Read More ColumnsPOPULATION CHANGES AND NATIONAL SECURITY CONCERNS
Previous Parts
Fowards Part One Part two
National security and its changing face
(November 07, Chennai, Sri Lanka Guardian) There appears to be a lot of semantic confusion about National Security. Often it is used in the limited sense of being the same as National Defence. Though defence ensured by armed forces as a guarantor of territorial integrity is an important and major component, the demise of the multi-polar world, increasing globalisation and integration of nations have enlarged the dimensions of National Security. According to Gen Ved Prakash Malik, former Chief of Army Staff, “Trends and statistics of the last 50 years have shown that the armed conflicts around the world have been gradually moving down the paradigm scale of intensity as well as inclusivity.”
New security challenges are diverse and multi-dimensional. These include different forms of terrorism, economic under-development, trade imbalances and disputes, illegal migration of people, uncontrolled population growth, human rights abuses, drug trafficking, environmental degradation, and conflicts over access to natural resources that are key to development e.g. water and oil.[30] All these challenges are by and large interconnected. According to Gen Malik, some of the national security issues faced in India are -
• Problems of national assimilation and integration, particularly of Border States in the North and North Eastern parts of India.
• Porous borders with Nepal, Bhutan, Myanmar, Bangladesh, and Sri Lanka which enable illegal trans border movements and smuggling of weapons and drugs. These days AK rifles, machine guns, rocket propelled grenades, land mines, RDX, even shoulder fired surface to air missiles are easily available from such sources.
• Exploitation of ethnic and religious minority status by unscrupulous political leaders.
• Nexus between crime, insurgency and politics.
• Weak governance including large-scale corruption, poor law and order machinery in many states.
Thus National Security is no more a concept to be left only to military brass and defence analysts. As an analyst said, “Today national security means not only immunity against foreign aggression or intervention, it also includes an absence of hunger and diseases, poverty and illiteracy. National security policy must ensure not only physical protection of the state; it must provide a framework for the growth of a healthy, progressive and democratic society. Political leaders and policy makers have to carefully balance the country’s defence and social needs.”[31] The global war on terrorism has highlighted the need for certain perquisites of National Security – sense of nationhood, a national vision, and a desire to safeguard national identity, culture, interest and its physical entity among the people. [32]
Viewed in this global scenario, the dimensions of National Security now encompass a wide spectrum - territorial integrity of the nation, securing national economy and fiscal structure from predatory operations, fostering national identity and the sense of nationhood among the people, providing social security for citizens, fostering a sense of security among the people, security of internal and international communications by all means including electronic, securing the environment from degradation and nuclear security. Illegal migration of foreigners regardless of their religion poses a threat to all these aspects of national security.
In a heterogeneous society like India, where the common ethos is the binding factor of nationhood, fostering national identity is a key element of national security. Foreigners seeking refuge in India like the Chakmas of Bangladesh, Tibetans from Tibet and Burmese students are products of situations where possibilities of their return to the home country exist. As they are recognized by their nationality, they do not threaten Indian national identity. On the other hand illegal immigration of foreign nationals covertly threatens national security as they hide their national identity and merge with the population. And this problem is in addition to citizens of Pakistan and Bangladesh, who come with legitimate travel documents, but do not return to their home country. In a counter affidavit filed in Supreme Court of India in a case filed by the All India Lawyers Forum for Civil Liberties (AIFCL), Joint Secretary, Home (Political Department), Government of West Bengal, had acknowledged “that between 1972 and 1997 a total number of 9,91,031 Bangladeshi nationals entered into Indian territory with valid travel documents but they did not return to Bangladesh and have overstayed.”[33]
Demography and illegal immigration
Though there are population changes in respect of all religionists, any discussion of demographic change in the country as related to national security brings to the fore the question of Muslim population changes. There are two reasons for this:
a. One is the issue of partition of India and creation of a homeland for Indian Muslims in Pakistan (now mutated into two homelands following the secession of the Eastern wing into Bangladesh.). Sections of Hindu population, particularly those of the Hindu right, believe that any perceived or actual abnormal growth of Muslim population in the country might lead to a partition of the country all over again. The emergence of Muslim extremist organizations like the Student Islamic Movement of India (SIMI) and years of involvement of Pakistan in Jihadi terrorism in Kashmir are pointed out as examples of Muslim ‘disloyalty’. They find center-left parties cultivating vote banks by pampering Muslim community through inequitable laws favouring Muslims and thereby compromising national security considerations.
b. The second issue is India’s fear of illegal immigrants compromising India’s security and territorial integrity. This fear is more because of nationality than religion. It has been fuelled by the large-scale illegal infiltration of Bangladeshis, predominantly Muslims, along border districts of India’s eastern and northeastern states. A number of small ethnic insurgent groups have been operating in some of the seven northeastern states of India. Prior to the creation of Bangladesh, Pakistan’s Inter Services Intelligence (ISI) had given refuge to some these groups in East Pakistan and provided arms and resources to them to carryout operations across the borders in northeast India. Though India helped in the creation of Bangladesh, some of these groups have continued to launch their violent forays from launch pads in Bangladesh. Bangladesh has consistently denied their existence on their soil. Thus the fear of illegal immigrants compromising border security is a genuine one.[34]
Even other eminent persons like TV Rajeswar, at present the Governor of Uttar Pradesh and former Governor of West Bengal and Lt General S.K. Sinha, Governor of Assam, had voiced their fears of drastic changes in demographic make up for reasons of national security. Rajeswar had said: “There is a distinct danger of another Muslim country, speaking predominantly Bengali, emerging in the eastern part of India in the future, at a time when India might find itself weakened politically and militarily. And second that the danger is as grave even if that third Islamic State does not get carved out as a full-fledged country’. [35]
Demographic changes in India have come through natural growth of population, migration of population, refugees, and illegal infiltration of foreign nationals. Irrespective of religious belief or ethnicity, the first two of these involve only Indian nationals and have limited and manageable impact on National Security. On the other hand, illegal migration of foreign nationals poses a major threat to National Security as it makes the question of nationhood meaningless. Indian history and culture are closely intertwined with India’s neigbhours – Pakistan, Nepal, Bhutan, Tibet (China), Myanmar, Bangladesh, Sri Lanka and Maldives. Its close interactions with these nations both in war and peace over generations have given Indian population a multi-ethnic, multi-religious and multi-lingual makeup. Both legal and illegal demographic changes of India are often the result of these neighbouring states’ internal situations as well as their relations with India. The partition of India, the occupation of Tibet by China and the creation of Bangladesh were some of the major events in the history of the Indian subcontinent that resulted in a flood of refugees flowing into India.
