Tag: bangaldesh immigration

CAA Conundrum: Enough Is Enough, Debate the Issues Nationally

Almost three months after the law was passed, protests have not abated and many lives have been lost. The government must provide a healing touch.

Even 70 days after the Citizenship (Amendment) Act (CAA) was passed, and the continuing widespread agitations and protests all over the country leading to many deaths, no end is in sight. The government seems to believe that it alone knows what is in the best interest of the country and agitations are largely due to the disinformation campaign by the opposition parties and disgruntled liberal sections.

On the other, the opposition firmly believes that India’s constitutional values are being compromised and steps taken by the government are patently anti-Muslim and would permanently damage the unity and integrity of the country. The truth lies somewhere in between. Unfortunately, my repeated pleas in the seven articles written on the relevant issues so far urging for a national dialogue and debate have fallen on deaf ears.

In this column, I have highlighted, illustratively, just five issues which need to be debated nationally. There are many others craving for attention.

First, public memory is phenomenally short but it needs to be remembered that the genesis of the National Register of Citizens (NRC) was the Assam Accord signed by Rajiv Gandhi in 1985, which provided for identifying those who came into India after the designated date and deporting them, without realising that deportation of undocumented immigrants would be impossible.

The proposals for NRC and the introduction of a separate national identity card for citizens and non-citizens were mooted in the context of the influx of immigrants, much before the Aadhaar card was launched. Government pronouncements in parliament and outside of 20 million ‘illegal Bangladeshis’ and the Supreme Court decision in Sarbananda Sonowal v. Union of India (2005) accentuated these fears. The Supreme Court had called it an invasion of the country and invoked the constitutional duty of the Centre to take steps to guard the borders.

Also Read: After Saying CAA Is ‘Internal Matter’, Centre Withholds Info on It Citing Foreign Ties

However, it now appears that the context itself has changed radically. Chinmay Tumbe has brought out the findings based on migration data of Census 2011 published in 2019. It shows an altogether different picture. The number of Bangladeshis in India is actually falling, according to the Census. Further, the number of Indian residents born outside the country fell from 6.2 million to 5.3 million between 2001 and 2011, taking the immigration rate down from 0.6% to 0.4%. The immigration rate across India at the district level recorded by the Census 2011 shows that in over 500 of the 640 districts of India in 2011, the immigration rate was under 0.5%. It is seen that except for a few districts along India’s border with Bangladesh, undocumented immigration is likely to be a tiny fraction of the population.

These figures raise serious doubts about the credibility of the Census data. There is obviously gross under-reporting. It is not clear why it took eight years for the census commissioner to release the data on migration. It is not clear if the government has tried to reconcile these figures with its own data on undocumented immigration. Either the census results are wrong or the government data is concocted.  Both cannot be true. But the census figures knock the bottom out of the NRC. This issue, therefore, needs to be thrashed out and the government’s considered opinion must be placed before the country.

File photo of people waiting to check their names on the draft list at the National Register of Citizens (NRC) centre at a village in Nagaon district, Assam in 2018. Photo: REUTERS/Stringer

Second, while over a hundred countries have laid down policies for national identity cards for their citizens and/or residents, several democracies such as Australia, Canada, Denmark, Norway, the UK and the US do not have a national identity card. In India, the Aadhaar card coverage is now universal. In addition, India already has voter ID cards and  PAN cards. Is it necessary to introduce yet another identity card?

Third, various options for dealing with undocumented immigrants need to be spelt out clearly. As opposed to a number of countries in the European Union and the US, options are limited for India. Keeping immigrants in detention centres is out of the question due to their huge numbers. As I have advocated earlier, the only option is to declare them as stateless persons to begin with, and absorbing them as citizens after some time, say, ten years. India has evaded any discussion on this critical issue for the past several decades. It is high time a national policy is evolved and adopted.

Fourth, India has been unable to make up its mind about enacting a law dealing with refugees. India had to accept over ten million refugees from the erstwhile East Pakistan, before the creation of Bangladesh. Many Sri Lankan refugees arrived during the anti-Tamil violence in that country. India treated these refugees most generously and almost all of them have gone back to their countries. But, as an enlightened democracy, India must fall in line with the best international policies and practices and enact a refugee law. Relevant issues and concerns need to be debated nationally.

Also Read: Mumbai Bagh: Police Pull off Tarp Used to Shield Protesters From Sun in Dawn ‘Attack’

Fifth, if after re-examination as above, it is still considered necessary to proceed with the NRC, ways will have to be found to simplify the process for establishing one’s citizenship. It is difficult to agree with Judge Kashikar in Mumbai that election card is sufficient proof of citizenship. Same is true of the Aadhaar card. In Assam, the process became unduly complicated due to the terms of the Assam Accord and the sub-nationalism which runs deep as seen from the recent decision of the state government to identify the native/indigenous Muslims by carrying out a special census. Fortunately, this is not so in most other parts of the country. At the same time, it will also not be proper to take an extreme position, as some states seem to be doing, by suggesting that even the name of the father need not be asked. However, a much more simplified format can be evolved for the NRC. This exercise must not be done behind closed doors by the government. It should be a consultative and open process to increase its acceptability.

India must address these issues objectively, jettisoning narrow interests and political baggage. What is at stake is India’s future as a strong and vibrant democracy. An announcement by the government of bringing out a white paper will provide a healing touch and create a climate for finding a lasting solution.

Madhav Godbole is a former Union home secretary and secretary, justice. His two recent books are: The Babri Masjid-Ram Mandir Dilemma—An Acid Test of India’s Constitution and India’s Governance—An Incisive Commentary On Some Burning Issues.

What Does Demography Reveal About Immigration Into West Bengal?

Data does not support the argument, based on anecdotal evidence, that ‘illegal immigrants’ from Bangladesh are changing West Bengal’s demography.

The national debate for or against National Register of Citizens (NRC) and Citizenship (Amendment) Act (CAA) rages on. From tea stalls to shopping malls, from offices to social network, from primetime television to the protests on the street – the ‘discussion’ is everywhere. At the core of this debate is the fast-held belief that millions of immigrants from neighbouring Bangladesh have illegally entered West Bengal, Assam and Tripura, radically altering the state demographics. A fraction of Indian society passionately believes this is indeed the case and blame the ‘illegal immigrants pampered for vote-bank politics’ for several socio-economic problems of India and these states specifically. Another major set of Indians – the ones who are not so strongly against people of other religions and countries – also believe that substantial immigration has taken place. Although this is a post-truth era dominated by ‘alternative facts’, it is desirable that people from all sides of the political spectrum have a look at hard evidence.

