Far-reaching SC verdict

Context: Much has been written about the recent judgement of
the Supreme Court, which accepted March 25, 1971, as the cutoff year for
deciding Indian citizenship under the Citizenship Act of 1955 in Assam. This
order has pleased neither the current government nor the indigenous population,
both of which sought a uniform cutoff date throughout the country regarding
Indian citizenship under the Act of 1955. The Accord is an administrative
agreement, and its sanctity is contingent upon the government’s decision to
honour it. It is not legally binding on the Centre to implement the Accord in
letter and spirit. This explains the delay in following up on the Accord’s
provisions, such as the implementation of Clause 6.

National Register
of Citizens (NRC)

·      
Need for
NRC: The need for the NRC in India
has been a subject of significant debate and contention due to concerns about
illegal migration and citizenship verification.

·      
NRC in
Assam: The NRC in Assam has its
roots in the complex history of large-scale migration to the state from
Bangladesh (formerly East Pakistan) occurred after the independence, causing
tensions and concerns about Assam's demographic and cultural identity.

Aim- It aims to
identify genuine citizens residing in Assam as of March 24, 1971, and to
address immigration concerns.

Background- Undocumented migration: Over the years, Assam witnessed undocumented
migration, estimated at around six million out of its 26 million population,
causing socio-political complexities. Assam agitation and AASU: In 1978, the
All-Assam Students Union (AASU) started a movement demanding the detection and
deportation of illegal immigrants, leading to the historic Assam Agitation. Assam
Accord (1985): The Assam Accord was signed between Prime Minister Rajiv Gandhi
and Assam Movement leaders, promising to identify illegal immigrants who
arrived after March 24, 1971. ULFA: Formed in 1979, the United Liberation Front
of Assam (ULFA) emerged, initially targeting Bangladeshi immigrants but later
changing its stance when its members sought refuge in Bangladesh.

·      
Challenges
Associated with NRC: Exclusion
of genuine citizens- Numerous genuine citizens were excluded due to the
Assam NRC due to document-related discrepancies or lack of proper paperwork.

Potential for discrimination- Critics of the NRC argue that it is discriminatory
and can be used to target specific groups, particularly religious minorities.

Cost and delays- The NRC process demands significant resources in terms of technology,
manpower, and administrative infrastructure for verification, compilation, and
maintenance of records.

Lack of proper documentation- The possibility of corruption and fraud in the data
collection and verification process cannot be ignored.

Marginalised section- Many people from the marginalised and poor section do not have legal
and valid documents yet, which can render them stateless.

No clarity over the fate of excluded people- Neither the state nor the Centre has specified what
happens to those who lose their cases in the Foreigners' Tribunals, including
whether they will be detained, deported, or allowed to remain in the country
without the rights and privileges of citizenship.

Key points

·      
Overview: The cutoff year of March 25, 1971, which could have
been pushed back to 1951, thereby increases the number of illegal migrants over
and above those identified in the NRC updating process.

·      
Issues with
judgement: The government would have
liked the cutoff year to be set as 1951, as this would have prevented any
perception of Assam being singled out as the only State to accept a later year.

Secondly, the order makes it binding on the government
to deport post-1971 infiltrators from Assam.

Thirdly, the government might also be in a fix over
the CAA cutoff date set in 2014, as indigenous groups may press for
nullification of this Act and request that 1971 be recognized as the cutoff
year for granting citizenship to Hindu refugees fleeing religious persecution
from neighbouring countries.

A fourth concern for the government is dealing with
the approximately one crore legal Muslim migrant in Assam, who will now
constitute one-third of Assam’s population, posing a constant risk of
overrunning the Hindu demographic in the State, considering the higher birth
rates among Muslim migrants.

·      
Conclusion: The pronouncement of the judgement has taken away the
shield that allowed both State and Central governments to delay making
difficult decisions. Implementing the Assam Accord can no longer be postponed
on the pretext of waiting for the outcome of the cutoff year petitions pending
in the Supreme Court.