[So, the roll-out gets launched. But, not with drum-beatings. Almost stealthily. To emerge as the monster that it is, in slow approaching steps.
The draft list, in Assam, has left out jst 4 million. (Ref.: < https://in.reuters.com/article/nrc-assam-national-register-citizens/india-leaves-four-million-off-assam-citizens-list-triggers-fear-idINKBN1KL0CE >.) Are we taking note??? *The new Foreigners (Tribunals) Amendment Order 2019, dated May 30, allows all states to constitute their own FTs, earlier unique to Assam, to address the question of citizenship of a person. The amendment empowers district magistrates in all states and union territories to set up FTs to detect foreigners....Unlike regular courts of crime, where a person is presumed innocent until proven guilty, and the onus is on the prosecution to prove the guilt of the accused, in an FT hearing, the burden of proof lies on the person whose citizenship is under question....Sub-clause 17 of the new paragraph 3A in the Order is of particular interest here. It reads: “Subject to the provision of this Order, the Tribunal shall have the power to regulate its own procedure for disposal of the cases expeditiously in a time bound manner.”The new clause assumes significance given the propensity of the FTs to decide cases ex parte (in the absence of the proceedee). The FTs are now granted power to regulate its own procedure for the disposal of cases. They are given a carte blanche (to operate as they please) of unlimited or unspecified powers. [Emphasis added.]* (Excerpted from sl. no. I. below.) “ *I have served for 30 years in the Army. I have been posted in Madhya Pradesh, Maharashtra, Rajasthan, Delhi, Punjab, Jammu and Kashmir, Andhra Pradesh, Assam and Manipur. I have defended my country standing bravely at the border. I love my country. I am an Indian and I am sure justice will be done in my case,” he said.Sanaullah (52), retired as a subedar with the Corps of Electronics and Mechanical Engineers (EME) in August 2017. He had joined the Army on May 21, 1987, and in 2014, was awarded the President’s Certificate for his promotion to the rank of a “Junior Commissioned Officer in the Regular Army in the Rank of Naib Subedar”.After his retirement, Sanaullah joined the Border wing of Assam Police as a sub-inspector in Kamrup (Rural) district after clearing the qualification tests.However, after investigating him as a suspected illegal foreigner in 2008-09, the Border wing lodged a “reference” case against him at a Foreigners’ Tribunal (FT). On May 23, Sanaullah lost the case. Six days later, he was taken to the detention centre in Goalpara district....“My heart broke during my interactions with fellow detainees — most of them have never been to school and are very poor. Some of them have spent eight-nine years in detention. One person from Nalbari district, around 65 years old, has spent over nine years. Most of them were telling me how they had been declared as ‘foreigners’ due to errors in the spelling of their names and discrepancies in age in certain documents,” says Sanaullah.“The families of many of these detainees do not have the funds to contest the FT order in high court. Some of the families have stopped visiting because even travelling from a far off district to the centre in Goalpara requires money. I met some young men, in the age group of 18-30, who have been declared ‘foreigners’ but there is no question on the Indian citizenship of their parents and siblings,” he says.* (Excerpted from sl. no. III. below.) *On June 8, upon the orders of the Gauhati High Court, Mohammad Sanaullah was released on bail from a detention camp in Assam. He had been detained on May 29, after a Foreigners Tribunal had declared him an illegal immigrant. The Gauhati High Court’s bail order came after a week of sustained public pressure, occasioned by the revelation that Mr. Sanaullah had served for three decades in the Indian Army.In the intervening period, a shocking number of irregularities surfaced. In its inquiry report, the Assam border police had written that Mr. Sanaullah was a ‘labourer’. The three men who signed the case report claimed that the investigating officer had fabricated their signatures. The investigating officer himself admitted that it might have been an “administrative mix-up”. Yet, it was on the basis of such shoddy material that the Foreigners Tribunal — a quasi-judicial body expected to follow the rule of law — came to the conclusion that Mr. Sanaullah was a “foreigner”, and packed him off to a detention camp — until the High Court stepped in to set him at liberty.But Mr. Sanaullah is among the luckier