As India progresses economically upward it has attracted both legal and illegal migrants who come in search of jobs. Due to special relationship status with India, some of these migrants like the Nepalese enter legally and have become part of Indian social fabric. However, not all immigrants seamlessly integrate into the national scene like the Nepalese. They upset the delicate socio-economic, religious, political and linguistic structure of traditional societies, which are largely agricultural. This results in social friction and upheaval. A very good example is the massacre of Bangladeshi Muslim immigrants in Nelli in Assam on Feb 18, 1983 by tribals costing as much as 1753 lives. The issue was alienation of tribal land and poverty.[36] In the case of illegal immigrants the problem is much bigger and multi-dimensional. The effort of illegal immigrants, to relinquish their identity and acquire Indian identity covertly causes social havoc. Their efforts lead to increased corruption, criminality, confrontation with local law and order machinery and compromises border security. If this occurs in the border states of India, as is the case of Bangladeshi immigrants, there are added dimensions of external intervention in internal security situations of the states – a euphemistic way of saying abetting terrorism and insurgency.
Illegal immigration of Bangladeshis after 1971 has been an ongoing process in many parts of India. Apart from the states of West Bengal, Assam and Tripura, which have been, seriously affected, Bangladeshi Muslims immigrants are found in Bihar and cities like New Delhi and Mumbai. As this paper is only dealing with demographic concerns in a democracy and national security, the author has not dwelt upon in detail on population issues as whole for the country but has chosen the example of Assam to explain the issues involved. This in no way should be construed as minimizing the magnitude of the problem faced in other states.
Illegal immigration in Assam
Immigration of peasant labour, most of them Bengali Muslims, had been an ongoing phenomenon in the plains of Assam even before partition. Even then this was not only an ongoing point of confrontation between Hindus and Muslims but also the Congress and Muslim League. This was a cause of concern perceived by British administration also. Sanjoy Hazarika quotes C.S. Mullen, Census Commissioner for Assam, commenting on the increase in Bengali settlers in Nowgong district going up by two thirds (from 300,000 to 500,000) between 1921and 1931 as: “the immigrant army has almost completed the conquest of Nowgong. The Barpeta sub-division of Kamrup has also fallen to their attack and Darrang is being invaded. Sibsagar has so far escaped completely but a few thousand Mymensinghias in North Lakimpur are an outpost which may, during the next decades, prove to be vulnerable for major operations.”[37]
Since then this phenomenon is continuing till date. Only the Bengali speaking Muslim immigrants come illegally because they are foreign nationals. They come because of land alienation, poverty, unemployment and lack of adequate social infrastructure in Bangladesh, which figures in the list of world’s poorest countries. They unwittingly transfer these pressures to Assam. These social pressures cause friction in communities as shown by the long spell of agitation launched by the All Assam Students Union in the eighties, which threw the ruling party out of office and paralysed normal life. But the concern is not because they are Muslims or Bengalis but for reasons of security, as eloquently brought out in 1998 by General S.K. Sinha.
In early November 1998, General S.K. Sinha had sent an official report to the President—‘Report on Illegal Migration into Assam submitted to the President of India by the Governor of Assam’. This report presents a bird’s eye view of the situation then. In this report, General Sinha drew attention to the differential decadal growth of population of Hindus and Muslims in Assam—33.7 per cent and 38.3 per cent in 1951-61, respectively; 37.2 per cent and 31 per cent, respectively, in 1961-71; and an estimated 41.9 per cent and 77.4 per cent, respectively, in 1981-91—and observed:
‘‘The Muslim population of Assam has shown a rise of 77.42 per cent in 1991 from what it was in 1971. The Hindu population has risen by nearly 41.89 per cent in this period. The Muslim population (as a percentage of total population) in Assam has risen from 24.68 per cent in 1951 to 28.42 per cent in 1991. As per the 1991 Census, four districts (Dhubri, Goalpara, Barpeta and Hailakandi) have become Muslim-majority districts. Two more districts (Naogaon and Karimganj) should have become so by 1998 and one more district (Morgaon) is fast approaching this position.
‘‘The growth of the Muslim population has been emphasised in the previous paragraph to indicate the extent of illegal migration from Bangladesh to Assam because...the illegal migrants coming into India after 1971 have been almost exclusively Muslims...Large-scale illegal migration from East Pakistan/Bangladesh over several decades has been altering the demographic complexion of this State,’’ Sinha recorded. ‘‘It poses a grave threat both to the identity of the Assamese people and to our national security. Successive governments at the Centre and in the state have not adequately met this challenge...I feel it is my bounden duty to the nation and the state I have sworn to serve to place before you this report on the dangers arising from the continuing silent demographic invasion...’’ [38].