Immigration from Bangladesh in recent years

The layman’s knowledge about ‘millions of illegal immigrants’ is mostly based on anecdotal evidence and hearsay like ‘it is known..’, ‘that vegetable vendor is from…’ and ‘in the border areas…’. Beliefs and opinions, especially when not substantiated by facts, are hard to change. However, an objective way to understand the subject is to do a ‘testing of hypothesis’ i.e. you make a hypothesis and then, based on data collection and analysis, you conclude whether the hypothesis is correct or not.

So, in the case of West Bengal, the hypothesis is: If there has been a massive immigration of Bangladeshis (Muslims/Hindus) into the state in recent decades (and they were allotted ration cards, voter cards), that should skyrocket the state’s population number and substantially deviate its trend from the rest of the country. Do the numbers present in the census and surveys like NFHS agree with this?

If we look at the census data of 1981, 1991, 2001, and 2011 (graph 1 and table 1), the immediate conclusions are: the growth rate of WB’s population has distinctly been less than the national average since the 1990s; this decrease is true not only for the whole population, but also for both Hindu and Muslim communities of over the past 2-3 census (Graph 1).

The decadal growth rates for WB’s Hindus has been 21.1% in (1981-91); 14.2% in (1991-2001); and 10.8 % in (2001-2011). The corresponding values for WB’s Muslims are 36.9% in (1981-91); 25.9% in (1991-2001); and 21.8 % in (2001-2011).

Graph 1 Population growth rates for 1991-2001 and 2001-2011 in India and WB

(Source: 1991, 2001, and 2011 Census; The table on the right showing the numerical values.)

In other words, the two major religious communities of WB are contributing less to the population of India compared to several other states, at least since 1991 for Hindus and since 2001 for Muslims. The state’s growth rate is less than the national average. This punctures the myth that West Bengal is bursting with a much larger-than-expected population because of Bangladeshi immigrants.

WB’s border districts and ‘illegal immigrants’

It could be argued that a closer look into the border-districts of WB will show big changes in Hindu-Muslim demographics, as that is where the immigrants have entered. However, no such trend is visible from the census data of these districts. In concurrence with the lucid explanations by professors Subhanil Chaudhury and Saswata Ghosh, the population numbers clearly show that:

i) the 2001-2011 growth rates of almost all districts of WB has decreased compared to the previous decade (Graph 2),

ii) this holds true for Hindus and Muslims (Graphs 3A, 3B).

iii) there is no consistent trend in the border districts that can be explained by massive immigration.

Graph 2: Population growth rates for 1991-2001 and 2001-2011 in districts of WB

(Source:1991, 2001, and 2011 census; Dinajpur was divided into two separate districts, Uttar and Dakshin, in 1992 and so was Midnapore into East and West in 2002. Hence, i) the data of whole Dinajpur was plotted for both Uttar and Dakshin at 1991-2001, and ii) the data of whole Midnapore was plotted for both East and West at 1991-2001 and 2001-2011.)

Graphs 3: Population growth rates for Hindus (A) and Muslims (B) for 1991-2001 and 2001-2011 in districts of WB

(Source: same as in Graph 2)

The growth rate is higher than the state average in three districts which have a significant border with Bangladesh (North Dinajpur, Malda and Murshidabad). But this is less than the state-average in four other border districts (South Dinajpur, Nadia, Cooch Behar, and North 24 Parganas). Among the ‘inward’ districts, Purulia, Medinipur and Birbhum have higher than average growth rates while Hooghly and Bardhaman have a slower population growth rate.

The striking thing is that the two communities parallel each other: Wherever the rate of growth of Hindus is high, it is high for Muslims; wherever it is less for Hindus, it is less for Muslims (table 2). In other words, there is no high Hindu growth rate, no high Muslim growth rate and no high-along-the-border growth rate. The census – the major data source available for such studies – just does not show any massive immigration into West Bengal.

Table 2:Growth rates of Hindus and Muslims parallel each other in districts of WB.

(Source: based on an article by S. Chaudhury and S. Ghosh, Anandabazar Patrika, Sept 10, 2015; The values were obtained by subtracting the state average of the community from the value for the district. WB state average (2011-2001) for Hindus is 10.81% and for Muslims is 21.81%.)

What drives the steady decrease of population growth rates for WB? 

Briefly, it is increased levels of literacy, especially female literacy and (consequent) women empowerment. These are factors that have been globally recognized as prime drivers that cause a decline in the total fertility rate (TFR, number of children a woman bears) and this state is no exception. The TFR for WB(1.7/1.8 per children per woman) is among the lowest in the country and this applies to both the communities. Graph 4A compares TFR for the state’s Hindus and Muslims with the corresponding scenario from Kerala, one of the leading states in this regard and UP, one of the lagging states.

Furthermore, demographers (Ghosh, 2018; Haq and Patil, 2016) have noted that the gap between Hindu and Muslim fertility rates has reduced by more than one child (or very close to that) for states like WB, Assam and Kerala. In the case of WB, Hindus have reached replacement levels (<= 2.1 children per woman) in 18 out of the 19 districts, while Muslims follow that trend in 12 districts (Graph 4B). Evidently, the fertility rates of Bengal’s two major religious communities are converging – something the policymakers and the people should both be happy about.

Graph 4A: Comparison of Total Fertility Rates (TFR) for Hindus and Muslims

(Source: TFR data from NHFS-4 for India, Kerala, Uttar Pradesh, and WB)

Graph 4B: TFR for Hindus and Muslims in districts of WB

(Source: Ghosh, S. (2018) Ind. J. Human Dev. 12, 37-51)

In this context, it is noteworthy that the 4th National Family Health Survey (NFHS-4, 2015-16) for WB had explained, “The greatest differentials in fertility is by schooling. At current fertility rates, women with no schooling will have 1.2 children more than women with 12 or more years of schooling (a TFR of 2.5, compared with 1.3).”

Truly, the higher the literacy rate of a WB district, the lower its population growth rate, and the higher the percentage of population below poverty line (BPL) the faster its population is growing (graph 6). These data also explain the higher growth rates and TFR of WB’s Muslims compared to the state’s Hindus. Around 80% of WB’s Muslims are among the economically most backward, and around 17% of Muslim families are still illiterate.

Graph 5: Correlation of Literacy (left) or Poverty (right)with Growth rate in WB districts(Source:2011 Census and 2006 Sachar Committee report)

Are the neighbouring regions of Bangladesh overpopulated?

