The National Register of Citizens (NRC) which aimed at identifying undocumented migrants has caused havoc in the North Eastern region of India, especially in Assam, since the day of its enactment. As a concept, NRC was first floated in 1951, with Assam as the first state. The objective of NRC in Assam was to deal with the influx of illegal migrants. It is important to note that that NRC in Assam alone has excluded 19 lakh people in the final list published in 2019. The entire Assam Movement was dedicated against this migration of illegal immigrants, with the objective to protect the identity & culture of the indigenous communities of Assam.
Assam Accord, 1985 was the result of the Assam Movement which resulted in the classification immigrants into three classes. The first class granted citizenship to the immigrants who came to Assam before 1st January, 1966, while the second class granted citizenship to those who came to Assam after 1st January, 1966 but before 24th March 1971. However the third class, identified people who came to Assam on or after 25th March 1971 as illegal immigrants. Section 6A of the Citizenship Act, 1955 was to give effect to the Assam Accord, which's constitutional validity was upheld by the Supreme Court of India. As a result, the State of Assam has initiated its pushback drive of deporting immigrants who have been excluded in the list. The present article aims to focus on the pushbacks of these declared foreigners carried out by the State Government without due process and blatant disregard to the human rights, especially in absence of any formal deportation treaty with Bangladesh or Myanmar.
The Assam Government has initiated mass pushbacks of those declared as foreigners in Assam since May, 2025. The major issue being that all of this is done without proper due process. Recently a writ petition was preferred before the Supreme Court of India challenging the pushback policy of the Assam Government on the grounds that the massive pushback drive was being carried out without due process. The Supreme Court however, while refusing to entertain the petition, kept the liberty of the Petitioner open to approach the Gauhati High Court.
Even though liberty has been given to approach the Gauhati High Court, there might be a possibility, that when one does reach the footsteps of the court, he would have already been deported without due process being followed. Recently, a 51-year-old former teacher from Morigaon, Assam, was forcibly deported to Bangladesh. More concerning is the fact that this particular deportation was done, when the deportee's citizenship status was sub-judice before the Supreme Court of India (Civil Appeal No. 14705 of 2024)
What is terrifying is that in absence of any formal deportation treaty with Bangladesh or Myanmar, these deportees are stranded in international lands, with nowhere to go. This is not the only case, wherein due process was disregarded, as reports suggest that over hundreds of people from Assam are being been detained and forcibly pushed across the Indian border. These incidents demonstrate the blatant disregard to due process and violation of human rights. What is frightening is that fact that these extra judicial deportations are being backed by authorities while taking reliance upon the Immigrants (Expulsion from Assam) Act, 1950 and bypassing the Foreign Tribunals.
Now coming to the due process and the rights which are being blatantly violated, it is important to lay down the procedural safeguards as mandated by law. As per the legal requirements laid down, there are procedures which are to be followed by authorities while deporting someone. Firstly, before officially deporting anyone, the person should be produced before the Foreigners Tribunal and only after due adjudication in the tribunal and declaration, declaring the person as a foreigner, can deportation be permitted. The decision of a foreign tribunal is appealable and not final and the individual challenging should be given notice, legal counsel, and hearing.
Yet in the present scenario, all the pushbacks are happening without any of the prerequisites being followed. Apart from the blatant disregard to due process, it is also important to note that the present pushbacks are in complete violation of Article 14, 21 and 22 of the Constitution.
It is pertinent to discuss the international obligations of India and how the present pushbacks are violating it. The International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), is binding upon India. Article 13 of the ICCPR mandates that any deportation must be legal, and the individual must be able to provide justifications for their removal and obtain a review from a qualified official or attorney.
In addition, Article 3 of the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment prohibits deportation in cases where a person faces torture or persecution. This is the source of the non-refoulement principle, which forms a part of customary international law and enforceable against all nations, including India. Additionally, the UN Committee against Torture and Human Rights Treaty Bodies have emphasized that nations cannot rely on expulsions without first providing an impartial, legal assessment.
Now, considering the present unrest in Bangladesh and Myanmar, it is safe to assume that sending any declared foreigner, would not be just and in violation of international law and human rights. Further a major issue at present is the non-acceptance of these displace declared foreigners.
Now coming to the Constitution Bench judgment which upheld the validity of Section 6A of the Citizenship Act. While the judgment upholds the constitutional validity of Section 6A, the Assam Government however seems to be misinterpreting the judgment and under the veil of this verdict sanctioning extra judicial pushbacks. While the judgment does not do away with the hearing of Foreign Tribunals. However, the judgment observes that Section 6A of the Citizenship Act needs to be harmoniously read with the Immigrants (Expulsion from Assam) Act, 1950.
It seems this observation itself is being used by the Assam Government to circumvent the Foreign Tribunals and due process all together. As the Immigrants (Expulsion from Assam) Act, 1950 directly empowers a district commissioner to issue removal orders for identified foreigners. It important to note that the Supreme Court in its judgment has not allowed bypassing of judiciary for deportation, but only for identification of anyone as foreigners. Reliance upon a 1950 law which does not provide for any way of determination of an individual as a foreigner is dangerous and contradictory to the constitutional safeguards guaranteed under the Constitution. The misuse of this law for massive pushbacks directly without the procedural safeguards clearly shows the lack of due process.
The need of the hour would be transparency and judicial oversight. Due process is not optional but a legal obligation. There are no official records of the detention centres, neither a check on these extra judicial pushbacks. What is disheartening is that when such blatant violations of human rights and due process is rampant, it seems that this situation has been accepted.
All of these boil down to a simple question of whether such blatant disregard to due process and violation of human rights can be accepted just to reach a goal. Protecting one's community and its citizen is a necessity, however at what cost? Could there have been a better route for these deportations, which could be in accordance to the rule of law? Deportation of the declared illegal immigrants is a necessity, but in a haste to achieve a goal, should basic human rights be violated and due process be bypassed? Especially, when there's a possibility of displacing an actual citizen. Another question which looms over is even if these extra judicial pushbacks are success, where would any of these declared foreigners go in absence of any formal deportation treaty? Will the pushed back foreigners create their own land in no-man's land or will they be displaced forever?
These extra judicial pushbacks result in individuals getting uprooted from their lives or even the opportunity to bid adieu to their loved ones. This situation is perfectly summed up in a line from the book The Trial– “Someone must have been telling lies about Joseph K., he knew he had done nothing wrong but, one morning, he was arrested.”
Author is an Advocate. Views Are Personal.