ANALYSING NRC(NATIONAL REGISTER OF CITIZENS)

Indian Polity Citizenship

It is the register containing names of Indian Citizens. It was prepared first in 1951 after the conduct of the Census of 1951.
It is used to identify who is a bona fide Indian citizen and those who fail to enlist in the register will be deemed illegal migrants.

To compile a list of the names of genuine Indian citizens residing in Assam and, in the process, detect foreigners (read Bangladeshis) who may have illegally entered the state after March 24, 1971.

Assam’s demographic changes date back to the introduction of the plantation economy by the colonial state in the 19th century. The colonial state brought in tribal labourers from Chota Nagpur and Bihar to work the plantations and encouraged the migration of Muslim farmers from Bengal.

Migrations continued after Independence even as Partition solidified national identities. The ethnic, cultural and religious dimensions of the situation demanded sensitive and imaginative solutions from the political class.
In 1970s, All Assam Students’ Union spearheaded a massive drive, popularly known as the Assam Agitation calling for the detection, deletion and deportation of illegal Bangladeshi migrants.
In 2013, the Supreme Court finally ordered to complete the exercise by December 31, 2017, leading to the present updating of NRC in Assam.

Over 40 lakh of the 3.29 crore applicants have been excluded from Assam’s draft National Register of Citizens (NRC).

Process of adding person to NRC list is too complex and confusing – riddled with legal inconsistencies and errors.
Instances of arbitrary rejection of the gram panchayat certificates.
Robust non-transparent “family tree verification” process resulted in numerous instances of parents being on the draft list but children being left out. Each person who is left out will now have to prove not only his or her linkages afresh, but also the documents themselves before the appropriate forum.

Faults on part of the Supreme Court

Lack of proper monitoring process
Failed to ensure legal clarity over the manner in which the claims of citizenship could be decided
Failed to understand the implications of the results, and after effects as well as recourse that should be made available for people who have failed to be recognized as citizens of the State
Inability to comprehend the further political and policy actions in case of loss of citizenship

Other than the shock of being “left out”, there is a common thread that binds the ones who have been declared illegal migrants —the lack of any knowledge on what to do next.
Even as the people who have been left out of the list are now required to file their claims and objections for re-evaluation, along with the requisite documents, the message has yet to reach the hinterlands of a state, where people are staring at a future where they are likely to lose their homes and their families.

If in some pockets, the ratio of excluded to included is high, it could well reach a boiling point. At the same time, it will also impact the upcoming Panchayat elections if the ratio of excluded Muslims to Hindus is high. Then this could lead to vast polarisation, which could adversely impact the state, in future

A National Human Rights Commission study in January 2018 stated that even as Assam had six detention centres in jails, in the absence of any formal agreement between India and Bangladesh to deport persons who have been labelled foreigners by the foreigners’ tribunal, “there is no prospect of their eventual freedom from this incarceration. At present, it appears that they may actually be detained for the rest of their lives.”
The United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) has laid down guidelines, set in stone, for detention centres. However, barring the six detention centres spread across Assam, there are no provisions to house those who will eventually be rendered “stateless. “Detention must not be arbitrary, and any decision to detain must be based on an assessment of the individual’s particular circumstances; conditions of detention must be humane and dignified,” the UNHCR states, among a host of other guidelines that govern statelessness, asylum and detention.
The detainees in these centres are not allowed to legally communicate with their family members.
The “situation of grave and extensive human distress and suffering” in two of these detention centres—in Kokrajhar and Goalpara—the Centre has made no alternative arrangements to house or rehabilitate people who are omitted from the final list.

The entire situation has the potential to sow seeds of violence in the state.
Potential Genocide: Genocide Watch—an international organisation that seeks to pre-empt and prevent genocide and mass murder—has already issued an “early warning of potential genocide,” dubbing it as stage 7 alert. The organisation says that, “when Bengali Muslims in Assam are imprisoned in “foreigner” detention centres, the situation will move to Stage Eight: Persecution, the stage immediately preceding full genocide.”
Mass Deportation: The pathway to deportation is lengthy, and shrouded in processes that renders it virtually ineffective. In the absence of a bilateral agreement, it presupposes that the government of Bangladesh will acknowledge the identified persons (alleged foreigners) as Bangladeshi citizens.