There was no response from the government to this report as in the case of T.V. Rajasekar’s report also. Both were not right wing Hindu politicians, but former government servants of high reputation and governors appointed by the ruling Congress party!
The population growth figures in the border districts of Assam since then are as follows as per the census figures for 2001 which were published figures for 2001 [39]:
Percentage of growth of population between 1991 & 2001 in Assam districts bordering Bangladesh
District Muslims Non-Muslims Total
Dhubri 29.5 7.1 22.9
Goalpara 31.7 14.4 23.0
Hailakandi 27.2 13.3 20.9
Karimganj 29.4 14.5 21.9
Cachar 24.6 16.0 18.9
If this continues unchecked as General Sinha told the President, it ‘‘threatens to reduce the Assamese to a minority in their own state, as happened in Tripura and Sikkim.’’
‘‘The long-cherished design of Greater East Pakistan/Bangladesh, making inroads into the strategic land-link of Assam with the rest of the country,’’ he warned, ‘‘can lead to severing the entire land mass of the North-East...from the rest of the country. This will have disastrous strategic and economic consequences.’’ After tracing in detail the way the demographic balance has been overturned in district after district adjacent to Bangladesh, General Sinha concluded: ‘‘This silent and invidious demographic invasion of Assam may result in the loss of geo-strategically vital districts of Lower Assam. The influx of these illegal migrants is turning these districts into a Muslim-majority region. It will then only be a matter of time when a demand for their merger with Bangladesh may be made. The rapid growth of Islamic fundamentalism may provide the driving force for this demand. In this context, it is pertinent that Bangladesh has long discarded secularism and has chosen to become an Islamic State. Loss of Lower Assam will sever the entire land mass of the North-East from the rest of India...
In this context, an observation on the security risk posed by such unchecked illegal immigrants in a report on the same subject of illegal migration of Bangladeshi Muslims forwarded to the president by the Governor of West Bengal T. V. Rajeswar pertaining to West Benagal is significant. He says in the report: “ A study of the border belt of West Bengal yields some telling statistics: 20-40 per cent villages in the border districts are said to be predominantly Muslim. There are indications that the concentration of the minority community, including the Bangladesh immigrants, in the villages has resulted in the majority community moving to urban centres. Several towns in the border districts are now predominantly inhabited by the majority community but surrounded by villages mostly dominated by the minority community. Lin Piao’s theory of occupying the villages before overwhelming the cities comes to mind, though the context is different. However, the basic factor of security threat in both the cases is the same.” There cannot be a more ominous warning.
Handling of the illegal immigrant issue in Assam
The handling of the illegal immigrant issue in Assam is a classic example how as a nation we have been trivializing national security considerations for reasons of political expediency and parochial interests. Main aberration is inflating electoral rolls to swell the number of voters, particularly on the eve of elections. Sanjoy Hazarika quotes of an incident when Moinul Haq Chowdhury, a former Cabinet Minsiter under Prime Minister Indira Gandhi and former Muslim League activist youth leader until independence, was involved in such traffic for purposes of elections. In the 1989 general election, Chowdhury “wanted the BSF to look the other way and allow 50,000 Bangladeshis to come into the constituency, vote and return”, an Inspector General of Border Security Force (BSF) at that time recounted to Hazarika. [40].
From time to time, governments both at Delhi and at Assam have taken half-hearted and shortsighted measures to check the illegal immigrants and push them back. But the problem has grown so big, that the nation as a whole will have to get into the act. It is interesting to note that aliens in Assam are not prosecuted by the state under Foreigners Act 1946, which is applied in the rest of India. In Assam, the Foreigners Act was used only to identify and prosecute illegal immigrants who came prior to 1971. Evidently this is a direct consequence of vote bank politics. The various enactments, both past and present for handling illegal immigrants applied only in Assam are as follows:
a. Immigrants (Expulsion from Assam) Act of 1950: According to this all the Hindus were considered refugees while Muslims were aliens. This discriminatory act was repealed in 1957.
b. Prevention of Infiltration from Pakistan (PIP) Act of 1964: The PIP raised a special border police force of 1,914 men headed by a Deputy Inspector General of Police. A total of 159 watchtowers and 15 patrol posts and six passport checkpoints were set up. But following the Indo-Pak war of 1965 and the creation of BSF the border security task was handed over to them. The Assam special border police were employed in the interior to identify and deport illegal immigrants.
c. Illegal Migrants Determination by Tribunal Act of 1983 (IMDT): This was passed as a political move to thwart the growing influence of AASU, which was paralyzing Assam. Significantly it was passed by a Parliament, which had no members from Assam due to a boycott of elections on this issue. Foreigners Act 1946, which applies to the rest of India, does not apply to migrants in Assam; this Act is to be used for such a purpose.
