With the launch of Special Intensive Revision of Voter Lists across the country by the Election Commission of India, the issue of illegal immigration in India has become pronounced as many such persons are being excluded for the roll list. The Phase II of the SIR was completed in West Bengal among other states and the Phase III is ongoing now in North-eastern States among other regions. Both the States of West Bengal and North-Eastern region are sensitive for illegal migration mainly from Bangladesh and Myanmar. Over the years, the issue of illegal immigration from the neighbouring countries has created ethnic tension as well as issues for public order. India considered Rohingya immigrants from Myanmar as threat to public order in India. The Home Ministry of India has alleged that illegal immigration of ethnic groups in Manipur and Mizoram is one of the important reason for the violence and ethnic conflict in Manipur in 2023. This article analyzes the problem of illegal immigration in India and India’s response to this issue.
The completion of National Registration of Citizens (NRC) in the Indian state of Assam, the apprehension of similar NRC in the rest of the country, the passing of the Citizen Amendment Act (CAA) and its subsequent opposition in some areas have brought the issue of migration in the centre stage of India. It has highlighted all the issues related with migration in India like the legal regime, state policy, ethnic and religious dimensions, domestic political implications and well as external consequences. The issue of migration bears a hybrid character as it is closely associated with country’s domestic as well as foreign policy, involving the play of both internal and external elements. But the most significant aspect of migration in India has been its close association with ethnic conflict either as its source or its consequence or both. Also, the migration in India has taken place from the countries bordering India. In fact, India’s migration problem is South Asia’s migration problem as India is not only centrally located in the region, but also shares ethnic communities and borders with many countries. No other country in the region is placed in such central position. This has facilitated easy migration into India from the neighbouring countries for various reasons.
Legal and Illegal Immigration
Immigration into India falls into two categories: legal and illegal. Legal migration is one which is permitted under the law of the government. For example, the migration of Buddhists from Tibet in 1959 and thereafter, migration of Tamils from Sri Lanka in the wake of Tamil ethnic conflict in 1980s and thereafter in Sri Lanka falls into this legal category. This migration was sanctioned by the law of the government and the migrants were given refugee status. They were also provided with housing, education, and other facilities by the government. As per the figures provided by the government, the number of Tibet refugees is nearly one lakh and that of Tamil refugees is 9000o. Another of notable group of legal migrants is Chakma Buddhist refugees, numbering 45000, who migrated from Chittagong Hill Tract, Bangladesh to India in 1960s due to displacement on account of a dam project and perpetual religious persecution. The Chakmas were settled mainly in Arunachal Pradesh and some other in Assam, Tripura and Mizoram. Bangladesh and signed an agreement in 1997, whereby the former agreed to take back Chakma refugees. But due to some technical problems and disinclination of Chakmas to go back, this accord could not be implemented. Meanwhile, under changed circumstances those settled in last three states were given Indian citizenship and recognized as Schedule Tribes. However, the state government and people of Arunachal Pradesh have resented the Central government’s move in 2017 to grant citizenship to Chakmas on the ground of dilution of cultural identity and land rights of indigenous community. In 2015, the Supreme Court directed the Centre to grant the Chakmas and Hindu Hajong refugee’s citizenship in Arunachal… (Scroll.in: 2017). The Central government is determined to grant citizenship to 54000 Chakma (Buddhists) and Hajong (Hindus) living in Arunachal Pradesh in pursuance to the above Supreme Court order (Reuters: 2017). The matter still hangs in balance. Arunachal Pradesh is poised for another ethnic conflict in the north-east.
Recently, the government issued notification in September, 2015 (GOI: 2015) under the Passport (Entry into India) Act, 1920, which provided that the ‘persons belonging to minority communities in Bangladesh and Pakistan, namely, Hindus, Sikhs, Buddhists, Jains, Parsis and Christians who were compelled to seek shelter in India due to religious persecution or fear of religious persecution and entered into India on or before the 31st December, 2014’ shall not be treated as illegal immigrants even without the valid travel documents under the Foreigners Act, 1946. This is one-time exemption granted only to six minority communities. Later, Afghanistan was also added as the source country along with Pakistan and Bangladesh. The logic behind this change appears to be that these three countries are the Muslim majority countries and the persecuted non-Muslims minorities from these countries deserve humanitarian consideration from India. By the force of this notification, the migrants belonging to these six communities are no longer, illegal migrants in India. The Citizenship Amendment Act, 2019 is passed to relax conditions of granting Indian citizenship (duration of residence in India from 11 years to 6 years) to these six minority communities, migrating from the three countries namely Pakistan, Bangladesh and Afghanistan.
