In Assam, deportation shouldn't be wielded for narrow ends

Indian Express

a day ago

The Assam government's decision to operationalise the Immigrants (Expulsion from Assam) Act, 1950, to deport individuals identified as 'foreigners' by district collectors — without reference to Foreigners Tribunals (FTs) — raises urgent questions about the rule of law, institutional checks, and the rights of the vulnerable. While Chief Minister Himanta Biswa Sarma has referred to the Supreme Court's October 2024 judgment upholding Section 6A of the Citizenship Act to justify the move, citing legality cannot mask the moral and constitutional peril of bypassing due process. Illegal immigration poses a clear and present danger. But as Opposition MLAs have rightly pointed out, the state government's move risks arbitrariness and the possibility of communal profiling, bracketing innocent people, especially those from vulnerable communities, alongside the undocumented.
In recent weeks, Assam has, by Sarma's own estimate, deported 330 people to Bangladesh. The resurrection of the 1950 Act would, the CM said, aid in scaling up his government's pushback against outsiders in the state. The SC's 2024 judgment did affirm that the 1950 Act could be read alongside Section 6A to strengthen the identification of and action against illegal immigrants. But it did so within the architecture of existing laws and procedures. It did not dismantle the existing framework of FTs, nor did it authorise summary expulsions on the basis of a bureaucrat's suspicions, even if the person is listed in the NRC. This distinction is crucial because any other interpretation reduces justice to executive discretion and threatens the foundational right of every individual to be heard. The Northeast, particularly Assam, sits at the heart of a complex and emotionally charged border history. Since Partition and the subsequent creation of Bangladesh, waves of migration have triggered identity anxieties and fuelled political movements, including the Assam agitation of the 1980s. The porous border has served as a conduit not only for desperate people fleeing hardship and persecution, but also for elements that threaten security and communal harmony. These realities, however, demand vigilance, and should be addressed with deliberation, not shortcuts. Even with the institutional mechanism of FTs, there have been disquieting stories of administrative failures. Sarma's polarising rhetoric of flood jihad and land jihad in reference to the migrant crisis, too, has often served to deepen communal divides. With elections coming up in Assam in a year's time, it becomes even more imperative to ensure that deportation is not wielded for ideological or electoral ends.
Security threats, whether from foreign or domestic elements or geopolitical pressures, remain a priority that must be addressed with due seriousness. The Union Ministry of Home Affairs' order to crack down on undocumented foreigners, especially those from Bangladesh and Myanmar, has seen heightened action across several parts of the country. But in a region scarred by displacement, suspicion, and historical trauma, the government must distinguish between genuine security action and sweeping administrative moves that could serve political narratives more than public safety. The rule of law demands that the vulnerable — those without voice, power, or access to legal recourse — not be made collateral damage in the name of internal security.