Indonesia's Rejection of Rohingya: Navigating Legal and Humanitarian Challenges

In the waning days of this year, tensions surrounding the Rohingya issue in Indonesia have escalated, with approximately 1,600 Rohingya individuals entering Aceh's waters from the Cox Bazar refugee camp in Bangladesh. These Rohingya, victims of human trafficking facilitated by 'brokers,' have embarked on perilous journeys from Bangladesh to Indonesia on overcrowded vessels carrying 100 to 200 people. While their entry into Indonesia without official permission could be viewed as a violation of the nation's sovereignty, which allows Indonesia to deny them entry and residence in Aceh, the situation is more complex than a mere legal consideration.

Aceh's residents, having experienced the bitter aftermath of Rohingya arrivals in 2009, reject the presence of Rohingya on the grounds of social tensions that arose over time. Despite initially receiving assistance based on humanitarian grounds, social frictions increased as Rohingya individuals reportedly failed to respect local norms, engaging in theft and other disruptive behaviors. The initial goodwill extended by local people in Aceh turned into a burden, leading to a reluctance to accept the Rohingya presence.

At the national level, Indonesia lacked a legal framework to address foreign refugees like the Rohingya until the enactment of Presidential Regulation No. 125 in 2016. This regulation explicitly designates the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) and the International Organization for Migration (IOM) as the primary entities responsible for the Rohingya refugee crisis.

Humanitarian spirit alone is insufficient to tackle the Rohingya issue in Indonesia. It's crucial to note that accepting Rohingya as refugees requires coordination between the central and local governments to provide housing and essential facilities like sanitation and food. On the flip side, the slow resettlement process or placement in third countries results in a much larger influx of refugees entering Indonesia compared to those leaving.

Currently, the potential for clashes and forceful eviction of Rohingya refugees by local residents looms large if decisive action by the Indonesian government is not taken soon. Local residents in Aceh are urging Rohingya refugees to return to their boats and leave Indonesian territory. Meanwhile, UNHCR Indonesia engages in negotiations to relocate Rohingya to more accepting locations, but negative narratives about their behavior may limit the number of willing host areas.

Rejecting Foreign Refugees: No Violation of International Law

Furthermore, Mahfud MD, the Minister of Law and Human Rights, consistently asserts Indonesia's stance of not accepting Rohingya refugees, arguing that it does not violate international law. This refusal is based on several considerations. First, Indonesia did not sign the 1951 Refugee Convention, which binds nations to accept and provide basic human rights to refugees. Therefore, Rohingya cannot be officially classified as 'refugees' in Indonesia, and they are not entitled to the rights outlined in the convention.

Second, Mahfud MD initially expressed a desire to repatriate Rohingya refugees to their home country, Myanmar, potentially violating the non-refoulement principle entrenched in international customary law. Non-refoulement prohibits countries from returning individuals to their home countries where they face potential threats and persecution. However, Indonesia has the right to reject the entry of undocumented immigrants based on each country's prerogative.

Under the sovereignty principle, Indonesia has the right to implement a "push back policy," similar to what Thailand and Malaysia have done, to refuse the arrival of Rohingya in its territory. While this may seem harsh, legally, Indonesia has the right and capability to expel foreign entities, including Rohingya, entering its waters.

Without decisive actions and stringent regulations, Indonesia risks a situation similar to Bangladesh's, where economic burdens and social conflicts between foreign refugees and locals may escalate into anarchy. Unlike countries bound by the 1951 Convention, such as Turkey, Indonesia is not legally obligated to accommodate foreign refugees.

In light of this, several solutions need to be emphasized. First, temporary accommodations for Rohingya refugees should be found, with UNHCR and IOM taking primary responsibility. Indonesia must prevent further boats from entering its waters to stem the influx of Rohingya. Third, repatriation of Rohingya to camps in Bangladesh should be considered, as it does not violate non-refoulement principles or other international laws.

The Indonesian government must take decisive steps to prevent the entry of more foreign refugees. Existing Rohingya refugees in Indonesia need swift resettlement efforts or placement in third countries. While Indonesia must be firm regarding the entry of foreign refugees, humanitarian efforts must also be considered due to the precarious situation faced by these refugees.

Addressing the root cause of the Rohingya issue requires attention to Myanmar's government, which has not recognized Rohingya as part of its population since 1982. The solution lies in Myanmar acknowledging Rohingya, but this is a complex issue involving national security, history, and sovereignty. De facto, Myanmar has the right to exclude Rohingya through legal means within its sovereign jurisdiction, a prerogative nations possess.

As Indonesia grapples with these challenges, balancing legal considerations with humanitari