ones. Investigative journalists have revealed over the last few years that ‘administrative errors’ of this kind are the rule rather than the exception. As Mr. Sanaullah acknowledged in an interview after being released, there were people in the detention camps with similar stories, who had been there for 10 years or more [emphasis added]. For these individuals, without the benefit of media scrutiny, there may be no bail — only an endless detention. But by forcing the conversation onto the national stage, Mr. Sanuallah’s case has provided hope that we may yet recognise the unfolding citizenship tragedy in Assam for what it is, and step back from the brink while there is still time....In a process riddled with such flaws, and where the consequences are so drastic, one would expect the judiciary, the guardian of fundamental rights and the guarantor of the rule of law, to intervene. Instead, the Supreme Court, led by the present Chief Justice of India, has played the roles of cheerleader, midwife, and overseer. [Emphasis added.] Not only has it driven the NRC process, as outlined above but it has repeatedly attempted to speed up proceedings, pulled up the State government when it has asked to be allowed to release people detained for a long time, and instead of questioning procedural violations and infringement of rights, has instead asked why more people are not in detention centres, and why more people are not being deported. Most egregiously, the Court even used a PIL about the inhumane conditions in detention centres in order to pursue this project*. (Excerpted from sl. no. II. below.) If that's the case with Sanaullah, what'd happen to innumerable faceless ones??? *There have been 21 such suicides in Assam since 2015 when the process of updating the National Register for Citizens to weed out illegal immigrants from the state began, according to a database collated by Assam-based researcher Abdul Kalam Azad.* (Ref.: 'Assam NRC list: Fear of 'foreigner' tag is driving people to suicide: There have been 21 such suicides in Assam since 2015 when the process of updating the National Register for Citizens to weed out illegal immigrants from the state began', dtd. Nov. 2 2018, at < https://www.business-standard.com/article/current-affairs/assam-nrc-list-fear-of-foreigner-tag-is-driving-people-to-suicide-118110200245_1.html >.) *Are we taking note???*] I/III. https://www.news18.com/news/india/new-mha-order-allows-creation-of-foreigners-tribunals-gives-it-power-to-regulate-its-own-procedure-2179731.html New MHA Order Allows Creation of Foreigners Tribunals, Gives Them Power to 'Regulate Own Procedure' The new Foreigners (Tribunals) Amendment Order 2019 allows all states to constitute their own FTs, earlier unique to Assam, to address the question of citizenship of a person. Aditya Sharma | News18.com@aditya_shz Updated:June 10, 2019, 3:33 PM IST New MHA Order Allows Creation of Foreigners Tribunals, Gives Them Power to 'Regulate Own Procedure' A woman carrying her son arrives to check her name on the draft list of the National Register of Citizens at an NRC centre in Chandamari village in Goalpara district in Assam. (File photo/REUTERS) While the Home ministry, in its new amended order, spelled a clear road map for those not included in the National Register of Citizens (NRC), it also gave unspecified and unprecedented powers to the Foreigners Tribunals (FTs) – the quasi-judicial authority that assesses the question of authenticity of a person's citizenship. The new Foreigners (Tribunals) Amendment Order 2019, dated May 30, allows all states to constitute their own FTs, earlier unique to Assam, to address the question of citizenship of a person. The amendment empowers district magistrates in all states and union territories to set up FTs to detect foreigners. The amendment substitutes “the central government” with “the central government or the state government or the union territory administration or the district collector or the district magistrate,” allowing all latter authorities to refer to the question: whether a person is not a foreigner within the meaning of the Foreigners Act, to FTs for its opinion and thereby creating one. Unlike regular courts of crime, where a person is presumed innocent until proven guilty, and the onus is on the prosecution to prove the guilt of the accused, in an FT hearing, the burden of proof lies on the person whose citizenship is under question. The person under question has to prove both the authenticity of their citizenship and the authenticity of the documents used to build his/her case. The Home ministry has also re-ordered existing paragraphs and added