The UN Refugee Convention 1951 was crafted to support the refugees legally and morally. Many European states benefitted from the convention after World War II. However, it is a matter of irony that many of these same states are in favour of close borders now, whenever people are seeking refuge as the victims of war, ethnic cleansing, political or communal clashes, etc.
In the current Bangladeshi scenario, even core academic and intramural speeches are not well protected by the constitutional regime.
Last month, a delegation from Myanmar visited the Rohingya camps in Bangladesh to advance the talks in relation to the repatriation of the Rohingyas on a pilot basis. The Myanmar representatives planned to verify documents and repatriate around
Since 2020, the Government of Bangladesh has been relocating the Rohingyas to Bhashan Char. The UN and other agencies initially criticised the relocation process.
The International Court of Justice (ICJ) has recommenced The Gambia v Myanmar case hearing. It has approved the military junta government to represent the case on behalf of Myanmar.
The safe repatriation of the Rohingya peoples has been much talked for a while; but during the pandemic, the relevant stakeholders have lightly taken the efforts to initiate the said repatriation.
Constitutionally it seems Bangladesh accolades unlimited freedom of thought and conscience and it muzzles any sort of pre-censorship on freedom of speech and expression with some reasonable restrictions considering the security of state, communal and religious harmony, decency or morality and public order etc.
Rohingya’s plight surrounding non-recognition is as old as the history of colonialism in South Asia and South East Asia.
The UN Refugee Convention 1951 was crafted to support the refugees legally and morally. Many European states benefitted from the convention after World War II. However, it is a matter of irony that many of these same states are in favour of close borders now, whenever people are seeking refuge as the victims of war, ethnic cleansing, political or communal clashes, etc.
In the current Bangladeshi scenario, even core academic and intramural speeches are not well protected by the constitutional regime.
Last month, a delegation from Myanmar visited the Rohingya camps in Bangladesh to advance the talks in relation to the repatriation of the Rohingyas on a pilot basis. The Myanmar representatives planned to verify documents and repatriate around
Since 2020, the Government of Bangladesh has been relocating the Rohingyas to Bhashan Char. The UN and other agencies initially criticised the relocation process.
The International Court of Justice (ICJ) has recommenced The Gambia v Myanmar case hearing. It has approved the military junta government to represent the case on behalf of Myanmar.
The safe repatriation of the Rohingya peoples has been much talked for a while; but during the pandemic, the relevant stakeholders have lightly taken the efforts to initiate the said repatriation.
Constitutionally it seems Bangladesh accolades unlimited freedom of thought and conscience and it muzzles any sort of pre-censorship on freedom of speech and expression with some reasonable restrictions considering the security of state, communal and religious harmony, decency or morality and public order etc.
Rohingya’s plight surrounding non-recognition is as old as the history of colonialism in South Asia and South East Asia.
Internal relocation alternative is one of the doctrines recently developed to determine refugee or asylum seeker status in a host country. It basically examines whether the asylum seeker has exhausted all his opportunities of relocation in his country of origin during status seeking.
Medical wastes have been the reason of thousands of deaths around the world.
