c. II. III. IV. V. VI. All refugees should be consulted individually and not pressurised into agreeing to return to Myanmar. Any repatriation effort must be supervised by UNHCR, the UN Refugee Agency, with additional oversight from the OHCHR. All returning refugee, internally displaced and non-displaced Rohingya should be guaranteed their right to self-identify, their right to nationality and their right to documentation under international law. All Rohingya should be guaranteed equal treatment under the law and the right to nondiscrimination, including in relation to their enjoyment of basic human rights and freedoms which are entrenched in international law. Myanmar should ensure full humanitarian access as well as reconstruction and rehabilitation of affected areas, under the oversight and monitoring of the UN. Community rehabilitation and integration should be prioritised, including through identifying and prosecuting hate speech and through desegregation. The rights of the (formerly stateless) Urdu Speaking Community 17. As of recent recording, Bangladesh is home to approximately 300,000 members33 of the Urdu Speaking Community, popularly known as “Biharis”, who fled to then East Pakistan (now Bangladesh) at the time of partition of the sub-continent in 1947. From 1971 until 2008, Urdu speakers, many of whom had sided with Pakistan in the Liberation War and had registered to be “repatriated” to Pakistan after 1971, were not recognised as falling under the terms of Bangladeshi citizenship legislation and were thus stateless.34 18. The 2008 decision of Md. Sadaqat Khan and others v. Chief Election Commissioner35 reaffirmed that all members of the Urdu-speaking community were nationals of Bangladesh and directed the Election Commission to enrol all members of the community in the electoral rolls and accordingly, to provide them with National Identity Cards without any further delay. The High Court also noted that: “[The] [q]uestion of citizenship of Urdu-speaking has got another aspect, which is very important from the constitutional perspective. Miseries and sufferings of such people due to statelessness were time to time reported in the national media, electronic and print. Besides, the reasons mentioned in the letter of the Election Commission, they are constantly denied the constitutional rights to job, education, accommodation, health and a decent life like other citizens of the country. By keeping the question of citizenship unresolved on wrong assumption over the decades, this nation has not gained anything rather was deprived of the contribution they could have made in the nation building. The sooner the Urdu-speaking people are brought to the mainstream of the nation is the better.”36 19. Despite their situation thus being ‘resolved’ by this decision, the Urdu speaking community continues to face challenges in the present day. 20. The members of this community still predominantly live in ‘refugee camps’ where they were placed postindependence. In 2006, an estimated 151,000 stateless persons from the Urdu speaking community lived 33 Anam Zakaria, ‘We’ll never be home here’: Bangladesh’s Urdu speakers still dream of being resettled in Pakistan, 14 August 2017, available at https://scroll.in/article/846758/well-never-have-a-true-home-here-urdu-speaking-community-in-bangladesh-stilldreams-of-pakistan 34 UN High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR), Note on the Nationality Status of the Urdu-speaking Community in Bangladesh, 17 December 2009, available at: http://www.refworld.org/docid/4b2b90c32.html [accessed 5 October 2017] 35 Md. Sadaqat Khan (Fakku) and Others v. Chief Election Commissioner, Bangladesh Election Commission, Writ Petition No. 10129 of 2007, Bangladesh: Supreme Court, 18 May 2008, available at: http://www.refworld.org/cases,BAN_SC,4a7c0c352.html 36 Ibid, at 8. 6