two additional paragraphs in the new Order, granting uncertain yet indefinite powers to the FTs. Sub-clause 17 of the new paragraph 3A in the Order is of particular interest here. It reads: “Subject to the provision of this Order, the Tribunal shall have the power to regulate its own procedure for disposal of the cases expeditiously in a time bound manner.” The new clause assumes significance given the propensity of the FTs to decide cases ex parte (in the absence of the proceedee). The FTs are now granted power to regulate its own procedure for the disposal of cases. They are given a carte blanche (to operate as they please) of unlimited or unspecified powers. The draft NRC in Assam was published on July 30, 2018 amid huge controversy over the exclusion of 40.7 lakh people from it. With the final NRC getting ready to be published on July 31 after Claims and Objections, the Centre has set the directive for those excluded to approach the FTs. What tightens the noose on citizenship further is the inclusion of new paragraphs 1B and 3B in the Order, which restrict an appeal against detection as foreigner solely to the FTs and under the specific “terms and conditions”. For instance, in the case of NRC, if an appeal is made then the new order allows the District and Sub-District Registrar or Local Registrar of Citizen to furnish any information pertaining to the determination of the citizenship status of a person. If an appeal is not made, the concerned authority “may refer to the Tribunal for its opinion”. Regardless, the FTs are to deliver their verdict within four months of the missing persons submitting their records. Furthermore, the new Order makes FTs the final decision-making body on citizenship in Assam or elsewhere by setting a condition on hearing an appeal. Sub-clause 10 of the new paragraph 3A says that the FTs may issue notice to the appellant and the district magistrate for hearing of the question of one’s citizenship only if, after producing records, it “finds merit in the appeal”. Given the quasi-judicial nature of the FTs and the several concerns that have been raised about its functioning, opening the interpretation of the word “merit” to the wisdom of the FT members poses an alarming development. The new order disempowers those already vulnerable under the law’s jurisdiction by creating ambiguity over what constitutes “merit”. It increases the possibility of bias or an erroneous judgment. The Centre is going to help the Assam government in setting up 1,000 FTs by July 31 to ease the rush of the many claims for inclusion in the NRC. The central government is also in the process of giving its approval to the state government's proposal to set up e-Foreigners Tribunals. The Supreme Court-monitored NRC exercise, aimed at identifying illegal immigrants in the state that borders Bangladesh, was carried out only in Assam, but the FT mechanism unique to it that determines one’s citizenship now transcends all states. II/III. https://www.thehindu.com/opinion/lead/inhumane-and-utterly-undemocratic/article27705953.ece Inhumane, and utterly undemocratic Gautam Bhatia JUNE 10, 2019 00:02 IST UPDATED: JUNE 10, 2019 14:52 IST *Mohammad Sanaullah’s case must serve as an urgent call for rethinking the National Register of Citizens* On June 8, upon the orders of the Gauhati High Court, Mohammad Sanaullah was released on bail from a detention camp in Assam. He had been detained on May 29, after a Foreigners Tribunal had declared him an illegal immigrant. The Gauhati High Court’s bail order came after a week of sustained public pressure, occasioned by the revelation that Mr. Sanaullah had served for three decades in the Indian Army. In the intervening period, a shocking number of irregularities surfaced. In its inquiry report, the Assam border police had written that Mr. Sanaullah was a ‘labourer’. The three men who signed the case report claimed that the investigating officer had fabricated their signatures. The investigating officer himself admitted that it might have been an “administrative mix-up”. Yet, it was on the basis of such shoddy material that the Foreigners Tribunal — a quasi-judicial body expected to follow the rule of law — came to the conclusion that Mr. Sanaullah was a “foreigner”, and packed him off to a detention camp — until the High Court stepped in to set him at liberty. But Mr. Sanaullah is among the luckier ones. Investigative journalists have revealed over the last few years that ‘administrative errors’ of this kind are the rule rather than the exception. As Mr. Sanaullah acknowledged in an interview after being released, there were people in the detention