Observers argue that the campaign against the Rohingya Muslims could easily morph into an unjust targeting of an entire community
Team Clarion
CHANDIGARH – The Haryana government’s recent move to initiate a wide-scale verification campaign against Rohingya Muslims residing in various districts has sparked a wave of controversy and concern. The state authorities, working with the police and Criminal Investigation Department (CID), are actively involved in identifying and verifying individuals, with a deadline set for January 12 for completion of the process. The decision has raised serious questions, particularly over accusations of targeting vulnerable communities based on religion and ethnicity, with critics decrying it as discriminatory and politically charged.
The state claims that the campaign is being introduced as a security measure, citing concerns over the growing number of Rohingya Muslims, particularly in the Nuh district. Authorities suggest that these numbers pose a security threat to public safety, yet evidence linking the community to criminal or anti-national activities remains scant. Despite the lack of proof, political pressure, especially from Hindu groups like the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS), has intensified, with demands for the expulsion of Rohingya Muslims not just from Haryana but across India.
According to government sources, around 600 to 700 Rohingya Muslim families, comprising about 2,000 individuals, are currently residing in Haryana. The families, who fled violent persecution in Myanmar over a decade ago, were settled in various districts, including Rewari, Mahendragarh, Nuh, and Faridabad. Over time, many have integrated into local communities, and some have even received identification documents such as Aadhaar cards and ration cards.
Despite these integrations, some intelligence agencies have raised an alarm over the potential involvement of Rohingya Muslims in criminal activities. However, no substantial evidence has been presented to support these claims. Critics of the initiative argue that these allegations are vague and unsubstantiated, questioning whether the drive is driven by political motivations, aimed at vilifying Muslims and creating unnecessary divisions in society.
The political backdrop to this campaign shows the powerful influence of the RSS which has been vocal in its calls for the removal of Rohingya Muslims from Haryana. The RSS has been pressuring the state leadership, including former chief minister Manohar Lal Khattar and current Chief Minister Naib Singh Saini, to take stronger action against the Muslim community, presenting them as a threat to national security.
These political dynamics raise concerns about the true motives behind the verification process. Observers argue that the campaign against the Rohingya Muslims could easily morph into an unjust targeting of an entire community, despite the absence of credible evidence to support accusations of criminal behaviour. Human rights groups have warned that the situation risks spiralling into widespread harassment of an already vulnerable population, fuelling sectarian tensions and undermining social harmony.
The verification campaign has deeply concerned local leaders and humanitarian advocates, who argue that it threatens to tear apart the lives of families who have been living peacefully in Haryana for years. “These families have been part of our community for over a decade. Their children go to our schools, and they work alongside us,” said a local community leader in Nuh, who chose to remain anonymous. “Instead of subjecting them to suspicion, they should be offered the support they need to integrate further.”
The emotional toll of this campaign is being acutely felt by the Rohingya Muslims themselves. “We fled Myanmar to escape violence. Now we are facing the same hostility here,” said Abdul Karim, a Rohingya resident of Nuh. “All we want is to live peacefully with our children. Why are we being treated like criminals?”
Amina Begum, another Rohingya woman from the same district, shared her frustration. “We have built our lives here. Our children are in school, and we contribute to the local economy. But now we feel like we are under constant suspicion,” she said, her voice tinged with fear. “This makes us feel unsafe.”
Rohingya Muslims, particularly those who have settled in Haryana, have been quick to defend themselves against accusations of criminality. “We are refugees, not criminals,” said Abdul Karim. “We came to India seeking safety for our children after fleeing the violence in Myanmar. We have not harmed anyone.”
These voices highlight the ethical dilemma that India faces when dealing with refugees and displaced persons. While the government asserts that the verification campaign is necessary for national security, critics argue that the measures unfairly target one community without clear evidence of wrongdoing. Human rights advocates insist that the Rohingya Muslims, who have already endured immense hardship, should not be subjected to additional persecution in India.
The constitutional ramifications of the verification campaign are significant. Legal experts warn that the state’s actions, especially in the absence of concrete evidence, could violate the fundamental rights guaranteed by the Indian Constitution, particularly the right to equality and protection from discrimination. “Any action targeting a specific community must be grounded in transparent data and due process,” said Colin Gonsalves, a prominent Supreme Court lawyer. “Without clear evidence, such actions risk undermining the secular fabric of India and alienating an already vulnerable community.”
The Constitution of India guarantees equal treatment for all citizens, irrespective of religion or ethnicity. Critics argue that the verification campaign could undermine these fundamental principles. “This could lead to a dangerous precedent, where religious and ethnic minorities are unfairly singled out,” said Gonsalves.
The media’s role in shaping public opinion on the issue cannot be overstated. Unfortunately, media coverage of the Rohingya Muslims has been largely negative, focusing on their potential criminality rather than the difficulties they have faced as refugees. Some journalists, however, have called for more responsible reporting, arguing that it is essential to give a voice to the affected communities and present a balanced perspective. “The voices of the Rohingya Muslims must be heard,” said one journalist who has been covering the issue extensively. “This is not just about national security; it’s about human dignity and justice.”
Political leaders in Haryana have, at times, fuelled fears surrounding the Rohingya Muslims, using the issue to consolidate their political base. The inflammatory rhetoric coming from groups like the RSS and VHP has raised concerns about the potential increased communal tensions. Experts argue that political leaders must be more cautious in their statements and actions, ensuring that they do not contribute to the stoking of fear and division in society.
As the verification campaign in Haryana moves forward, it remains to be seen how the state balances national security concerns with the rights and dignity of the Rohingya Muslims. The situation poses a critical test for India’s commitment to its constitutional values of equality, non-discrimination, and secularism. The way the government handles this process will have long-term implications for the treatment of refugees and religious minorities in India.
The Rohingya Muslims, who have already suffered greatly, deserve to be treated with compassion and fairness, not suspicion and fear. If the state fails to uphold the rights of these vulnerable individuals, the verification campaign risks deepening existing divisions in Indian society and eroding the country’s secular identity.
The challenge for the Haryana government is clear: it must ensure that the verification process is conducted transparently, fairly, and in compliance with constitutional safeguards. Only then can the state protect its security without compromising the rights of its citizens, especially its most vulnerable.