The Second category of migration is one which is not covered by the law of the land. All people crossing from one state to another, if not permitted by respective states are illegal. This is the logical corollary of principle of ‘Territorial Sovereignty. In Indian context, some examples of the illegal migrants are all citizens of Bangladesh who have migrated into India on or after 25 March, 1971are treated as illegal migrants. The recent National Register Citizen (NRC) exercise completed in Assam under the supervision of the Supreme Court has identified 19 lakh such persons in Assam only. It does not include the other illegal migrants from Bangladesh in living other north-eastern states or West Bengal or other parts of the country.
The second group of illegal immigrants belongs to Rohingyas (Muslims), who have mainly migrated to India from Rakhine Province of Myanmar, bordering India since 2017 following large scale ethnic violence between minority Rohignyas and majority Buddhists and highhandedness of armed forces of Myanmar. The Rohingya immigrants in India are estimated to be 40000 as per the identity card issued by the United Nations High Commissioner on Refugees (UNHCR). They are settled in different parts of India mostly in West Bengal and Jammu and Kashmir. The Indian government has not granted them refugee status and has declared them illegal immigrants. The government fears that some of them may be radical or terrorist elements among the Rohingya immigrants. In 2018, the Indian government deported the first seven Rohingyas back to Myanmar indicating its policy to treat them as illegal immigrants and send them back to Myanmar. But Rohignyas are insisting to be granted refugee status as per the international law. Hence, Rohingyas have also filed a case in the Supreme Court of India in 2017 to stop their repatriation and to get the refugee status in India. The UNHCR’s Special Rapporteur on contemporary forms of racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance has filed an application in the Supreme Court in January 2020 to make a plea under international law in favour of Rohingyas. The matter is still pending in the Supreme Court.
The exact number of illegal migrants is not officially known in India as no such data base is maintained at the level of central government. The prime reason is that these migrants cross to India in clandestine manner and are scattered in various parts of the country (The Hindu: 2020). After legalizing the status of illegal migrants of 6 communities under the 2015 notification, at present, the major chunk of illegal immigrants is from Myanmar and Bangladesh. While the Rohignyas are reregistered by the UNHCR, the illegal immigrants from Bangladesh have been subject of wild estimation ranging from 12 million to 20 million. While he UPA government’s Minister of State for Home Affairs informed the Parliament in 2004 the number of illegal migrants from Bangladesh to be 12 million, the BJP government’s Minister of State for Home Affairs informed the Rajya Sabha in November 2016 in a written reply that their number may be around 20 million. The Minister also admitted that since entry of such Bangladeshi nationals into the country is clandestine and surreptitious, it is not possible to have accurate data of such Bangladeshi nationals living in various parts of the country (Business Standard: 2016). An analysis by the India Today Data Intelligence Unit (DIU) of Census 2011 data revealed that around 5.5 million people in India had reported their last residence outside the country which is roughly 0.44 per cent of its total population. Of these, 2.3 million (42 per cent) came from Bangladesh and 0.7 million (12.7 per cent) from Pakistan. The number of immigrants from Afghanistan was low at 6,596. It also indicated that the majority of illegal, migrants from Bangladesh came to India prior to 1991 period and majority of them are concentrated in the border states: West Bengal, 82 per cent; followed by Tripura, 9 per cent; and Assam, 3 per cent (Rampal: 2019). It means the problem of illegal migrants in West Bengal is more serious than in Assam. The presence of Bangladesh migrants has been reported from other parts of the country including big cities like Mumbai and Delhi. As per the official data 19 lakh illegal Bangladeshi illegal immigrants have been identified so far in Assam only under NRC exercise in 2019.
India shares 4156 kms border with Bangladesh and more than half of it the State of West Bengal. In spite of government efforts to fence the border, the border has been porous at many places and immigration has been taking place for long time since 1950s. It is estimated that nearly 10 million migrants came to India during the 1971 civil war in Bangladesh and liberation of Bangladesh. There is no estimate how many of them have gone back subsequently. If we calculate the natural growth of illegal migrants, their number to be around 20 million is a safe estimate.
Illegal Immigration and Conflict in India
Ethnic conflict has close association with immigration. Ethnic conflicts may induce people to migrate and migration may induce ethnic conflict in the host country. But every migration is not the result of the ethnic conflict and each migration does not always produce ethnic conflict. Again, it is not only the illegal migration which produces ethnic conflict, but legal migration in the form of refugee status and grant of citizenship may also produce ethnic conflict and political tensions. For example, the Union government has recognized the presence of Chakma refugees but granting them citizenship rights in Arunachal Pradesh has strong protests from the indigenous people as their presence would not only undermine their cultural identity, but also increase the struggle for scarce resources on the state. The apprehension and uncertainty due to the presence of alien elements is logical outcome of larg- scale migration.