camps with similar stories, who had been there for 10 years or more. For these individuals, without the benefit of media scrutiny, there may be no bail — only an endless detention. But by forcing the conversation onto the national stage, Mr. Sanuallah’s case has provided hope that we may yet recognise the unfolding citizenship tragedy in Assam for what it is, and step back from the brink while there is still time. NRC, Foreigners Tribunals According to the Assam Accord, individuals who entered Assam after March 24, 1971 are illegal immigrants. There are two parallel processes to establish citizenship: the Foreigners Tribunals operating under the Foreigners Act, and the National Register of Citizens (NRC), which is under preparation. While nominally and formally independent, in practice, these two systems bleed into each other, with people who have been declared as foreigners by the Foreigners Tribunals, and even their families, dropped from the draft NRC. For something as elemental and important as citizenship, one would expect these systems to be implemented as carefully as possible, and with procedural safeguards. This is especially true when we think of the consequences of being declared a non-citizen: disenfranchisement, exclusion from public services, incarceration in detention camps, statelessness, and deportation. Before treating an individual — a human being — to such drastic consequences, the very least a humane and civilised society can do is to ensure that the rule of law has been followed to its last degree. The reality, however, is the exact opposite. In a vast number of cases, the legally mandated initial inquiry before an individual is dragged before a tribunal as a suspected “foreigner” simply does not happen — indeed, it did not happen for Mr. Sanaullah. The Tribunals themselves are only constrained by a very limited number of procedural safeguards. This has led to situations where Tribunals have issued notices to entire families, instead of just the suspected “foreigner”. Additionally, reports show that Foreigners Tribunals habitually declare individuals to be “foreigners” on the basis of clerical errors in documents, such as a spelling mistake, an inconsistency in age, and so on. Needless to say, the hardest hit by this form of “justice” are the vulnerable and the marginalised, who have limited documentation at the best of time, and who are rarely in a position to correct errors across documents. On occasion, orders determining citizenship have been passed by tribunals without even assigning reasons, a basic sine qua non of the rule of law. In addition, a substantial number of individuals are sent to detention camps without being heard — on the basis of ex parte orders — and the detention centres themselves are little better than concentration camps, where families are separated, and people not allowed to move beyond narrow confined spaces for years on end. The process under the NRC is little better. Driven by the Supreme Court, it has been defined by sealed covers and opaque proceedings. For example, in a behind-closed-doors consultation with the NRC Coordinator, the Supreme Court developed a new method of ascertaining citizenship known as the “family tree method”. This method was not debated or scrutinised publicly, and ground reports found that people from the hinterland were not only unaware of the method, but those who were aware had particular difficulties in putting together “family trees” of the kind that were required (the burden fell disproportionately upon women). And recently, it was found that a process by which individuals could file “objections” against people whose names had appeared in the draft NRC — and on the basis of which these people would be forced to once again prove their citizenship — had resulted in thousands of indiscriminate objections being filed, on a seemingly random basis, causing significant hardship and trauma to countless individuals. However, when the people coordinating these “objections” were contacted, they brushed it off by saying that it was mere “collateral damage” in the quest to weed out illegal immigrants. The role of the judiciary In a process riddled with such flaws, and where the consequences are so drastic, one would expect the judiciary, the guardian of fundamental rights and the guarantor of the rule of law, to intervene. Instead, the Supreme Court, led by the present Chief Justice of India, has played the roles of cheerleader, midwife, and overseer. Not only has it driven the NRC process, as outlined above but it has repeatedly attempted to speed up proceedings, pulled up the State government when it