No. Rather, the population growth rates and TFRs of Khulna, Rajsahi and Rangpur – the three Bangladesh divisions flanking WB – are among the lowest in the country (Graph 6). This is also in sync with the well-known fact that Bangladesh has been managing its population growth quite constructively and, in fact, its growth rate is less than India’s. And, in the absence of a bulging population, the reasons for immigration into WB are further reduced.

Map of West Bengal and Bangladesh (source: dmaps)

Graph 6:Population growth rates for 1991-2001 and 2001-2011 in divisions of Bangladesh(Source: BBS; note: Khulna, Rajsahi and Rangpur share border with WB)

What if the undocumented immigrants do not have voter, ration and Aadhaar cards?

That is WhatsApp legend. Neither does any peer-reviewed data indicate that, nor would it make much sense to allow millions to come in for ‘vote bank’ and yet not give them voter cards. In contrast, the 2019 report of the UN Department of Economic and Social Affairs (DESA) pegs immigrants who were born abroad but now resident in India at 5.1 million at present. That is distinctly less than the 6.4 million in 2000 and 7.6 million in 1990. As for migrants from Bangladesh, their number has reduced from 4.37 million in 1990 to 3.1 million in 2019, and obviously, 3 million in 1.2 billion is chump change! The census drop-in report explains, ‘This is due to substantial decline in the number of recent migration and death of earlier migrants due to old age.” Immigration certainly is not India’s (or West Bengal’s) pressing problem. [Please note, these values are not migration happening every year, rather total number of migrant residents].

Does that mean emigration from Bangladesh has stopped? Not really, although a detailed understanding is beyond the scope of this article. However, the recent data does indicate that many more Bangladeshis are moving to other countries than to India. For eg, UN-DESA estimates that, in 2000, there were 1.49 lakh and 97,000 Bangladeshi immigrants in the UK and USA respectively. In 2019, the corresponding numbers have increased to 2.4 lakhs and 2.45 lakhs respectively. In Saudi Arabia, there were around 5 lakh Bangladeshis in 2000; today they are more than 1.2 million. Indians are moving too; at around 17.5 million in 2019, the largest number of international immigrants are from India.

Graph 7:Migrants from neighbouring countries resident in India

(Source: UN)

“Muslims have multiple wives, so they have more children”: Really?

A popular ‘belief’ (the infamous ‘hum paanch, humare pachchis’) is that most Muslim men have 3-4 wives and this increases their number of children. However, a simple recollection of ‘high school’ knowledge should be enough to dispel this myth. Briefly, human populations invariably have a natural gender ratio of 1:1 because of the way human reproduction works. The sex of a human child is determined by the father’s sperm – male if the sperm had a Y chromosome and female if it carried an X chromosome. Spermatogenesis – the physiological process that produces sperms in the testes – produces equal numbers of X and Y sperms, and fertilization is a random process i.e. X and Y sperms have equal chance of fusing with an oocyte. This ensures the 1:1 ratio of men: women in human populations, and makes it impossible for most men of any population to indulge in polygamy. Even if we assume that, in a population of 1000 people (500 men and 500 women), 100 men marry 3 women each, it means there will now be 400 unmarried men but only 200 unmarried women. Thus, some men will not be able to find a wife and will not have any children, thereby averaging out the growth of the entire population. The take-home message is that it is scientifically absurd to imagine that any human population could overgrow in such fantasising ways. Period.

To conclude

It is not doubted that people moved in and out, especially in the aftermath of the colossal tragedy of the partition and the political instability that gripped Bangaldesh later. But, the national and international data just does not reflect enough recent movement that can radically alter the demographics of WB. Rather, the census reflects a success story. Contrary to ‘common knowledge’, India’s population juggernaut has clearly slowed down. Some states like WB have done better in this regard, others have to buck up. But undoubtedly, since 1991, India has slowly but steadily moved towards solving the major problem of unbridled population overgrowth. In a more scientifically-tempered nation, this would be a cause for self-congratulation. This would also be a pedestal to address the existing lacunae and for harnessing the potential of our demographic dividend; the biggest population now is in the age of 15-63 years now i.e. the ‘working age’, availability of jobs would have unleashed a true ‘Indian 21st century’. Instead, a lack of scientific outlook towards facts within our society continues to add to faulty perceptions, bluffs and such bitter estrangement among Indians.

Souvik Bhattacharyya is a molecular microbiologist working on bacterial population dynamics at Texas, USA. Anirban Mitra is a molecular biologist and teacher, based in Kolkata.

In 2019, 999 Bangladeshis Detained for ‘Staying Illegally’ in India: Border Chief

Shafeenul Islam, director-general of the Border Guards Bangladesh, said that 445 Bangladeshi nationals had returned from India over the past two months.

New Delhi: The Bangladesh government has detained and initiated legal proceedings against almost a thousand of its nationals during 2019 for “illegally entering and staying in India”.

Major-General Shafeenul Islam, director-general of the Border Guards Bangladesh (BGB), said at a press conference on Thursday that 445 Bangladeshi nationals had returned from India over the past two months.

“999 Bangladesh nationals, including 135 children, 258 women and 606 men, have been detained in 2019. 312 of them were arrested in November and 133 in December,” Major-General Shafeenul Islam, director-general of the BGB, said in Dhaka.

A week ago, Bangladesh’s foreign policy advisor Gowher Rizvi had declared that the country would take action against its citizens who were found “staying illegally” in India.

The Bangladesh government verified the identities of the people with the help of local representatives and the BGB came to know that they were Bangladeshi nationals. He said, “253 cases were lodged against them for illegal trespass, while initial investigations found that at least three of them were human traffickers.” According to reports, they were later released on bail.

Bangladesh also listed 96 Indians who were staying “illegally” in Bangladesh. Of these, 62 were handed over to the BSF and the rest were detained. Legal proceedings have been initiated against them.

Between December 25 and 30, 2019, the directors-general of India’s Border Security Force (BSF) and the BGB held talks in New Delhi. Islam, during his visit, said that the creation of the NRC is completely an “internal affair” of India and the cooperation between the border guarding forces of the two countries is very good. He said the BGB will continue to work to prevent illegal border crossings as per its mandate.

He said during the five-day talks, the BGB demanded that the BSF take effective steps to prevent killings of Bangladeshis on frontiers as casualty figures sharply rose in 2019. “The number of border killings in 2019 was highest in the last four years. As per our calculation, the number of such unexpected deaths was 35,” the BGB chief said.

Also Read: Home Ministry Set to Miss Deadline for Fencing India-Bangladesh Border

However, the BSF estimate of the casualty figure is much lower than our calculation, Islam said.

