On August 7 and 8, civil society groups organised a two-day public hearing christened “Contested Citizenship in Assam: Constitutional process and Human Cost” at the Indian Society of International Law, New Delhi. Human rights activists, lawyers, academicians and people from Assam who have been impacted by the National Register of Citizens (NRC) attended the event.

An eight-member jury led by Justice (Retd) Kiran Joseph, Justice (Retd) AP Shah, Justice (Retd) Madan B Lokur, Prof. Faizan Mustafa, Ambassador Deb Mukherji, Ms Githa Hariharan, Dr Syeda Hameed and Prof Monirul Hussain heard the testimonies of people who are suffering owing to the implementation of NRC. 

When the final NRC list was released on August 31, it excluded almost 19 lakh people from Assam, rendering them stateless. A document released at the event stated, “The population at risk are overwhelmingly from minority ethnic, religious and linguistic groups–mostly Muslims and Hindus of Bengali descent–with high percentages of women, children and daily wage workers, all among the most marginalised and excluded communities.”   

In his opening remarks, Advocate Prashant Bhushan said, “ The hearing is aimed at educating the public on what is being called the largest citizenship purges in history”.

The event saw around 10 people from Assam present their testimonies to the jury. Here is what some of them had to say:

Shahjahan Ali Ahmed, a Miya poet from Baska district of Assam, said, out of the 33 members of his family, only three members had made it to the final NRC list, while the rest had been struck off. “Most people whose names have been excluded from the list are not educated and are not aware of the rules and regulations related to NRC. The government has been inefficiently implementing these rules on people, making them suffer,” he added.

Masuma Begum, an activist who lives in Lakhimpur district of Assam, echoed similar concerns. She testified that while her name was excluded from the final NRC list, the names of her younger brother and parents were included. Masuma’s name has been left out despite her father and grandfather, both, being ex-employees of the Assam government, leaving her befuddled and sceptical of the NRC. She said, “If it can happen to people like us then I don’t know what is happening to those who are uneducated.”

Even stranger was the case of Prasanjit Dey who found his name in the final NRC list but couldn’t find his father’s. In 2011, when Prasanjit’s father went to a polling booth to cast his vote, he was stopped, and the presiding officer declared him a D- voter (Doubtful voter). Prasenjit decided to study law after the incident and discovered there was a plethora of D-voters in Assam. In 2017, he decided to fight his father’s case. The Border Police assured him that his was a strong case since he had submitted all the relevant documents. After a few days, the same Border Police officer called him saying his father had been declared a foreigner. Now, his case is in motion in High Court.

A documentary highlighting the plight of people living in detention camps was also showcased by Citizen for Justice and Peace (CJP), an NGO, at the event. The documentary began with the story of Rashmi Nora who was 3-months pregnant when she was shifted to a detention camp in Assam. After her health deteriorated severely, she was released on humanitarian grounds.

Another victim was Shaukin Ali, who spent five years at the detention camp for a minor discrepancy in his name. 

Adding to the subject of the documentary, human rights activist Harsh Mander said, “Just a difference of letters in someone’s name can lead them to the detention centre. Do we have the right to put this amount of stress and tension to the most distressed and deprived people of the society?”

During a session on ‘Detention camps in Assam’, Mohsin Alam Bhat who works in Centre for Public Interest Law, explained how the NRC has violated the international human rights laws. He claimed, “According to international human rights law, detention should be the last resort, but in India, it is the first.” He further added that according to the same law, a person can not be criminalised for the mere act of crossing the international border, whereas here, a person born in India is being declared foreigner because his/her ancestors had crossed the international border.” He said it was a clear violation of international human rights laws.

“The government has claimed they will build detention camps where thousands of people can be accommodated with playgrounds and schools. Should we be proud of having such detention camps?” 

“I come from a district called Goalpara in Assam which used to be known for its cultural heritage but now it is known for its detention camp. The government is making the largest detention camp of India in Goalpara,” said Mustafa Kadam Hussain while presenting his testimony to the jury.