has asked to be allowed to release people detained for a long time, and instead of questioning procedural violations and infringement of rights, has instead asked why more people are not in detention centres, and why more people are not being deported. Most egregiously, the Court even used a PIL about the inhumane conditions in detention centres in order to pursue this project. However, what the Supreme Court has failed to understand is that in questions of life and death, where the cost of error is so high, it is not “speed” that matters, but the protection of rights. But through its conduct, the Supreme Court has transformed itself from the protector of the rule of law into an enthusiastic abettor of its daily violation. And the Gauhati High Court has been no better, passing a bizarre and unreasoned order stating that it would be a “logical corollary” that the family members of a declared foreigner would also be foreigners, on the basis of which the border police have sent the names of entire families to NRC authorities. This is the very antithesis of how constitutional courts should behave. Focus the spotlight Mohammad Sanuallah is, for now, a free man. But a society in which his case is the exception instead of the rule, where it needs a person to be an ex-Army man, and his case pursued by national media for a full week before interim bail is granted, is a society that has utterly abandoned the rule of law. Yet Mr. Sanaullah’s case can do some good as well: it can prompt some urgent national introspection about a situation where, in the State of Assam, thousands of people languish in detention camps for years, victims of a process that, to use an old adage, would not be sufficient to “hang a dog on”. If anything can trigger an urgent and imperative call for change, surely this will — and must. *Gautam Bhatia is a Delhi-based lawyer* III. https://indianexpress.com/article/north-east-india/assam/ex-army-man-declared-illegal-when-i-entered-jail-i-cried-and-cried-had-defended-my-country-at-the-border-5774290/ Ex-Army man declared ‘illegal foreigner’ in Assam: ‘When I entered jail, I cried and cried…’ The Gauhati High Court has issued notices to the Union of India, government of Assam, NRC authorities, the Election Commission of India and a former Assam police officer Chandramal Das in the case challenging the FT order against Sanaullah. Written by Abhishek Saha | Guwahati | Updated: June 11, 2019 11:28:08 am Assam army man illegal foreigner, Kargil hero illegal foreigner, assam army man detained, NRC assam, Mohammad Sanaullah, Mohammad Sanaullah assam, Mohammad Sanaullah bail, Mohammad Sanaullah released, indian express, latest news Md Sanaullah and his wife Samina Begum. (Express Photo by Abhishek Saha) Mohammad Sanaullah walked out of the detention centre in Assam’s Goalpara on June 8. But the day this Indian Army ex-subedar will never forget is May 29 — when he walked into the centre, carrying the tag of an “illegal foreigner”. “Entering through the prison gate, I cried and cried. I asked myself what sin have I committed that after serving my motherland for three decades, including at the LoC in Kupwara, I am being detained like a foreigner,” he told The Indian Express at his residence in Guwahati’s Satgaon after being granted interim bail by the Gauhati High Court. “I have served for 30 years in the Army. I have been posted in Madhya Pradesh, Maharashtra, Rajasthan, Delhi, Punjab, Jammu and Kashmir, Andhra Pradesh, Assam and Manipur. I have defended my country standing bravely at the border. I love my country. I am an Indian and I am sure justice will be done in my case,” he said. Sanaullah (52), retired as a subedar with the Corps of Electronics and Mechanical Engineers (EME) in August 2017. He had joined the Army on May 21, 1987, and in 2014, was awarded the President’s Certificate for his promotion to the rank of a “Junior Commissioned Officer in the Regular Army in the Rank of Naib Subedar”. After his retirement, Sanaullah joined the Border wing of Assam Police as a sub-inspector in Kamrup (Rural) district after clearing the qualification tests. However, after investigating him as a suspected illegal foreigner in 2008-09, the Border wing lodged a “reference” case against him at a Foreigners’ Tribunal (FT). On May 23, Sanaullah lost the case. Six days later, he was taken to the detention centre in Goalpara district. Md Sanaullah retired as a subedar with the Corps of Electronics and Mechanical Engineers in 2017. (Express Photo) The FTs — 100 across the state — are quasi-judicial bodies meant to “furnish opinion on the question as to whether a person is or is not a foreigner