the United States, regardless of nationality, gender identity, religion or opinion.' FIFA and the US State Department have been contacted for comment.