Islam said the BSF is following a policy of maintaining maximum restraint and minimal use of force even after being attacked by “armed border offenders”.

A statement issued by the BSF last month in New Delhi after the conclusion of the DG-level talks said, “On the concern of the BGB regarding the death of Bangladeshi nationals on borders, it was informed to them that a non-lethal weapon policy is strictly followed by BSF personnel on borders.

“Firing is resorted to only in self-defence, when BSF patrols are gheraoed and attacked by a dah (a sharp-edged weapon) etc. It was specified that the BSF does not discriminate between criminals based on nationality,” it said.

(With PTI inputs)

Judiciary ‘Complicit in Perpetuating Exclusion, Abuse’: Amnesty Report on NRC

The report on the NRC stated that the process carried out by the Foreigners Tribunals has been riddled with grave biases, prejudices and arbitrary decision-making processes. 

Mumbai: In a detailed report on the ongoing process of compiling a National Register of Citizens in Assam, the International human rights organisation Amnesty International India has criticised the judicial system of the country for being “complicit in perpetuating exclusion and abuse” and violating human rights in the state.

The report, which, in detail, studies 16 cases of persons who were arbitrarily deprived of their citizenship by the Foreigners Tribunals has stated that the process carried out by the tribunal has been riddled with grave biases, prejudices and arbitrary decision-making processes.

The report extensively delves into some of the key judgements passed by the Supreme Court of India and the Gauhati high court and has critically commented on the courts’ orders for “entrenching discriminatory practices on ground and emboldening the Foreigners Tribunal to function in total disregard for fair trial standards”.

The report focusses on the 2005 judgement of the Supreme Court of India issued in the case of Sarbananda Sonowal v. Union of India, which Amnesty says was responsible for changing the face of citizenship determination in India. In this petition, the apex court had focussed on the aspect of “external aggression” and the report says in the absence of any guidance given by the constituent assembly debates and previous case laws, the court interpreted the term ‘aggression’ broadly, drawing interpretations from US, UK and international law.

It argued that the word ‘aggression’ would include “invasion of unarmed men in totally unmanageable proportion if it were to not only impair the economic and political well-being of the receiving victim State but to threaten its very existence.”

The court had relied on the 1931 report of C.S. Mulan, a census officer and the 1998 report of the former governor of Assam, which claimed that irregular immigration was the primary cause for problems like insurgency and ethnic strife in Assam, sloppily linking irregular migration with external aggression.

Also read: The SC Is Exceeding Its Brief as the Apex Judicial Organ in the NRC Case

“For all practical purposes, it equated migration with ‘external aggression’, and ruled that it has resulted in the constitutional breakdown in the state, setting a grossly wrong precedent,” the report points out, further adding that the judgement was violative of domestic laws and international human rights of thousands set to lose their citizenship in the state.

Supreme Court of India. Photo: Reuters

A similar analysis was done of the Gauhati high court’s order in the 2013 case of State of Assam v. Moslem Mondal & Ors where the judges had restricted the scope of judicial appeal.

“The right to appeal is an essential element of a fair trial, aiming to ensure that a decision resulting from prejudicial errors of law or fact, or breaches of the accused’s rights, does not become final. Specifically, restricting nationality decisions to the exclusive competence of the executive, raises due process concerns as this leaves people more vulnerable to an abusive application of law,” Amnesty concluded in the recently released report.

Foreign Tribunal: its independence and competence

The Gauhati high court, in May 2005, had upon approval by the government of Assam and the Ministry of Home Affairs, issued a notification calling for the recruitment of 47 members for the Foreigners Tribunal.

The government of Assam had restricted the criteria to serving or retired district judges or additional district judges and advocates aged 45 years or above with over 10 years of legal practice. Knowledge of Assam, Assamese and issues related to foreigners were key yardsticks. While the judges appointed as members were given a non-restricted tenure until they turned 65, the tenure of the lawyers appointed as members was limited to two years, extendable on the basis of ‘need and performance’.

The report highlighted how these recruitments were done without taking competency and adequacy into consideration. Speaking to Amnesty International India, Sanjay Hegde, senior Supreme Court lawyer said, “If the conditions for hiring the Foreigner Tribunal members were applied for example to the Debt Recovery Tribunal, people would have yelled that injustice was being done to them. Clearly, we seem to place a lesser premium on human citizenship than on human debt.”

Also read: In the Idea of an ‘All India NRC’, Echoes of Reich Citizenship Law

The report, through 16 case studies, elaborates on the several levels of discrimination that have been faced by those excluded from the registry. The tribunal’ process discriminates on the basis of gender, religion, individuals disability, and economic stability.

The organisation, on the basis of its findings, has asked that India immediately sign and ratify the 1954 Convention relating to the status of stateless persons and the 1961 Convention on the Reduction of Statelessness.

Amnesty International India has sought for “restoration of citizenship to people where it can be shown that the deprivation of citizenship was done through arbitrary-decision making and constituted a human rights violation”.

In another recommendation, the organisation has asked for a reversal of the burden of proof on the state, particularly in cases where the person suspected of being a foreigner does not hold any other nationality and stands the risk of becoming stateless.

Another report, similar findings

Another fact-finding exercise, undertaken by the members of ‘Women against Sexual Violence and State repression’ or WSS, suggests that even minor discrepancies in names cost many a place on the list. “Several people testified to the struggle of Hindu officials to get their names right while filling forms for voter IDs, panchayat certificates and the rest. Sometimes an additional suffix related to social identity like a ‘Munshi’ randomly added by an official decades ago became the price for exclusion,” the finding states.

Among women, the report says, “Although, it is common practice for women who would sign off as Khatun to become Begum once they are married, this customary change in name caused many rejections.”

Also read: On the NRC, Even the Supreme Court is Helpless

The preliminary findings, compiled by members of the fact finding team – Nisha Biswas, Ajita, Swapna, Maheen Mirza, Bondita, Seema, Nikita Agarwal, Sohini and Shreya K – has also looked at the deep trauma, indebtedness, loss of lives and trust suffered by those who have fallen of the grid.

“The process has had a deeply damaging impact on the people of Assam leading to many physical, mental and psychosomatic illnesses. The fear of being detained in camps, deported to unknown lands, separated from friends and family, and attacked for being branded as foreigners have come to define everyday life for many in Assam,” the finding states.

Why BJP and Amit Shah Are Pushing For Another Round of NRC in Assam

For those following the party’s reaction to the recently updated NRC in the state, the announcement does not come as a surprise.