within the meaning of Foreigner’s Act, 1946”. “After my retirement, I was looking for opportunities to continue serving my state and my country. I got selected to the Border wing and took the job. The officers who arrested me were my senior colleagues. They followed the procedure as required after an FT order,” he said. “On May 28 evening, I was called by a DSP to North Guwahati police station. I had an apprehension that it could be related to my detention as per the procedure. At the station, I had to sit through the night, without a place to sleep. Next day, around 7 pm, I entered the detention centre in Goalpara. The prison cell where I was kept there had probably 40-odd people. They gave me two blankets, a mosquito-net and a plate and a glass,” he says. The bail order says Sanaullah has to furnish a bond of Rs 20,000 with two local sureties. The order states that Sanaullah’s biometrics — iris and fingerprints — and photograph should be obtained prior to his release. It also prohibits Sanaullah from moving out of th territorial jurisdiction of Kamrup (Rural) and Kamrup (Metro) districts. There are six detention camps in Assam — housed in jails at Goalpara, Kokrajhar, Tezpur, Jorhat, Dibrugarh and Silchar — and they hold 1000-odd “illegal foreigners”. Many of those lodged in these centres have challenged the FT orders in courts. “My heart broke during my interactions with fellow detainees — most of them have never been to school and are very poor. Some of them have spent eight-nine years in detention. One person from Nalbari district, around 65 years old, has spent over nine years. Most of them were telling me how they had been declared as ‘foreigners’ due to errors in the spelling of their names and discrepancies in age in certain documents,” says Sanaullah. “The families of many of these detainees do not have the funds to contest the FT order in high court. Some of the families have stopped visiting because even travelling from a far off district to the centre in Goalpara requires money. I met some young men, in the age group of 18-30, who have been declared ‘foreigners’ but there is no question on the Indian citizenship of their parents and siblings,” he says. Last month, the Supreme Court allowed the conditional release of persons lodged at detention centres for being “illegal foreigners” in Assam. The apex court ordered that such detainees who have completed more than three years may be released after they furnish a bond with two sureties of Rs 1 lakh each of Indian citizens, submit details of address of stay after release and provide biometric details in a secured database. They should also report once every week to the police station specified by the FT. “If they come out and work, maybe they will earn a small amount, say Rs 200 per day. But they will be able to live with their family and probably have meals together,” says Sanaullah. The Gauhati High Court has issued notices to the Union of India, government of Assam, NRC authorities, the Election Commission of India and a former Assam police officer Chandramal Das in the case challenging the FT order against Sanaullah. The basis of the “reference” to the FT was an interrogation investigation report by Das, the then sub-inspector of the Border wing of the Assam police, against Sanaullah in 2008-09. However, the three witnesses named in that report Amjad Ali, Mohammad Kuran Ali and Mohammad Sobahan Ali — all residents of Kalahikash village in Kamrup district from where Sanaullah hails — lodged an FIR against Das last this week saying that it was fictitious. They said their names were included without their permission, and that their signatures were faked. Moreover, the family and lawyers of Sanaullah pointed out multiple anomalies in Sanaullah’s purported confession, attached in the investigation report, and alleged it was completely fabricated. “The interrogation report was completely fictitious. I had never met the police officer Das. On the dates of the supposed interrogation mentioned by Das, I was serving in Operation Hifazat (a counter-insurgency action) in Manipur,” says Sanaullah. -- Peace Is Doable -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Green Youth Movement" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to greenyouth+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send an email to greenyouth@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/greenyouth. To view this discussion on the web, visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/greenyouth/CACEsOZgJpMcW%2BOXd6UC2nKQ7O8mnAGpy-pDWtnfaE8-Ahsj_VQ%40mail.gmail.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