Advocate Gautam Bhatia told the jury that the conventional working style of the Indian judiciary system deflected exceptionally in the case of NRC. 

Defining ‘citizenship’ as ‘the right to have rights’, Gautam told the jury that in most cases the burden lies on the court to prove the suspect guilty including IMBT Act (Illegal Migration Determination by Tribunal). “It is only the exceptional case of NRC where the citizen is burdened to proof lies on the accused,” he added. 

“In most of the cases, the courts itself says that they will take a longer time for a proceeding to maintain fairness, but in this case, the Supreme Court is making haste. If fairness requires the case to go slower than the cost is worth paying for,” Bhatia argued.

Another victim who presented his testimony at the event was Ashraful Hussain, a Miya poet from Barpeta district of Assam. His brother’s name was excluded from the final NRC list. He said, “My village is on the bank of river Brahmaputra. It has a low literacy rate and a lot of problems. Nine years ago, when I was a college student, a lot of people from my village were declared D-voters. I decided to write about 20 such cases. While writing, I did understand what these people went through but I only felt their pain when my own brother’s name was taken off the NRC list, three years ago. My brother was called to a police station to receive a notice that stated he was required to prove his citizenship to the Foreigners Tribunal. He submitted all the relevant documents like his 1951 NRC list, 1966 voter list and others. After submitting the documents, he was summoned by the Foreign Tribunal (FT) that asked him vague questions like the names of all the siblings of his grandfather.

“I don’t think anybody who is sitting here remembers the names of their grandfather’s siblings,” Hussain said. “One can never seek justice from the Foreigners Tribunal,” he added.

In his testimony, Shakil Ahmed, a journalist from Barpeta district, said, “One day I received a call questioning my father’s identity as well as mine. My father’s name is on the 1951 NRC list. He also has his land ownership documents from 1939. But someone from All Assam Student Union (AASU), who doesn’t even know us, questioned our citizenship. When we went to submit our documents, the person who raised these questions wasn’t even present at the location. I know even though we have authentic documents, the authority can still call them illegal. We in Assam are scared all the time, especially when we hear something about the NRC. But we don’t feel the same fear in Delhi.”

Mizanur Rehman Sheikh, another resident from Howripet in Assam’s Kokrajhar district, recalled a similar experience.

Kismat Ali from Assam’s Udalguri district was another person present at the event whose name was struck off the third NRC list released in 2015. He said, “It was 2 am in the morning when the police knocked on our door. When I opened, they took me to the Udalguri Border officials. They didn’t even allow me to make a call. The police wrote a statement for me that claimed: ‘I’m a Bangladeshi and I have come from the detention centre’. I refused to put my signature on the statement but they forced me. They took me to a detention camp which was basically a jail. I was in a pathetic condition. The Foreigners Tribunal and High Court rejected my case. I did not have the capacity to approach the Supreme Court. My sister lives in Pune works as domestic help for a family. They helped me approach the Supreme Court. An advocate called Harsh Mander helped me out but now, my sister’s daughter’s name has been taken off the list.”

 After hearing all the testimonies, the jury at the end of a two-day long session presented its verdict. (Retd) Justice AP Shah read the jury report that said, “The members of the tribunal heard the views and experiences of people excluded from the National Register of Citizens (NRC) in Assam, and of various leading experts. We all agree that the NRC has spawned a humanitarian crisis. We worry because there are no signs of this crisis abating. A large number of minorities in Assam, whether religious, linguistic or ethnic, have lived with the fear of being told that they don’t belong in India.”

He further added, “They may be, at any time, be marked doubtful (D) voters and prevented from exercising their franchise. A local border police constable can, again at any time, accuse them of being a foreigner and refer the case to a detention centre. Even after the final NRC list, there are many demands for selective re-verification of the NRC.”

 The verdict considered the following issues on which the testimonies were heard 

• The burden of proof on the accused 
• Documents that rural residents would find hard to muster but were insisted upon
• Documents refused due to discrepancies in the English language, the spelling of a Bengali name or in age
• Loss of Livelihood
• Violation of Child Right