Ethnic Conflict and Agitation in Assam
The presence of large number of illegal Bangladeshi immigrants in Assam has been resented for long time by the indigenous inhabitants of state, as they fear the erosion of their culture, language, employment opportunities, land and other resources. The illegal migrants from Bangladesh are Bengali speaking, whereas natives of Assam speak Assamese or other local dialects. Their customs and cultural norms also differ. The growing resentment among people of Assam took organized and even violent form when the mass movement was launched against illegal migrants in 1979. The movement (1979-85) was headed by the All Assam Student Union (AASU) and All Assam Gan Sangram Parishad (AAGSP). The violent agitation took ugliest turn when 2191 illegal Bangladeshi immigrants were killed on 18 February, 1983 in 14 villages of Nagoan district to f Assam. This is known as Nellie Massacre (Slideshare.in: Retrieved 2020).
After protracted negotiations, the Assam Accord was signed on 15 August, 1985 between the Union Government and the representatives of AASU (All Assam Student Union) and AAGSP. The 15-point accord, among other things, provides for the identification and repatriation of illegal immigrants, economic development of Assam, ban on acquisition of immovable property by foreigners, ban on the encroachment of government land, regular recording of all births and death and special measures for protecting and promoting Assamese culture. Regarding identification of illegal migrants, it was provided:
1. The outsiders who settled in the state of Assam before 01 January, 1966 will be treated as legal immigrants.
2. That all those coming to state on or after 25 March, 1971 shall be declared as illegal migrants.
3. The outsiders who settled in the state between 1 January, 1966 and 25 March, 1971 would be regularized but they would be deprived of voting rights for 10 years (India Today: 2019).
However, the leaders of the movement were demanding the cut off year to be 1951 for identification of illegal migrants.
The implementation of Assam Accord with respect to identification of illegal migrants delayed due to many technical and political reasons. Finally, the NRC was published in August, 2019 after the intervention and under the supervision of the Supreme Court, which identified 19 lakh illegal immigrants in Assam sate only. Now the government faces the uphill task to give the identified persons another hearing before the Foreigners Tribunals, finally prove that they are illegal migrants, put them in the detention camps, prepare their documents with the cooperation of their country of origin and with its consent repatriate them to their country of origin. These steps are complex and time taking and may take years together to complete. Meanwhile, Bangladesh has reservation about India’s NRC exercise in Assam.
Also, the issue of illegal migrants in Assam has repercussion for the entire North –East as the demands for similar NRC and deportation of illegal migrants have been raised in other states like Nagaland, Meghalaya, Mizoram and Manipur. Various influential outfits have started checking the flow of people across the states. Even within Assam, the Bodo speaking tribal people living in the four plain districts of Assam (Kokrajhar, Chirang, Baska and Udalguri) have launched agitation against outsiders in the name of protecting their culture and resources. The Union Government has signed Bodo Accord on 27 January, 2020, which, among other things, empowers the Bodo Territorial Council District (BTCD) to issue the permit to all those people living in the BTCD areas which came after 25 March, 1971 (as per the terms of the Assam Accord, 1985). These people can live and work in Bodo areas but will not have voting rights. Thus, the issue of migration has potential to cause ethnic conflict in future the entire region.
Immigration and Ethnic Conflict
It is not only the illegal migration which has caused ethnic conflict and tension in India, but legally sanctioned migration has also the potential for such conflict. The case of Chakma refugees in Arunachal Pradesh has been cited earlier. The indigenous tribal communities of Arunachal Pradesh have expressed their opposition to the granting of citizenship to Chakmas. The presence of Tibetan and Tamil refugees has not evoked much resentment due to political reasons. However, the Government’s effort to grant citizenship to six non-Muslim communities from the three countries namely Pakistan, Afghanistan and Bangladesh through Citizenship Amendment Act, 2019 (CAA), has evoked multidimensional opposition from across the country. The CAA provides for some concessions in granting the citizenship to members six persecuted minorities namely Hindus, Sikhs, Buddhists, Jains, Parsis and Christians, who crossed into India before 31 December, 2014. The concession is that they will be given citizenship after 6 years residence in India, which is 11 years in other cases. It does not affect the status of any citizen of India belonging to any religion.
