India’s diaspora is the world’s largest, yet its policy framework faces legal and implementation gaps. This review presents updated data, case law, and strategic recommendations to transform the India diaspora policy into a global success model.
New Delhi (ABC Live): India’s diaspora policy is a cornerstone of the country’s international engagement. With over 35 million people of Indian origin spread across 200+ countries, India has the largest diaspora globally. This expansive community serves as a cultural bridge, an economic contributor, and a diplomatic asset.
However, India’s diaspora engagement policy, despite its evolution, faces structural, legal, and implementation challenges. This review critically analyses the policy through the lens of the government’s 2025 Lok Sabha Committee Report, backed by relevant case law and data.
Introduction: Why the India Diaspora Policy Matters
India’s diaspora—comprising Non-Resident Indians (NRIs), Persons of Indian Origin (PIOs), and Overseas Citizens of India (OCIs)—has evolved from colonial-era migration to becoming one of the most powerful global communities. As of January 2024, the diaspora population stood at 35.42 million, including:
- 15.85 million NRIs
- 19.57 million OCIs and PIOs
This diaspora contributes not just to India’s global image but also to its economy and diplomacy. In 2023–24, India received $118.7 billion in remittances, the highest globally, contributing over 3% to its GDP.
Countries like China, Israel, and Ireland have already institutionalized diaspora engagement into national development. India, however, is still aligning its tools of soft power with a coherent policy framework.
Understanding the Policy: The 4Cs Framework
India’s diaspora policy is structured around the 4Cs framework developed after the 2016 merger of the Ministry of Overseas Indian Affairs with the Ministry of External Affairs (MEA):
| Pillar | Meaning |
|---|---|
| Care | Welfare schemes, legal aid, repatriation support |
| Connect | Cultural and youth programmes like Know India |
| Celebrate | Pravasi Bharatiya Divas and Samman Awards |
| Contribute | Leveraging remittances, expertise, and investments |
While symbolically strong, the framework lacks uniform implementation and measurable outcomes.
India Diaspora Policy: Key Data Analysis
Population Trends
| Category | Number (million) | Share (%) |
|---|---|---|
| NRIs | 15.85 | 44.7% |
| OCIs/PIOs | 19.57 | 55.3% |
| Total | 35.42 | 100% |
Remittances Inflow
| Year | USD (Billion) |
|---|---|
| 2021–22 | 89.1 |
| 2022–23 | 112.5 |
| 2023–24 | 118.7 |
| 2024–25* | 61.4 (H1) |
Estimated to cross $122 billion by year-end.
OCI Card Issuance (2005–2025)
Total OCI cards issued: 5,158,262
| Year | Cards Issued |
|---|---|
| 2023 | 349,382 |
| 2024 | 341,315 |
| 2025 (Q1) | 35,655 |
Indian Prisoners Abroad
As of February 2025, 10,152 Indian nationals were in foreign jails. Top 5 countries:
- Saudi Arabia: 2,633
- UAE: 2,518
- Nepal: 1,317
- Kuwait: 387
- Malaysia: 338
Key Legal Issues and Case Law
Several constitutional and administrative challenges affect diaspora engagement. The following landmark cases clarify the rights of diaspora communities:
Ravi Naik v. Union of India (1994)
Issue: Automatic loss of Indian citizenship upon acquiring foreign nationality.
Impact: Reinforces India’s prohibition on dual citizenship.
Public Interest Foundation v. Union of India (2014)
Issue: Electoral reforms and NRI voting.
Impact: Opened doors for remote voting, but legal changes remain pending.
Suraj Lamp & Industries v. State of Haryana (2012)
Issue: Validity of property transactions via Power of Attorney (PoA).
Impact: Invalidated PoA sales, affecting NRIs buying land through proxies.
Afzal Ullah v. State of UP (1964)
Issue: Citizenship vs. domicile distinction.
Impact: Limits rights of OCIs under constitutional law.
Rohit Dalmia v. Union of India (2013)
Issue: Arbitrary denial of OCI card.
Impact: Upheld procedural fairness and natural justice.
Legal and Institutional Gaps
- Fragmented Definitions: NRI definitions differ across MEA, FEMA, and the Income Tax Act.
- OCI Revocation: No clear appeal process for revocation of OCI cards.
- Voting Rights: No statutory mechanism for remote voting yet.
- Property Laws: OCIs cannot purchase agricultural land—causing confusion.
- Lack of Treaty Enforcement: Prisoner transfer treaties are underutilized.
Global Mobility Agreements
India has signed Migration and Mobility Partnerships (MMPAs) with:
- France, UK, Germany, Italy, Austria, Denmark, Australia And Labour Mobility Agreements (LMAs) with Gulf countries, Israel, Japan, Malaysia, Portugal, Taiwan. However, no evaluation exists to measure the number of diaspora members benefiting from these.
Implementation Strengths
- e-Migrate Portal 2.0 with regional language support
- Indian Community Welfare Fund (ICWF) used for legal aid and repatriation
- Shelter homes in Gulf countries for distressed migrant workers
- Working Group Recommendations implemented (e.g., 50% reservation for women in diaspora scholarships)
Major Challenges
| Challenge | Description |
|---|---|
| Data inconsistency | No single verified diaspora database |
| Legal fragmentation | Conflicting definitions and eligibility rules |
| Low impact of MoUs | Few measurable benefits from MMPAs |
| Language barriers in missions | Limited regional staff in embassies |
| OCI/PIO confusion | 1.5 lakh PIOs yet to convert to OCI |
| NRI voting delay | Legislative reforms still pending |
Recommendations to Improve India Diaspora Policy
- Create a unified diaspora database, linking MEA, Immigration, and Tax data.
- Enact a Diaspora Protection Act to codify OCI rights and appeals.
- Facilitate NRI voting via postal ballots, with Election Commission oversight.
- Expand diaspora investment schemes through tax incentives and green bonds.
- Ensure all missions have regional language officers and legal aid desks.
- Audit and publish the outcomes of all migration MoUs and LMAs annually.
Conclusion
India’s diaspora is not just a cultural legacy—it is a strategic global asset. While the government has made progress in institutionalizing diaspora engagement, gaps remain in data, legal rights, implementation, and evaluation. A shift from symbolism to statutory guarantees and structured benefits will ensure the diaspora remains connected to India’s development journey.
Also, Read
Explained: Why India Lost Majority of Investment Arbitration Cases