New Delhi: When Union home minister Amit Shah declared that the National Register of Citizens (NRC) exercise would be conducted across the country, he issued another significant statement. Assam, where the updated NRC was released on August 31, will also have another round of the exercise.

This is despite the fact that the protracted exercise cost Rs 1,600 crore of taxpayer money to be completed in the northeastern border state.

Although there is no formal communication, news reports quoted Assam finance minister Himanta Biswa Sarma as saying that the Assam government has asked the Centre to reject the recently updated NRC. Shah’s remarks on the floor of the parliament must then be read as the Narendra Modi government’s approval to Assam’s request.

Also read: Rajya Sabha: Amit Shah Announces Govt’s Intention to Conduct a Pan-India NRC

How does one read these developments?

Legally speaking, it is not clear if the Centre has the power to conduct another round of NRC in Assam. On August 13, then-Chief Justice of India Ranjan Gogoi categorically stated that the update of the NRC in the state would depend on the decision of a constitution bench, to which at least 13 questions have been set aside by the apex court.

The court had said:

“We make it clear that subject to orders as may be passed by the Constitution Bench in Writ Petition (C) No.562 of 2012 and Writ Petition (C) No.311 of 2015, National Register of Citizens (NRC) will be updated.” 

Among the questions that the larger bench will have to decide is the validity of March 24, 1971 as the exclusive cut-off date in Assam for citizenship. If that bench, still unconstituted, passes an order for or against Section 6A of the Citizenship Act, exclusive to Assam, the apex court has stated that the present NRC will be updated.

From a judicial standpoint, it appears the Centre cannot bypass that order.

A view of the Supreme Court. Photo: PTI/Ravi Choudhary

Not a bombshell

Then, should one read Shah’s announcement from a political viewpoint?

I would say yes. For those following the BJP’s reaction – both in Assam and at the national level – to the updated NRC, Shah’s declaration in the Rajya Sabha on November 20 will not come as a bombshell. In fact, Sarma, BJP’s go-to man in the northeast, endorsed Shah’s statement on Twitter, vindicating the latest stand taken by the state BJP on the updated NRC.

The real reason behind the party’s rejection of the updated NRC likely has a lot to do with the Hindu Bengali community, a large number of whom were excluded. The Sarbananda Sonowal government has failed to offer any relief to the community, which has been a vote bank for the BJP in both the Brahmaputra and Barak valleys of the state. A large chunk has been loyal to the BJP since the 1990s. It was their support that propelled the party into the Assam assembly in 1991.

The majority Assamese community traditionally had an indifferent attitude towards the BJP. Though top leaders of the saffron party like Atal Bihari Vajpayee were deeply involved in the negotiations between the anti-foreigner agitation leaders and New Delhi in the early 1980s, the Assamese people rejected the BJP and instead voted for the AGP in the 1985 elections. Most BJP candidates lost their deposits in that election. Assamese voters also rejected iconic musician Bhupen Hazarika when he contested the elections from Guwahati on a BJP ticket.

Shiladitya Dev. Credit: Facebook/Shiladitya Dev

Even before the updated NRC was released, BJP’s Hindu Bengali legislators like Shiladitya Deb from Hojai were vocal about the possible exclusion of a large number of people from the community. He was concerned that Hindu Bengali voters in various assembly constituencies where the BJP had won in 2016, including his own, would be excluded in the final draft. Deb told the local media repeatedly that they would most likely be excluded from the final NRC too. But the state BJP skirted the issue then, claiming that it was Deb’s personal comment.

Majoritarian politics

The party did so simply because of its need to align with majoritarian politics. A large number of Assamese and other tribes in the plains had faith that the Supreme Court would deliver a ‘correct’ (xuddha) NRC.

The BJP couldn’t put its weight behind Deb’s stand then, lest it be perceived as a party backing only Hindu Bengalis. In the eyes of the Assamese, ‘illegal Bangladeshis’, irrespective of religion, had to be identified and deported. Naturally, the Assamese community reacted sharply to Deb’s pronouncements.

It was not lost on the BJP that after years of toil, it had finally gotten a foothold in the Assamese heartland. In the 2016 assembly polls, it won a large number of seats in the Brahmaputra valley. The party couldn’t risk toppling the applecart.

When the final NRC was released on August 31, the number of those excluded dropped to nearly 20 lakh. This was less than half of the more than 40 lakh who were excluded in the final draft, released in July 2018.

Many pro-NRC civil society groups like the All Assam Students Union (AASU), Assam Public Works, Prabajan Virodhi Manch began expressing doubts on the accuracy of the NRC update process. Most demanded a re-check in districts with large Bengali speaking population or people of East Bengal origin. The opinion that many must have slipped into the document with ‘fake documents’ began to be bandied about by these groups.

Also read: Why Is No One In Assam Happy With the Final NRC?

BJP sees an opportunity

Hindu Bengali groups in the state claimed that most of those who had been excluded from the final NRC belonged to their community. This was a view echoed by Nepali organisations, another community which votes heavily in favour of the BJP in the state. These developments helped fortify the narrative that only the Muslims of East Bengal origin “benefitted” from the NRC process.

It gave the BJP the leeway that it needed to reject the updated NRC. No wonder then, Sarma in a response to his tweet on November 21, said, “Many names have been wrongly included too”.

Attempts were also made to malign NRC state coordinator Prateek Hajela. The party’s state unit insinuated that Hajela “facilitated” the inclusion of ‘illegal Bangladeshis’ (read Muslims) in the final document.

Curiously, the Supreme Court, on October 18, relieved him of his NRC duty and transferred him out of the state, citing ‘threat perceptions’. Sources close to Hajela told this correspondent that he himself sought to be transferred to his home state of Madhya Pradesh. On November 10, Hitesh Dev Sharma was named as Hajela’s replacement, but news reports said he hadn’t joined yet.

Former Assam NRC coordinator Prateek Hajela. Photo: PTI

Buying time

And, herein lies the finer point behind the Assam government’s rejection of the NRC and how it will help push further the party’s political game in the state. One clear advantage is that it will give the state government the ability to buy time, which it desperately needs.

Those who have been left out of the final NRC – Hindus and Muslims – are for all practical purposes, suspected foreigners. The rules dictate that within 120 days of receiving the rejection slip from the authorities, those excluded are to approach the Foreigners’ Tribunal to appeal and decide their citizenship status. The period was extended from 60 days to 120 days by Amit Shah, just before the final NRC was published.

Also read: Nationwide NRC: Here’s a List of Documents You May Have to Furnish if Assam is the Model

Reports suggest that the authorities are yet to issue rejection slips. But the government can only stall that for so long. Once the slips are issued, the tribunal process will soon begin, again for both Hindus and Muslims.