The impact of CAA in the North-East including Assam needs careful understanding. It should be noted that the areas falling under the 6th Schedule of Constitution and North-Eastern states where inner line permit is applied have been exempted from the CAA ambit. However, the protests against CAA continue in Assam as non-tribal areas of Assam are still covered under the ambit of CAA. Assam has some genuine grievances with CAA as it fixes the cut-off date 31 December 2014 for six categories of migrants, which is variance with the cut- off date fixed in the Assam Accord (1985) that is 25 March, 1971 for identifying illegal migrants. Thus, critics say that the CAA is violation of the Assam Accord. In addition, the grievances of the non-tribal areas of Assam include that, if six non-Muslim communities living in Assam are granted citizenship, it would reduce Assamese speaking people to minority as majority of such migrants are Bangla language speaking people from Bangladesh. Thus, the issue of linguistic identity has also entered into discourse on CAA in Assam.
The government referred to the non-implementation of Nehru-Liaquat Ali Pact and subsequent persecution of minorities in Pakistan as justification for enacting CAA to protect the interests of minorities. The Nehru-Liaquat Ali Agreement was signed on 8 April 1950 in the wake of large-scale migration of minorities from both countries amidst looting of their property, women and harassment during the partition of the country. In brief, the agreement provided for the recognition of the religious, cultural, economic and political rights of remaining minorities as well as the safety of the property and women of the migrating minorities in their respective countries (NEA: Retrieved 2020). India had already implemented these provisions through her fundamental rights, but the Constitution of Pakistan when created in 1956, 1962 and finally in 1973 declared Pakistan as an Islamic State. The Zia’s regime in 1970s and 1980s led to deeper Islamization of Pakistan’s polity and society. Thus, Pakistan did not adhere to the sprit and words and this agreement prompting the Government of India to go for CAA to protect the rights of minorities leaving Pakistan and other two other countries. There are regular newspaper reports of forced conversion of non-Muslims girls in Pakistan’s Sind province and their forced marriage with Muslim youths. It was in this context that the Home Minister of India referred the violation of this agreement in the Parliament as a justification for passing the Citizenship Amendment Act.
However, the CAA has been opposed on the ground that it undermines the secular credential as enshrined in the Constitution of India. The CAA has evoked both domestic and external reactions. Domestically, the opposition to the CAA is seen from the students, Muslim Community, political parties and some non-BJP state governments. It has taken a political colour. Some state governments like Kerala, Rajasthan, M P, West Bengal ruled by non-BJP parties have passed state assembly resolutions calling for withdrawal of CAA and not implementing the same in the state. Thus, CAA has caused strains in the federal fabric of India. In fact, granting citizenship is the Union subject under the Constitution and state have limited role in the process in granting citizenship as the ultimate power rests with the Union government. It should be pointed out that if the Union wants, the states will have to implement the provisions of the CAA. The Union has right to issue direction to that effect to the state governments under the relevant provisions of the Constitution. Also, since the legal aspects of the CAA are being examined by the Supreme Court, the prolonged political agitation is not justified. Externally, the CAA has been opposed on the ground that it discriminates people on the ground of religion in granting citizenship. Such apprehensions have been raised by the some members European Parliament, American Congress and some Human rights groups. For India the reservation and concerns expressed by Bangladesh is more important, because India enjoys cordial relation with her. During her visit to New Delhi on 3-6 October, 2019, Bangladeshi Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina raised the issue of CAA and issue of illegal Bangladeshi migrants living in India. Bangladesh may have apprehension to take back a large number of persons identified as illegal migrants in India. Also, it casts negative aspersions on the treatment of minorities in Bangladesh. The Afghan refugees in India are few in number and its response to CAA has been normal. However, the regular persecution of minorities in India is an added factor in support of India over the implementation of CAA.
The issue of NRC has been clubbed along with CAA in the ongoing protests. Though government has denied having any proposal for implementing nationwide NRC, the protesters are also protesting against the NRC, which is yet to emerge. The National Register of Citizen is nothing but the record of the bonafide citizens of the country. Technically, the bonafide Indian citizens have nothing to worry about it. No citizen of India will be affected by it. However, it seems that government has put the proposal for nationwide NRC in the backburner in view of the ongoing protests against CAA. Also, in view of the complex procedure involved in the NRC till the final deportation of identified immigrants, it appears a very difficult task to implement NRC in India. In nutshell, it has to be emphasized that the protests against the CA and NRC is India are largely motivated by political consideration with few exceptions of genuine grievances in Assam.