The IMDT Act came as a result of the Assam Accord signed on Aug 15, 1985, after vigorous agitation and ‘direct action’ by the people of Assam. It has laid down elaborate procedures for the detection and deportation of post Mar 25, 1971 migrants. It is to be applied in accordance with the Foreigners Act, 1946 and Foreigners (Tribunal) Order 1964. It is a complex and curious piece of legislation. According to this an Indian citizen living within a radius of 5 km has to file a complaint about the illegal immigrants identified by him for taking action to detect and deport him. He has to pay a fee for this. The state has established special tribunals in the 16 districts, where retired judges dispose off the petitions. The results achieved are disappointing to say the least. Sanjoy Hazarika gives the following statistics for the work done under the IMDT between1983 to 1987 in Dhubri only: [41]
Total cases brought for investigation: 46,882
Cases found to have merit by police: 15,921
Dead cases by the time brought to trial: 7,940
Shifted elsewhere: 2,838
Addressee untraced: 5.143
Cases brought before tribunal: 2,314
Cases completed 2,260
Not found as foreigners: 2,233
Declared as foreigners: 908
It is clear that nobody has taken the security concerns of the problem really seriously and the IMDT Act is flawed from its inception. A number of writ petitions on the various defective aspects have been filed in the Supreme Court of India. The timeline on the progress of these cases is at Appendix attached. (The timeline also reflects on the entire process of government decision-making). The Government of India claimed that a bill to revise the enactment was to be placed before the Parliament and the Court adjourned the hearing on the cases on March 16, 2003. That is where the issue stands. The Illegal Migrants Laws (Repealing and Amending) Bill 1983 was filed on May 7, 2003 in the Rajya Sabha. It has not been taken up, evidently because the government at the Centre has changed. It appears that it is not a priority issue for any political party, which are reactively nit picking on actions taken by one another. As Arun Shourie eloquently puts it, “The executives can’t tackle the problem. The legislatures won’t tackle it. And this is how the courts tackle it.” [42] Where do we go from here is a question waiting for a long time to be answered? Meanwhile, illegal immigration continues unabated. More lives are lost by violent activities engineered by motley collection of insurgent groups ensconced in safe houses in Bangladesh. All of us stand helpless with our own priorities, which are other than a concern for national security.
ROAD AHEAD
To conclude, as the aim of this paper is analytical rather than prescriptive there are no recommendations for implementation. It will be oversimplifying a complex problem confronting national security if the author ventures to suggest a prescriptive course. It involves action by the governments at various levels, political parties, intelligentsia, bureaucracy, diplomats, security forces and the common man. And it is a conundrum waiting to be solved within the process of a democratic government in a way it does not damage the relationship between the Hindu and Muslim populations in border areas who will be bearing the brunt of any action.
However, even a cursory glance of the three inter-related issues of democracy, demography and national security will reveal certain common issues that need to be urgently addressed by the nation. The traditional Hindu method of tackling a problem through sama, beda, dhana, dhanda can guide us in evolving integrated solutions These include:
a. Long-term solution: Evolving an integrated solution to proactively solution to solve or mitigate the problem and its fallout on national security. This would involve answering the question why the illegal immigrants come and find solutions thereof. It will involve improving relations with Bangladesh to achieve a win-win situation where the abysmally poor people there will find it profitable to stay and work in Bangladesh itself. There had been a number of analytical articles on this subject, including one by the author. [43]
b. National security concerns: This should become national priority number one. All political parties need to be educated on this. Pressure groups can be created to educate the public as well. Again this requires an integrated solution to make northeast a viable region where youth will have a stake in bringing peace there, so that they give up insurgency. Bangladesh itself is facing increasing militancy from Jihadi groups operating there.[44] It will have to be persuaded that it will be in their own interest to tighten illegal border traffic.
c. Hindu-Muslim relationship concerns: It is time we evolved a national consensus on addressing Hindu-Muslim concerns speedily rather than using them as political tools to gain power. This would depend upon where and how we want to take the nation forward so that democracy graduates from creating a ‘one percent society’ to become one of the tigers of Asia. [45] Many of the issues earlier discussed can be solved if only the nation makes up its mind. If the creative mind of the Indian can contribute to the growth of modern technology, this should not be a problem.
National security is not to be treated in isolation. The citizen should perceive the nation’s security as dearer than his own life. To achieve this level of perfection, we need to make his existence more meaningful and productive than live in hunger and penury. Governance has to be more responsive. A number of things need to be addressed urgently. The list seems endless: transparency as an article of faith, rule of law and strict law enforcement, judicial reforms to ensure fair and speedy dispensation of justice, sensitisation of bureaucracy for a human approach in governance, equitable laws for all regions and religions, introducing economic rather than religious or caste criteria for affirmative action, introduction of a national identity card system, strict enforcement of uniform immigration laws, and electoral reforms, to list a few. As the cliché goes if there is a will, there is way. As Swami Chinmayanda had said: “Everyone of us may not be able to at once to achieve the infinite expansion of universal oneness, but all of us are trying. Religion’s original task was to help us in gradually achieving this elevated vision. To lift the limited and selfish human being from his passion, greed, and hatred to this loftier vision of the world was the essential ideal of religion.”[46] There cannot be a better way to practice Hinduism in its true spirit than to do that.
None of the above issues are new; there had been any number of studies, commissions and official reports on each one of them. All of them are complex, time consuming and at least some are explosive. But a mature nation has to learn to bite the bullet and handle the unpleasant and difficult issues to become a great nation. It has to accept change and undergo trials and tribulations of restructuring itself to bring the benefits of a truly democratic nation to make it meaningful to the underdog; otherwise National Security will be at peril. Seeing the past record, chances of any real time progress appears bleak. But there is hope in youth; they don’t carry the pangs of partition and the hatred it generated. As Thomas Paine said “those who expect to reap the blessings of freedom must, like men, undergo the fatigue of supporting it.”
Notes
1. In this context Margaret Mead has said: “A society which is clamoring for choice, which is filled with many articulate groups, each urging its own brand of salvations, its own variety of economic philosophy, will give each new generation no peace until all have chosen or gone under, unable to bear the conditions of choice. The stress is in our civilization.”
