The ongoing Supreme Court (SC) monitored exercise on updating the “National Register of Citizens” (NRC) in Assam has created a political storm.
South Asia has seen many crises over citizenship and it is important for India to ensure that the Assam episode doesn’t become one.
How did the current process commence?
A PIL was filed in the Supreme Court by “Assam Public Works” in 2009 for the removal of “illegal voters” from the electoral rolls of Assam.
Further, the PIL had asked for updating the NRC as required under the Citizenship Act, 1955 for honouring the Assam Accord of 1985.
Notably, the Accord was an outcome of protests by “Assamese students unions” for the removal of illegal migrants who entered Assam after 1971.
Though filed in 2009, the case really picked up steam in 2013 as the Supreme Court directed the Union and State governments to speed up the process.
Significantly, the first NRC was framed in 1951, but its subsequent iterations were recognised to be faulty and the present exercise is to rectify this.
How did the exercise proceed?
A deadline of January 2016 was initially fixed for the draft of the NRC, but due to delays, an extended deadline was given till July 2018.
All 3.3 crore residents of Assam were required to submit documents from a list prescribed by the government to prove that they were Indian citizens.
While the process proved to be complex and fraught with confusion, the draft of the updated NRC was recently released.
The draft list of citizens was published recently, and it leaves out the names of approximately as many as 40 lakh residents of Assam.
While the political leaders have assured that everyone will be given a fair and patient hearing to prove their citizenship, this is unlikely to inspire confidence.
What are the inconsistencies in the current NRC?
It was hoped that the Supreme Court’s monitoring of the process would have ensured fairness and transparency.
But regrettably it has not been so, with “family tree verification” proceeding largely in a secretive and arbitrary manner.
Further, the invalidation of gram panchayat certificates as proof has predominantly affects women who change locations after marriage.
It was only recently that the Supreme Court clarified that the panchayat certificates could be relied upon, provided they are proven in courts.
Many instances of parents being included in the NRC but children being left out have also been reported.
What the important moral issues that arise?
Preparing the NRC swiftly seemed more important than ensuring that there was legal clarity over the manner in which citizenship claims are verified.
Further, the larger question of what to do of the lakhs of people likely to be left out of the final NRC has remained unanswered.
While the immediate consequence is that they will lose their right to vote as demanded by the PIL, the future course of their lives remains grey.
Whether the government would ghettoise those rendered stateless (in line with communal rhetoric) or would it adopt more reconciliatory actions is uncertain.
What is the way ahead?
During the Constituent Assembly debates, the provision relating to citizenship was a challenging one that also generated much international interest.
This was because Indian nationalism during the freedom movement had not attempted to define itself on exclusive racial or ethnic bases.
Seventy years later, India’s approach to citizenship is once again going to be scrutinised by the world, and our constitutional values are at stake.
All state authorities need to be prudent in their actions and ensure that good sense prevails to not commence another humanitarian tragedy.