India’s Immigration Policy
Legally, India is opposed to any form of illegal migration whether leaving from India or coming into the country. India has not signed the UN Refugee Convention 1951 and its 1967 Protocol, which regulate the migration of refugees at global level. Thus, India decides each case of immigration on case to case basis. At present India’s refugee policy is ‘not to have any policy on refugees.’ Thus, India takes decision on each case on the basis of merit and impact on India’s foreign policy and her national interest. Thus, India has refugee status to Tibetan refugees who came to India in the wake of Chinese Aggression in Tibet in 1959. Similarly, India has also granted refugee status to Sri Lankan Tamils, who came to India during Tamil civil war. Nearly one lakh Sri Lankan Tamils are still living in India as refugees. On the other hand, India has refused to grant refugee status to Rohingyas coming from Myanmar on the plea that some terrorist element might also be part of Rohingyas. India has declared them illegal immigrants.
India has also not signed the UN Convention on Refugees which was adopted in 1951. Thus, this convention is not applicable to India at present. According to this Convention, a refugee is a person who is unable or unwilling to go back to his original place of evidence due to fear of persecution on the ground of race religion, nationality, membership of a group or his public opinion. Under this convention, refugees are granted certain rights in the host country and benefit of principle of non-refoulement or forced repatriation to the home country. But this convention is not applicable to India.
One may criticize the Indian government for not declaring official refugee policy to impart definiteness, certainty and clarity in the legal regime regulating the migration into India. But such criticism is not tenable in view of the conditions surrounding India in South Asia. If India goes with uniform policy of granting refugee status to all those migrants crossing from the neighbouring countries, it will have negative impact on the domestic population and may not be sustainable in the long run. Besides social and ethnic tensions, it may beyond India’s resources and capacity. Even the European countries, known for their claims for egalitarianism and humanitarianism, when faced with Middle East refugees in 2014, restricted their entry to their boundaries. Even the US also has annual limit for granting refugee status to migrants. Again, in view of the porous border between India and her neighbor, it would not be prudential for India to adopt a liberal refugee policy. Thus, India’s stand on not signing the 1951 Convention has some merit. If India does not a policy on refugees, she will have the liberty to judge each case on the basis of its merit and her national interest. The declared refugee policy or law will constrain India to take appropriate decision in each case. This is the reason, that India does not have any definite refugee policy. However, whether India has a refugee policy or not, the recent developments have brought to the fore the simmering issue of migration and its related repercussions across the social and political spectrum of India. This is not likely to subside in near future. Those people and regions are likely to be more concerned where cultural identities are sharply defined.
REFERENCES
Business Standard (2016) Two crore illegal Bangladeshi living in India: Govt. Business Standard, 16 November, 2016. Available At: https://www.business-standard.com/article/pti-stories/two-crore-illegal-bangladeshi-living-in-india-govt-116111601110_1.html
Business Standard (2019) Refugee status or deportation for Rohingyas? SC may rule before CJI retires. Business Standard, 16 August, 2019. Available At: https://www.business-standard.com/article/current-affairs/refugee-status-or-deportation-for-rohingyas-sc-may-rule-before-cji-retires-119081600125_1.html
GOI (2015) Notification, Ministry of Home Affairs, 7 September, 2015. Available At: https://indianfrro.gov.in/frro/Notifications_dated_7.9.2015.pdf
India Today (2019) What is Assam Accord of 1985 and how amended citizenship law challenges it? Available At: https://www.indiatoday.in/news-analysis/story/what-is-assam-accord-of-1985-and-how-amended-citizenship-law-challenges-it-1627965-2019-12-13
MEA (retrieved 2020) Nehru-Liaquat Agreement, MEA, GOI. Available At: https://mea.gov.in/Portal/LegalTreatiesDoc/PA50B1228.pdf
Rampal, Nikhil (2019) Maximum immigrants from Pakistan and Bangladesh entered India more than 30 years ago. India Today, 14 December, 2019. Available At: https://www.indiatoday.in/diu/story/how-voting-behaviour-of-delhiites-changed-since-1952-1645876-2020-02-12
Reuters (2017) Chakma refugees to get citizenship after 50 years in India, not land. Available At: https://www.reuters.com/article/us-india-landrights-refugees/chakma-refugees-to-get-citizenship-after-50-years-in-india-not-land-idUSKCN1BU1CK
Scroll. In (2017) 50 years on, Chakma refugees from Bangladesh are still denied citizenship rights in Arunachal. Available At: https://scroll.in/article/845129/50-years-on-chakma-refugees-from-bangladesh-are-still-denied-citizenship-rights-in-arunachal
Slideshare.in (retrieved 2020) Genesis of Nellie Massacre and Assam Agitation. Available At: https://www.slideshare.net/umain30/genesis-of-nellie-massacre-and-assam-agitation
Leave a Reply