2. Background paper issued by the President, Rashtriya Jagriti Sansthan for this conference.
3. The author considers the year 1971-72 a watershed in the history of Indian democracy. Major events like the India-Pakistan war of 1971 that resulted in the birth of Bangladesh, imposition of a state of emergency for the first time ever by the Indian Prime Minister Mrs. Indira Gandhi, her defeat at the polls later and the emergence of the first-ever coalition Government at the Centre had their genesis in this period. Indian politics and centralized political functioning had never been the same thereafter
4. I understand the term Hindu used in this paper as explained by Dr. Frank Gaetano Morales, as “… an individual who accepts as authoritative the religious guidance of the Vedic scriptures, and who strives to live in accordance with Dharma, God’s divine laws as revealed in the Vedic scriptures. In keeping with this standard definition, all of the Hindu thinkers of the six traditional schools of Hindu philosophy (Shad-darshanas) insisted on the acceptance of the scriptural authority (shabda-pramana) of the Vedas as the primary criterion for distinguishing a Hindu from a non-Hindu, as well as distinguishing overtly Hindu philosophical positions from non-Hindu ones.” Does Hinduism teach all religions are the same? See http://www.dharmacentral.com/..
5. The word jihad comes from an Arabic root j-h-d, with the basic meaning of striving or effort. It is often used in classical texts with the closely related meaning of struggle, and hence also of fight. The word jihadi is used here to mean who fights. See Bernard Lewis, The Crisis of Islam. Phoenix Books, 2003, page 25.
6. Chambers 21st Century Dictionary, Allied Chambers (India) Ltd, New Delhi.
7. Swami Vivekananda, Interviews, Pages 226-227, The Complete Works of Swami Vivekananda, Vol. V, Advaita Ashrama, Calcutta. 1992
8. Alberuni’s India, abridged by Ainslie T Embree, New York, Norton 1971, chapter 14.
9. This contrasts with Pakistan, which had tried to distance itself from the moorings in composite Indian culture by creating a notional Islamic culture of Turkish and Arabic origin. The author feels this as one of the reasons for the growth of Jihadi terrorism in Pakistan
10. Any citizen, who has a grievance of public interest, can file a petition in the higher courts of India including the Supreme Court. Under this dispensation first offered by Justice Bhagawati of the Supreme Court, citizens’ complaints have been admitted as legal petitions at the Supreme Court.
11. Quoted by Dr. Laurence J. Peter, Quotations – Ideas for our time, Page 153, Quill William Morrow, New York. 1992
12. Unfortunately in their interaction with Hindu society, Muslims appear to have picked up the practice of caste differences also. R.Upadhyay, South Asia Advisory Group, NOIDA, “Muslim brotherhood -A key to Communal politics in India” Paper No 1072, Aug 30, 2004 states: “Theoretically, the Muslim community is a caste-less society but in practice Indian Muslims are socially divided between the descendants of Muslim invaders, converts from upper caste Hindus and lower caste Hindu converts. Shaikh, Sayed, Pathan and Moghuls who belong to upper strata of Muslim society and popularly known as Ashraf Muslims do not maintain equality in social interaction with their co-religionists, who belong to their pre-Islamic lower caste Hindus like barber, washerman, weaver, butcher, scavenger and so on. Still carrying the mental burden of their pre-Islamic castes, they continue to suffer from inferiority complex in their social interaction with upper caste converts. Though, there is no religious binding, the inter-marriage between different groups of Indian converts is not common in Muslim society.” http://www.saag.org/
13. Swami Vivekananda, Pages 425-416, The Complete Works of Swami Vivekananda, Vol. VI, Advaita Ashrama, Calcutta. 1992
14. This part of the paper is based upon Hardy. P’s, Sources of Indian Tradition, second edition, Vol. I, New Delhi, Penguin Books India (P) Ltd, 1991
15. For instance Moghul emperor Akbar’s great grandson Dara Shikoh (1615-1659) as a follower of Qadirir order of Sufis had studied Hindu philosophy and mystical practices. He was accused of heresy by the orthodoxy) Hardy. P. ibid p-471.
16. Shah Wali Ullah made significant contribution for the re-establishment of Islamic political authority in India. It was the political theory of Wali ullah that kept the Indian Muslims emotional social disorder and deprived them of a from forward-looking vision. Being proud of his Arab origin, he was strongly opposed to integration of Islamic culture in the cultural cauldron of the sub-continent and wanted the Muslims to ensure their distance from it. ""In his opinion, the health of Muslim society demanded that doctrines and values inculcated by Islam should be maintained in their pristine purity unsullied by extraneous influences" (The Muslim Community of Indo-Pakistan subcontinent by Istiaq Hussain Qureshi, 1985, People's Publishing House, Lahore, page 216 quoted by R Upadhyay ibid.). Waliullah did not want the Muslims to become part of the general milieu of the sub-continent. He wanted them to keep alive their relation with rest of the Muslim world so that the spring of their inspiration and ideals might ever remain located in Islam and tradition of world community developed by it". (Ibid. page 215). In the opinion of R. Upadhyay, the religious-political ideology of Wali Ullah made a permanent crack in Hindu--Muslim relation in this sub-continent, which undermined the self-pride and dignity of integrated Indian society. (R Upadhyay, Indian Muslims under siege? South Asia Advisory Group, NOIDA, Paper No. 1160, Nov 9, 2004. http://www.saag.org/)
17. B. Raman, Minority separatism in India – The Muslim minority, paper presented at a conference on “Ethnic Minorities and Great Power Strategies in Asia” held at Honolulu from October 12 to 14,2004, under the auspices of the Asia Pacific Centre for Security Studies. (B. Raman, South Asia Advisory Group, NOIDA, Paper No. 1144, Oct 18, 2004. www.saag.org)
18. This refers to the traditional gurukul form of education, which is almost extinct now. A student lives with his guru and learns at his feet, treating him as a guide to life than mere knowledge.
