India's Foreigners' Tribunals in Assam: A Systemic Disregard for Due Process and Human Rights, Report Finds
A comprehensive new study, "Unmaking Citizens: The Architecture of Rights Violations & Exclusion in India's Citizenship Trials," has revealed that India's Foreigners' Tribunals (FTs) in Assam are systematically failing to uphold due process and constitutional safeguards. The report, released today by the Bengaluru-based National Law School of India University and Queen Mary University of London, asserts that these quasi-judicial bodies have effectively become instruments of exclusion rather than impartial adjudicators of citizenship, precipitating a significant legal and human rights crisis in Assam.
Background of Foreigners' Tribunals in Assam:
Quasi-Judicial Mandate: FTs are specialized quasi-judicial bodies established to determine whether individuals residing in Assam are Indian citizens or "foreigners," a term often applied with the presumption of illegal migration from Bangladesh.
Post-2005 Establishment: These tribunals were created following the Supreme Court of India's decision in 2005 to scrap the controversial Illegal Migrants (Determination by Tribunals) Act of 1983. Assam currently operates 100 FTs, with further expansion planned.
Role in NRC Fallout: The FTs play a critical role in the aftermath of the National Register of Citizens (NRC) exercise in Assam. The final NRC list, published in 2019, controversially excluded approximately 1.9 million people, who were then mandated to appeal their exclusion to these tribunals.
Key Findings of the Report (as of July 2025):
The report, based on detailed interviews, case file analysis, and an unprecedented review of over 1,200 Gauhati High Court rulings between 2009 and 2024, highlights severe systemic flaws:
Widespread Disregard for Due Process: The study documents "widespread arbitrariness in decision-making," including the routine, wholesale rejection of both documentary and oral evidence without proper justification. It also points to a profound lack of clear legal norms to protect individuals from wrongful targeting and a failure to enforce procedural standards.
Violation of Constitutional and Human Rights Safeguards: The FT system is accused of directly violating the rule of law and the fundamental right to an effective remedy under both Indian domestic law and international human rights principles. Critically, the tribunals fail to provide the fair trial protections and human rights guarantees enshrined in Article 21 of the Indian Constitution, which applies universally to all persons, citizens and non-citizens alike.
Routine Instruments of Exclusion: Instead of operating as impartial judicial mechanisms, the FTs have transitioned into "routine instruments of exclusion." As of 2025, Assam's tribunals have officially declared nearly 166,000 people as "foreigners," with over 85,000 cases currently pending. Furthermore, they are poised to hear over a million appeals from individuals excluded from the NRC.
Arbitrary Decision-Making and Institutional Bias:
Summary Dismissal of Evidence: Tribunals frequently dismiss objections without adequate explanation, refuse to summon crucial inquiry officers, and operate without consistent adherence to established procedural norms.
"Lowering Standards" for Adjudicators: Amendments in 2019 significantly relaxed the qualification requirements for appointing FT members, allowing less experienced individuals to adjudicate complex citizenship cases. This erosion of professional standards has demonstrably compromised the quality of justice.
Performance Metrics and Perceived Bias: The report highlights strong allegations that the performance of FT members is implicitly or explicitly linked to the number of individuals they declare as "foreigners." Members who declare less than 10% of their cases as "foreigners" reportedly face a heightened risk of non-extension of their contractual tenures, creating a pervasive incentive for bias against claimants.
Exclusion for Minor Errors: Individuals have been declared foreigners for seemingly minor discrepancies, such as slight spelling mistakes in their names, an inability to produce an exhaustive set of documents, or difficulty recalling intricate ancestral details dating back several decades.
Lack of Secure Legal Foundation and Executive Interference: The report argues that the FT system suffers from an insecure legal foundation, making it highly vulnerable to executive interference despite its inherently judicial function. The contractual tenure of FT members is often contingent on executive discretion rather than being governed by clear, independent legislation.
Reverse Burden of Proof: A fundamental flaw in the FT process is the "reverse burden of proof." The onus of definitively proving Indian citizenship rests entirely with the individual appearing before the tribunal, rather than the state being required to prove that the person is a foreigner. This places an immense and often impossible burden on marginalized, frequently illiterate individuals who may lack proper documentation.
Disproportionate Impact on Vulnerable Populations: The majority of those disproportionately affected by this exclusionary process are reported to be women and children. These groups often face additional systemic hurdles in producing necessary documents or proving lineage, particularly maternal ancestry, which tribunals have frequently dismissed.
Unlawful Expulsions and Statelessness Risk: Human Rights Watch has previously reported instances where hundreds of Bengali-speaking Muslims, many from Assam, have been unlawfully expelled to Bangladesh without adequate nationality status verification, in direct disregard of due process and Supreme Court directives. This practice puts individuals at severe risk of statelessness.
Call for Action:
The report issues an urgent call for a fundamental rethinking of the legal structures governing citizenship in India. It unequivocally states that the current regime is not merely flawed but "actively unjust." Given the persistent discussions about a potential nationwide NRC exercise, these findings raise profound concerns about human rights, the rule of law, and the fundamental rights of millions across India.
I'm Aisha shehu
Talksocialtalka News