By rejecting the updated NRC, the state government and the BJP want to help avoid those Hindu Bengalis who have been excluded going through the tribunal process.

In September, Nepali organisations had declared that members of the community who have been excluded from the final NRC wouldn’t approach the tribunals. They cited various India-Nepal treaties and a 2018 executive order from the Ministry of Home Affairs recommending their exemption from the tribunals as relief. A Gauhati high court order in favour of the community prevents the state border police from declaring them as D or doubtful voters.

Activists of the Hindu Yuba-Chattra Parishad burn copies of NRC claiming that a large number of Bengali Hindus were left out. Photo: PTI

The Citizenship Amendment Bill

However, there is no such cushion for Hindu Bengalis who have been excluded from the final NRC. The only straw they have been holding on to is the amendment promised by the BJP to the Citizenship Act to provide relief to Hindus from Bangladesh.

The Assam government’s rejection of the NRC has meant a delay in starting the tribunal process. This will give the Modi government time to try and pass the Citizenship (Amendment) Bill in the ongoing parliament session.

Also read: Watch | After Assam, What Could Be the Implications of A Pan-India NRC?

It is crucial for the Hindu Bengalis to avoid going through the tribunal process. This is because, if the Amendment Bill is passed after they approach the tribunals, granting them relieft may not be smooth. The same lot of people, having applied for inclusion in the NRC on the ground that they had settled in the state before Bangladesh was created, will then have to officially state that they came to Assam due to religious persecution in that country.

That would also raise another question: Were the documents they supplied to the NRC authorities ‘fake’?

It is within these paradigms that Shah’s political message, sent from the floor of parliament to the Hindu Bengalis of Assam, must be placed. Though, only time can tell whether he will be able to smooth-land those Hindu Bengalis, currently excluded from the NRC, from the realm of ‘suspected foreigners’ to Indian citizens.

Shah’s statement may also serve a second purpose. It is possible for the BJP to shape the narrative – held by many among the majority Assamese voters and peddled by Sarma on Twitter – that “many names have been wrongly included too” in its favour.

Why Is BJP Changing Tack on NRC in Assam?

After calling all those excluded from the final draft ‘infiltrators’, the party has now begun expressing concern for ‘genuine citizens’ who have been left out.

Guwahati: With just days to go before the final National Register of Citizens (NRC) is published in Assam, the ruling BJP has changed tack.

In July 2018, the party’s national president Amit Shah called all the 40,07,007 applicants left out of the final draft NRC ‘ghuspetia’ (infiltrators) in July 2018. But on August 27, the party’s state unit president, Ranjit Dass, reportedly expressed “unhappiness” and “concern” over the updating of the NRC at a presser this past August 27, just days before the process comes to an official close.

Dass was flanked by BJP state general secretary Phanindranath Sarma and the president and vice president of the BJP minority morcha Muktar Hussain Khan and Toufik Rahman. Shiladitya Deb, a party MLA who has been particularly vocal for a long while about people from his community – Bengali Hindus – being left out of the final draft NRC, was by Dass’s side at the press conference.

Dass told reporters, “We don’t believe that the NRC is going to be an error-free document”. He contended that “names of genuine Indian citizens” would be left out of when it will be published on August 31. This was a significant development because Dass and other top BJP leaders in Assam had previously insisted that Deb’s opposition to the NRC update process was at “an individual level”.

Political observers, opposition leaders and prominent civil society groups in Assam opine that the clear paradigm shift in the ruling party’s stand – from taking credit for the NRC as a mechanism to sieve out “infiltrators” to running it down for excluding “genuine citizens” – is a strategic move.

Amit Shah had called all those excluded from the NRC as ‘infiltrators’. Photo: Reuters

BJP’s Bengali Hindu voter base

Ajit Bhuyan, a Guwahati-based journalist and political commentator, said, “A section of the national and international press has been running a one-sided campaign that those who would be left stateless by the NRC would only be Muslims. But those with ground knowledge are aware that a large number of Hindus are also likely to be left out of the final NRC. There is a strong likelihood that most of them will be Bengali Hindus, who have been voting for the ruling party.”

Bhuyan’s assessment of the BJP’s considerable base among the Bengali Hindus of the state is not far from the truth. Though the party supported Assam’s anti-foreigner agitation, most BJP candidates lost their electoral deposits in the 1985 assembly polls. The party’s maiden entry into the Assam assembly in 1991 banked on the Hindu Bengali voter base. The support was also because of the BJP/RSS’s established stand that Bengali Hindus migrating from East Pakistan/Bangladesh are “refugees” and only the Muslims are “infiltrators”.

The party’s 2016 win in Assam also marked a significant development because it signified a breakthrough in the Assamese heartland, the Brahmaputra Valley. This was possible through clever use of the slogan to protect the community’s jati, mati, bheti (home, hearth and identity) from “illegal Bangladeshis”.

Also Read: ‘More Hindus Forged Documents Than Muslims to Find Way Into NRC’

Congress leader and Nagaon MP Pradyut Bordoloi, when asked about the possible reasons behind the BJP’s sudden change of tack, agreed that it could be concerned about the Bengali Hindu voter base. “The BJP has been polarising the NRC update process on the basis of religion. However, after the final draft was published, they realised that a large chunk of their supposed vote bank, mainly Bengali Hindus, was also excluded. They were initially subdued about it and tried their best to delay the process by creating hurdles,” he said.

He continued, “In the run-up to the general elections, the party tried to bring the Citizenship (Amendment) Bill (to give relief to the affected people from the Hindu Bengali community). But it couldn’t get it passed by parliament. However, it did send out a message of reassurance to voters in West Bengal, Assam and Tripura that, ‘rest assured, we will take care of it’.”

Bordoloi said the BJP reaped the electoral benefit of this move. “Then we saw Assam’s advocate general, as the state government’s representative, and the solicitor general, as the Centre’s representative, seeking sample re-verification at the Supreme Court to delay the process. But the honourable court refused to entertain it.”

Nagaon MP Pradyut Bordoloi. Photo: Facebook

“Genuine citizens’ being left out”

A top state BJP source who refused to be named said that the party is “questioning” the NRC based on its ground reports that “several of our voters don’t have documents even if they are genuine citizens”. “In some cases, even old documents were rejected by the NRC officers, which was injustice, particularly when we are hearing from the ground that legacy codes were misused by some members of minority (Muslim) community,” the source claimed. “Our party state president also raised these points in the August 27 press meet.”