19. R.Upadhyay, Indian Muslims under siege? South Asia Advisory Group, NOIDA, Paper ibid
20. Ayaz Amir, “A ‘sincere’ approach to Kashmir”, Dawn weekly, July 17, 2004. http://www.dawn.com/weekly/ayaz/20040611.htm
21. In his "Last Pilgrimage" address Prophet Mohammed said, "Oh ye people, a Muslim is another Muslim's brother and thus all Muslims are brothers among themselves”; see M.R.A.Baig, The Muslim Dilemma, Page 12, 1974 (quoted by R Upadhyay ibid).
22. Mohammad Yasin, A Social History of Islamic India, Second Edition, 1974. Pages 3 & 69 (quoted by R Upadhyay ibid).
23. Asghar Ali Engineer, Islam and Muslim, 1985, Page 127.
24. Rafiq Zakaria; Indian Muslims - Where they have gone wrong? Bharatiya Vidya Bhavan, Mumbai-400007. 2004
25. For a detailed analysis of minority laws in Pakistan, see Shazia Rafiq, The Plight of Minorities In Pakistan August, 2004, http://www.pakistanweekly.com/Opinion1.htm
26. Ayaz Amir, ibid, Dawn weekly, July 17, 2004
27. See Bernard Lewis, The Crisis of Islam, Phoenix, Orion Books Ltd., London, 2003, for a background on Wahabism and its growth with the patronage of the Royal House of Saud.
28. In the words of U.S. Treasury Department official and expert on financing of terrorism David Afhauser “What (Saudi-funded mosques and other Islamic institutions) taught was an unforgiving, intolerant, uncompromising and austere view of the faith that became kindling for Osama Bin Laden’s match,” as stated in a U.S. Congressional hearing. For detailed analysis of Saudi involvement see http://www.townhall.com/columnists/joelmowbray/jm20040623.shtml
29. Rajmohan Gandhi, Understanding the Muslim Mind, Penguin Books, New Delhi 1987
30. Gen. V.P. Malik, Changing Paradigms of Security: Need for Multi-Disciplinary Approach, paper published in www.ORFonline.org, June 11, 2004
31. Ishfaq Illahi Choudhry, Secret Challenges of South Asian Country in the coming Decade: An Overview, BISS Journal, Dhaka, Vol. 21, No. 1, 2000.
32. B. Raman, presentation on ‘Issues in National Security’, ORF, Chennai, September 26, 2004
33. Ccounter affidavit filed in response to writ petition(civil) No. 125 of 1998 filed in the Supreme Court of India. Quoted by Sanjoy Hazarika, Rites of passage, Penguin Books India, New Delhi, 2000, page 306
34. See Wilson John, The Roots of Extremism in Bangladesh, Observer Research Foundation, New Delhi, Jan 2005, http://www.orfonline.org/
35. Quoted by Arun Shourie, The silent demographic invasion, part-1 to 3, http://www.indianexpress.com/full_story.php?content_id=56631#
36. Sanjoy Hazarika, ibid. Page 49-52.
37. Sanjoy Hazarika, ibid. Page 72.
38. Census of India published the population figures of Assam on its website; but these were taken off after three days evidently the ruling party found the political storm raised by the figures. Now officially the Census of India report does not carry these figures.
39. Quoted by Arun Shourie, ibid.
40. Sanjoy Hazarika, ibid. Page 57.
41. Sanjoy Hazarika, ibid. Page 135..
42. Arun Shourie, ibid.
43. Col R Hariharan, Bangladesh and India: Time to build a synergy in security, South Asia Advisory Group, NOIDA, Paper 1117, Sep 16, 2004. http://www.saag.org/papers12/paper1117.html
44. See Col R Hariharan, Banglabhai syndrome: is it vigilantism or Jejadi terrorism?, South Asia Advisory Group, NOIDA, Paper 1035 . http://www.saag.org/papers11/paper1035.html .
U.N. concern of links in Bangladesh with Al Qaeda are given in the daily New Age, Aug 30, 2004. See http://www.newagebd.com/front.html#4
45. T.E. Nainan presents an interesting cameo of India’s growth in India, the 1% society. See http://in.rediff.com/money/2004/sep/11guest.htm
46. Quoted by Swami Tejomayananda, Hindu Culture: An Introduction, Central Chinmaya Mission Trust, Mumbai-400 072, 2000
(Col R Hariharan, an MI specialist in counter-insurgency intelligence, served with the IPKF as Head of Intelligence in Sri Lanka. E-mail: colhari@yahoo.com)
Appendix
THE TIMELINE OF EVENTS RELATING TO
ILLEGAL MIGRANTS IN ASSAM
November 23, 1946: The Foreigners Act 1946 enacted. This gave to the Central Government certain powers in respect of the entry of foreigners into the territory of India, their presence therein and their departure from India.
September 23, 1964: The Foreigners (Tribunals) Order 1964 put out by the Central Government. This provided that any question as to whether a particular person is or is not a foreigner was to be referred to the Tribunals that were being constituted for the purpose.
October 15, 1983: Despite the existence of the Act of 1946 and despite the fact that it applied to the whole of India, the Illegal Migrants (Determination by Tribunals) Act was enacted in 1983 by Parliament to provide for the determination of illegal migrants and their deportation. This Act was made applicable only to Assam, and more specifically only to those foreigners who had entered into India after March 25, 1971, and were not in possession of valid passports or travel documents or other legal authority to enter India.
