As many as 44 former Supreme Court and High Court judges have condemned the “motivated campaign” against Indian Chief Minister Surya Kant over his remarks in the Rohingya migrant case.
“We, the undersigned retired judges, express our strong objection to the motivated campaign against the Hon’ble Chief Justice of India following his remarks in the Rohingya Migrant proceedings, including the open letter dated December 5, 2025,” the letter said.
The statement said that on December 5, some former judges, lawyers and the Campaign for Judicial Accountability and Reforms (CJAR) issued an open letter expressing “deep concern over some unconscionable remarks about Rohingya refugees on December 2” by the apex court, which was hearing a case over the disappearance of Indian Rohingya refugees from custody.
Stressing that “disparagement of the Supreme Court is unacceptable”, the statement said the judicial process should only be subject to fair and reasoned criticism.
“However, what we are witnessing is not a principled disagreement, but an attempt to delegitimize the judiciary by labeling routine courtroom conduct as an act of prejudice.
“The Chief Justice is being challenged for asking the most fundamental legal question: who conferred the status in law that is sought in court? No adjudication of rights or claims can begin unless this line is first resolved,” the statement said.
She said the campaign against the CJI during the proceedings missed the bench’s clear statement that no human being on Indian soil, citizen or foreigner, can be subjected to torture, disappearance or inhuman treatment and that the dignity of every person must be respected.
“To suppress it and then accuse the court of ‘dehumanization’ is a serious distortion of what was actually said,” read the statement signed by more than 40 judges.
It said that the very independence of the courts would be threatened if every “judicial inquiry” about nationality, migration, documentation or border security was charged with hatred or prejudice.
“Therefore, we reaffirm our full confidence in the Supreme Court and the CJI, condemn motivated attempts to twist the court’s remarks and personalize dissent into attacks on individual judges; and support the consideration of a court-monitored SIT in the illegal acquisition of Indian identity and welfare documents by foreign nationals who have entered Bharat in violation of law,” the statement said.
She said the country’s constitutional order required humanity and vigilance.
“In upholding human dignity while protecting national integrity, the judiciary acted in accordance with its oath. It deserves principled support, not vilification,” the statement said.
“Basic facts and legal status” of the Rohingya
The judges went on to state “certain basic facts and legal status” of the Rohingya. They said: “This background only reinforces the need for Indian courts to follow clear legal categories and not slogans or political labels.” The five facts they stated were:
1. The Rohingya did not come to India as refugees under Indian law. They were not admitted through any legal refugee protection framework.
2. India is not a signatory to the 1951 UN Refugee Convention or its 1967 Protocol.
3. There is serious and legitimate concern about how persons who entered India illegally obtained Aadhaar cards, ration cards and other Indian documentation.
4. In these circumstances, it is necessary and appropriate that a Court Monitored Special Investigation Team (SIT) be considered.
5. The Rohingya situation in Myanmar itself is complex and cannot be dismissed. There, too, they have long been treated as illegal migrants originating from Bangladesh, with citizenship challenged or denied.