He added, “But we will do everything to redress such injustice. We will not allow the exclusion of any genuine citizens, be it Hindu, Muslim or Christian. All our party workers have been instructed to help such people get legal aid.”

Aside from the state government announcing on August 27 that it would provide free legal aid through the district legal services authorities to “needy” people (who earn less than Rs 3 lakh per year), Dass also reiterated it.

The Congress too has activated its legal cell to help those left out of the final NRC. Bordoloi defended his party’s move, “There is every likelihood that many genuine citizens would be left out of the final NRC due to technical reasons. Many from religious minority communities, Muslims and Hindus, may be left out for even an anomaly in their names in different electoral rolls or documents.”

He said it is the duty of a responsible political party, be it the BJP or Congress, to help them. “It can be a traumatic experience for those left out for such reasons; it is a human tragedy, so we want to provide support.” He also said, “The BJP is providing legal aid for sectarian interest, but Congress will reach out to all.”

District-wise data released

Several senior reporters and political observers that The Wire spoke to in Guwahati said the clear shift in the BJP’s strategy on NRC could first be gauged from the state minister Chandra Mohan Patowary’s statement in the assembly on August 1. Patowary, the minister for implementation of Assam Accord, disclosed on the floor of the house district-wise break-up of the final draft NRC. This was kept secret by the registrar general of India’s office until then and was only shared in a sealed envelope with the Supreme Court by the NRC coordinator Prateek Hajela.

Also Read: US Panel on Religious Freedom ‘Concerned’ over Potential Abuse of Assam NRC

To seemingly discredit the NRC update process, Patowary tried evoking an old contention among many in the state – that the districts bordering Bangladesh, which are Muslim-majority, hoard “illegal immigrants” and demanded 20% sample re-verification in those areas.

In the August 27 press meet, Dass also accused NRC coordinator Hajela of “carrying out the revision work based on his own opinion and those of two to three organisations, after the SC asked chief minister Sarbananda Sonowal not to interfere in the process.” Though Dass didn’t name the “two to three organisations”, the general contention in the state is that he meant the All Assam Students Union (AASU).

People wait to have their names checked on the Assam NRC final draft. Photo: Reuters

Two days later, at a press meet in Guwahati, the AASU reacted, “Political parties seek to protect their vote banks involving both Hindus and Muslims and these criticisms are just a ploy to confuse people.”

“Amit Shah, who is also BJP national president, and chief minister Sonowal had earlier hailed the publication of the draft NRC but suddenly they started criticising the process,” AASU advisor Samujjal Bhattacharjee told reporters.

Aside from AASU, Akhil Gogoi of the Krishak Mukti Sangram Samiti and Upamanyu Hazarika of the Prabajan Virodhi Manch also accused the BJP of playing vote bank politics by trying to “discredit” the NRC before it is published.

Bordoloi added, “Now, the latest strategy is to question the credibility of the NRC coordinator Hajela, pass the blame to him.” By doing this, he claimed, “The BJP is only trying to pre-empt any backlash from its vote bank post-August 31.”

Bhuyan asked, “Hajela is just a court-appointed officer, why blame him? He is following court orders. Earlier, the Congress called him a BJP/RSS man, and now the BJP accusing him of being biased.” He added, “The final NRC is yet to be published. I ask the BJP, how did you know that so many genuine citizens will be out? Let’s wait for August 31. I agree that people have suffered, there is a lot of harassment, but it is also across communities. Not fair to say only one community has suffered.”

Three-pronged strategy

Interestingly, Sonowal, on August 15, called the final NRC a “historic document”. A senior Guwahati-based journalist associated with a prominent Assamese newspaper told this correspondent, “I see the BJP embarking on a three-pronged strategy on the issue. One, the party’s state leadership is sending a message to its voter base, mainly Bengali Hindus and Hindi speaking communities, that we are concerned about you; secondly, the chief minister, often termed Jatiyo Nayak (hero of the community) by the Assamese, is reaching out to the majority Assamese community by calling it a ‘historic document’. He said this a day or two after meeting Amit Shah in New Delhi. This is to try and keep the party’s Assamese voter base intact and lay claim over the NRC. Sonowal also said that a law would be brought to protect genuine citizens. So, he too sent a message to the non-Assamese voter base of the party, that ‘we are working towards a solution’. Thirdly, the Centre, by extending the period of appeal from 60 to 120 days, seems to be buying time to bring some sort of legal relief to the people.”

Asam chief minister Sarbananda Sonowal called the final NRC a ‘historic document’. Photo: PTI

He said, “I think when Parliament meets in early December, the BJP will try to introduce the Bill and get it passed or try bringing an ordinance to this effect. But it looks like the decision will be taken only after seeing how much damage has the final NRC caused to its voter base in Assam.”

Bhuyan, fresh from a meeting of Asom Nagarik Samaj (Citizens community of Assam) in Guwahati on the NRC issue on August 29, added, “I have stated this in today’s meeting. The BJP’s rejection of the NRC even before it was published is only a design to keep its Hindu Bangladeshi base intact. It is a conspiracy. There is a legal process in place for all those left out of the final NRC, which many others will also go through. What is the harm of everyone availing it, Hindus and Muslims? The Assam Accord doesn’t differentiate anyone based on religion.”

He said, “It is also an attempt to create confusion among the Assamese community and ensure that there is no social acceptance of the NRC by stating that a large number of foreigners (seemingly meaning Muslims) are included in it.”

Bengali Hindu leaders express concern

Shantanu Mukherjee of the All Assam Bengali Hindu Association (AABHA) told The Wire, “We are closely watching the scenario. Let’s see what happens on August 31. Though the national media has been covering stories only about Muslims affected by the NRC update process, we are equally affected. Even our people with pacemakers have been kept in detention centres. We are sure that lakhs of people who voted for the BJP will be excluded on August 31; one of the most affected communities will be Bengali Hindus, aside from some Assamese and tribals.”

Also Read: In the Idea of an ‘All India NRC’, Echoes of Reich Citizenship Law

Amrit Lal from the Sara Asam Bengali Jatiya Parishad added, “The Bengali Hindu community in Assam is feeling dejected at the moment. They have been supporting the BJP and Narendra Modi. One of the most disappointed lot are those who came from Bangladesh post-1971 due to anti-Hindu riots in that country and banked on the BJP for relief. Not many such people are in Assam because of the 1971 citizenship cut-off date, but a few thousands are. They were hoping to get relief from the party they supported. Now they are told, go through the legal process of the Foreigners’ Tribunals. They don’t know what is awaiting them.”