August 15, 1985: A Memorandum of Settlement was entered into between the All Assam Students’ Union (AASU), the State of Assam and the Union of India, commonly known as the ‘Assam Accord’. Among other things, the Accord provided:
‘‘The Government will give due consideration to certain difficulties expressed by AASU/AAGSP regarding the implementation of the Illegal Migrants (Determination by Tribunals) Act, 1983.’’
December 7, 1985: In pursuance of the Accord, the Citizenship Act 1955 was amended in 1985 and a new Section 6A was inserted into the Act.
span >
January 27, 1990: A ‘‘time frame’’ for ‘‘clause-wise implementation’’ of the Assam Accord was prepared, and signed by the Union Home Ministry and the Chief Secretary of Assam. It stated that a decision on the repeal of the Act of 1983 would be taken by February 28, 1991.
September 20, 1990: At a meeting between the Union Home Minister, Chief Minister of Assam and representatives of AASU, the Government ‘‘noted’’ the demand of the representatives of AASU that the Act of 1983 be repealed, and assured the representatives of AASU that it would initiate discussions with other political parties on the subject.
span >
August 11, 1997: At a meeting regarding the implementation of the Accord, the Central Government stated that although necessary administrative and organisational framework in the form of setting up tribunals and providing requisite staff to them had been set up, the results achieved had been extremely poor, and that there was a need to analyse carefully why the system had failed and what needed to be done to achieve the objective of detection and deportation of foreigners. On behalf of AASU, its president stated at the meeting that the former prime minister had visited Assam in October 1996 and had informed AASU that a decision had already been taken to repeal the IMDT Act.
April 6, 1998: At a meeting between officials of the Ministry of Home Affairs, Government of India, officials of the government of Assam and representatives of AASU, it was decided that the proposal made by the officials of the government of Assam and the representatives of AASU seeking the repeal of the Act of 1983 would be put up to the new Government for a decision.
September 23, 1998: Another meeting was held between the Government of India, government of Assam and representatives of AASU, the parties to the Assam Accord. The participants were informed that the repeal of the IMDT Act was ‘‘under the active consideration’’ of the Government.
February 1999: In his address to Parliament, the President of India stated that the repeal of the IMDT Act was ‘‘under the active consideration’’ of the Government.
March 18, 1999: At a meeting between representatives of the governments of India and Assam, and the representatives of AASU, the Government reiterated that the repeal of the IMDT Act was ‘‘under the active consideration’’ of the Government. Measures being taken to identify foreigners—for example, issue of photo identity cards—and the steps being taken to seal the border were also discussed.
July 1, 1999: At a further meeting, the representatives of AASU urged that an ordinance be issued to repeal the IMDT Act. They were again assured that the matter was ‘‘under the active consideration’’ of the Government of India.
March 2000: As nothing but nothing was happening, an erstwhile president of AASU, Sarbananda Sonowal, thought it would be a good idea to take the matter to the Supreme Court—after all, here was an institution that had been seizing the initiative on so many matters in which the Executive had not acted, or not been able to act. Accordingly, he filed a petition in the Supreme Court. He argued that the Act ought to be struck down as it so patently flew against the Constitution, and as it was patently discriminatory—laws applicable in the rest of the country made it so much easier to detect and deport foreigners than this law that had been imposed on the region of the country that was most afflicted by their invasion.
He had the greatest difficulty in finding a lawyer who would argue the case in the public interest. Mr Ashok Desai took up the case. That was in March 2000. Since then the case has come up a score of times. Several Chief Justices have come and gone. A Congress government has replaced the AGP government in Assam, which had filed an affidavit supporting the petition. This new government has filed an ‘‘additional affidavit’’—reversing the stand of the government of Assam as stated in its original affidavit! The Government at the Centre too has changed. Successive orders of the Supreme Court tell the tale. Here they are:
• April 17, 2000: Let a copy of the Writ Petition be served on the amicus in Writ Petition (c) No 125/98. To be heard along with that Petition.
• May 1, 2000: Additional Solicitor General prays for six weeks’ further time to furnish the status report. We grant the prayer.
• July 17, 2000: The delay in filing the status report is condoned. Copy of the status report has been furnished to counsel for the parties. Responses, if any, to the status report may also be filed within four weeks.
• August 28, 2000: Mr Ashok H Desai, senior counsel appearing for the writ petitioner in Writ Petition(c) 131/2000, has drawn our attention to an affidavit filed on behalf of the Union of India and, in particular, to the position detailed at page 214 of the ‘‘updated status position’’ attached to that affidavit, wherein it is stated that:
‘‘The Government is of the view that the Illegal Migrants (Determination by Tribunals) Act 1983, in its application to the State of Assam alone, is discriminatory. The proposal to repeal this Act is under active consideration of the Government.’’
Mr Desai has also drawn our attention to an affidavit filed on behalf of the State of Assam, respondent No 2, wherein it is stated on the affidavit of Shri D J Hazarika, Officer-on-Special Duty to the Government of Assam, that: ‘‘The State Government has thus been insisting upon the Central Government for repeal of the IMDT Act. Now, in the Counter Affidavit filed by the Central Government, it has been admitted that the Act is ‘discriminatory’ in nature and on such admission, the Act is liable to be struck down as unconstitutional.’’
Mr R N Trivedi, Additional Solicitor General, submits that he stands by the affidavit filed on behalf of the Union of India, but would like to seek further instructions in that behalf and prays for the matter to be adjourned and taken up in January 2001. We grant his prayer. In the meanwhile, ‘updated status reports’ may be filed by the Union of India and the concerned State Governments.
• January 8, 2001: WP(c) 125/1998 & 131/2000
Counsel for the parties submit that they have already filed counter/rejoinder. The additional document is still to be filed, let the same be filed within six weeks. The petitions shall be posted for final hearing before a three-judge Bench. To be listed after six weeks for directions.