Some Bengali Hindu leaders from the Barak Valley that this correspondent spoke to also pointed out that Modi, during his 2014 general election campaign, said at a rally that he would close down all the detention centres of the state. “People voted for the party. Instead, ten more are going to be made under his government,” one such leader said.

Mukherjee added, “We also demand that the conditions put in the earlier Citizenship Bill about proving cases of religious persecution in Bangladesh to be eligible for Indian citizenship be removed. How can they prove it? Were they supposed to look for safety first or go collecting proof of persecution?”

The Bengali Hindu leader, however, said, he didn’t support foreigners settling on Assam’s soil. “Assam is a small state, can’t take so much burden. The Centre has full majority. Why can’t it settle such people in different states?” The AASU has also been of the same view since the agitation days about those who might have entered the state after March 24, 1971.

On September 5, the AABHA will stage a dharna at New Delhi’s Jantar Mantar demanding justice for the affected people. “We are getting an overwhelming response to it already. People not just from Assam but other states will join us that day,” Mukherjee said.

Lal, from the Sara Asam Bengali Jatiya Parishad, added, “Politics aside, the biggest issue due to the NRC is at the social level; the delicate relationship between the Assamese and Bengali Hindus has come under threat. The opposition to the Citizenship Bill led to some unfortunate incidents. Over the last few decades, people from the two communities have developed good relations, have inter-married, mainly in the Brahmaputra Valley, where there are more Bengali Hindus than in the state’s Barak Valley. Now, the question is, how much can we allow that to be affected due to the NRC?”

In PIL Against Citizenship Bill, Assamese Intellectuals Say It Violates Constitution

The legislation threatens India’s plural polity as citizenship is determined on the basis of religion, the petition says.

Guwahati: A Public Interest Litigation (PIL) filed in the Supreme Court by leading Assamese intellectuals argues that the Union home ministry notifications for granting citizenship to a section of refugees and migrants from the neighbouring countries contravenes not only some articles but the very “basic structure” of the Constitution.

The 85-page petition, submitted by the Hiren Gohain-led Nagarikatwa Aain Songsudhan Birodhi Mancha (Forum Against Citizenship Act Amendment Bill) makes a case for the declaration of the three notifications by the ministry as “illegal and invalid, being, ultra-vires the Constitution of India.”

In 2015, the ministry issued two notifications – Foreigners (Amendment) Order, 2015 and the Passport (Entry into India) Amendment Rules, 2015 – exempting six non-Muslim communities from Afghanistan, Bangladesh and Pakistan from the application of Foreigners Act, 1946. The rules would apply to refugees who were compelled to seek shelter in India due to religious persecution or fear of religious persecution and who entered the country before December 31, 2014.

Again in 2016, the ministry issued an order to register the refugees as citizens or for grant of certificates of naturalisation under the Citizenship Act, 1955 residing in some districts in Chhattisgarh, Gujarat, Madhya Pradesh, Maharashtra, Rajasthan and Uttar Pradesh and Union territory of Delhi.

Also Read: Manipuri Filmmaker Aribam Syam Sharma Returns Padma Shri to Protest Citizenship Bill

On January 14, the Supreme Court decided to adjourn the hearing of the PIL on the plea that the Bill was pending in the Rajya Sabha after it was passed in the Lok Sabha. Chief Justice Ranjan Gogoi was quoted by the media as saying that the best option was to keep it pending till parliament decides on the matter.

The petition gives a chronology of all important events in Assam beginning from the Treaty of Yandaboo in 1826 which ended the Ahom rule, to the current developments while also discussing the social, economic and political consequences of illegal migration in the state. It has listed the ministries of home affairs, external affairs and the government of Assam as respondents in the case.

Against the ‘basic structure’ of Constitution

The concept of “basic structure” of the Constitution was propounded by the Supreme Court for the first time in the historic Kesavananda Bharti Versus State of Kerala in 1973 case and reiterated it in S.R. Bommai vs Union of India case in 1994.

According to the doctrine, the Constitution has certain features that cannot be tampered with or destroyed through amendment by parliament which includes supremacy of the Constitution, democratic and republican form of government, secular and federal character of the Constitution and separation of powers between the legislature, judiciary and the executive.

“Therefore, any legislation that fails the test of the ‘basic structure’ is unconstitutional,” the PIL said, adding, “The impugned legislations threaten the foundation of India’s plural polity, where every citizen, regardless of his religious identity, is equal to every other in his enjoyment of the rights the Constitution confers on him.”

Hiren Gohain. Credit: YouTube

Hiren Gohain. Credit: YouTube

Citizenship Act can be amended only by parliament

The PIL also terms the notifications “illegal” since it is only parliament that can make a law on acquisition and termination of citizenship as enshrined in Article 11 of the Constitution. Therefore, the definition of ‘illegal migrant’ as defined in the Citizenship Act, 1955 cannot be overridden by an executive fiat.

The fallout, the PIL points out, has been the dilution of the meaning of “illegal migrant” as defined in the Act which is a clear case of ‘conflict between a substantive legislation and a subordinate legislation’. “In this view of the matter the impugned legislation being ultra-vires, the Act is not sustainable in law and hence deserves to be set aside and quashed.”

The PIL says never before has religion been taken as a ground for distinguishing between citizens and non-citizens in the country. The notifications have introduced religion as a “new principle” into the citizenship law, which can be branded as ‘communally motivated humanitarianism’.

Notifications violate Assam Accord and NRC

The signatories, including senior journalist Manjit Mahanta and former Assam police chief Hare Krishna Deka, contended that the notifications violated the Assam Accord, which treated all refugees and migrants who entered the state after March 1971 as ‘illegal immigrants’ irrespective of their religion. It said that the amendments not only defeat the purpose of the Accord, but open the “floodgates” to undocumented immigration to Assam.

Also Read: Is Assam Mirroring the ‘Idea of India’ on the Citizenship Amendment Bill?

And, therefore, the new laws would also adversely impact the update of the National Register of Citizens (NRC), an exercise to identify Indian citizens residing in the state. The exercise, which is also being monitored by the Supreme Court, is expected to be completed in June. The PIL is of the unequivocal opinion that the process would be derailed since a large section of undocumented migrants who would be left out of the register would be able to acquire citizenship on account of the new citizenship laws.

The petition underscored that the notifications have hindered the process of identifying undocumented migrants in Assam, a long process involving the border police, foreigners’ tribunals and the Election Commission. It mentioned that in some cases, the courts have acquitted migrants even after submission of evidence against them by the prosecution.

Rajeev Bhattacharyya is a senior journalist in Guwahati.