• February 26, 2001: Issue notice in the impalement applications two other writ petitions pending. Let the parties complete pleadings in all these petitions within six weeks. Counsel for the parties shall also, within two weeks from the date of completion of the pleadings, file brief written submissions, not exceeding five pages each. They shall be at liberty to exchange written submissions between themselves. Learned counsel for the interveners are also permitted to file their response to the writ petitions as well as written submissions. To be listed for directions to fix time schedule for hearing after eight weeks.
• July 9, 2001: Counsel for the State of Assam prayer for four weeks time to file a further affidavit granted. Rejoinder, if any, to be submitted within three weeks thereafter.
• October 15, 2001: Writ Petition (c) No. 125 of 1998 .An application has been filed on behalf of the State of Assam seeking permission to file ‘‘a new counter affidavit’’. The application is supported by an affidavit of the Commissioner & Secretary, Home Department, Government of Assam. The affidavit filed along with the application treated as ‘‘an additional affidavit' and taken on record the new affidavit as an additional affidavit filed on behalf of the State of Assam. Mr Ashok Desai, learned senior counsel, prays for and is granted four weeks’ time to file his response to the additional affidavit filed by the State. Writ petitions to be after four weeks before a three-judge Bench for further proceedings.
The applicant through their learned counsel is permitted to assist the Court at the time of hearing of the case. The application for impalement is, accordingly, disposed of.
January 9, 2002: Put up this matter along with.
January 18, 2002: Reference I A No. 4 of 2001 and WP(c) No. 131/2000 on January 18, 2002. As these matters deal with the validity of the Illegal Migrants (Determination By Tribunals) Act 1983. In view of the controversy, rule was issued in all these matters. All the respondents have entered appearance and have filed their respective show cause. Put up for final disposal in the third week of April 2002.
April 15, 2002: On perusal of the prayers made in these petitions, it appears that in Writ Petition) No. 131/2000, the validity of Act 39/83 is under challenge and learned counsel for the parties pray that this matter may be heard and disposed of early. Mr Jain, learned senior counsel, also says that in Writ Petition) No. 7/2001, the same prayer has been made. In other matters, the question of implementation of the provisions of the Act and sealing of the border etc are under consideration. Therefore, the court directed that these two petitions may be delinked from this batch of cases and posted for hearing on 22nd April 2002. The counsel are requested to file written submissions in these two matters, if not already filed, in the meantime. Rest of the matter may be put up in July 2002.
• April 22, 2002: The petitioner has filed written submissions. Mr Sanghi appearing for the State of Assam is requested to file his written submissions. All other parties who want to argue asked to file their written submissions and serve copy of the same on the respective counsel for 10th of May, 2002. After hearing, the court directed that these petitions be listed on 13th of August 2002, along with WP(C) No. 581/2001, as it is submitted that the validity of Section 6A of the Citizenship Act 1955 is also under challenge.
• August 13, 2002: The matter is not listed.
• October 28, 2002: Asked to be put up on 20th November 2002.
• November 20, 2002: The matter did not reach the court.
• January 24, 2003: Matter to be list the matter in the month of April 2003 for directions.
• April 7, 2003: Matter to be listed the matter for directions in July 2003.
• July 7, 2003: Court says that a Bill has been introduced in Parliament for repeal of the Act, which is impugned in the present petitions. In that view of the matter, the hearing of the petitions was adjourned. Asks for listing of the petitions in January 2004.
• January 2004: The matter is not listed.
• March 16, 2004: Asked to call in the month of July 2004 as requested. By this time, the country was in the midst of the campaign for general election. The case was adjourned again. And that is where things remain
[Source: Arun Shourie, The silent demographic invasion, part-1 to 3, http://www.indianexpress.com/full_story.php?content_id=56631#]-
Previous Parts
Fowards Part One Part two
National security and its changing face
(November 07, Chennai, Sri Lanka Guardian) There appears to be a lot of semantic confusion about National Security. Often it is used in the limited sense of being the same as National Defence. Though defence ensured by armed forces as a guarantor of territorial integrity is an important and major component, the demise of the multi-polar world, increasing globalisation and integration of nations have enlarged the dimensions of National Security. According to Gen Ved Prakash Malik, former Chief of Army Staff, “Trends and statistics of the last 50 years have shown that the armed conflicts around the world have been gradually moving down the paradigm scale of intensity as well as inclusivity.”
New security challenges are diverse and multi-dimensional. These include different forms of terrorism, economic under-development, trade imbalances and disputes, illegal migration of people, uncontrolled population growth, human rights abuses, drug trafficking, environmental degradation, and conflicts over access to natural resources that are key to development e.g. water and oil.[30] All these challenges are by and large interconnected. According to Gen Malik, some of the national security issues faced in India are -
• Problems of national assimilation and integration, particularly of Border States in the North and North Eastern parts of India.
• Porous borders with Nepal, Bhutan, Myanmar, Bangladesh, and Sri Lanka which enable illegal trans border movements and smuggling of weapons and drugs. These days AK rifles, machine guns, rocket propelled grenades, land mines, RDX, even shoulder fired surface to air missiles are easily available from such sources.
• Exploitation of ethnic and religious minority status by unscrupulous political leaders.
• Nexus between crime, insurgency and politics.
• Weak governance including large-scale corruption, poor law and order machinery in many states.
Thus National Security is no more a concept to be left only to military brass and defence analysts. As an analyst said, “Today national security means not only immunity against foreign aggression or intervention, it also includes an absence of hunger and diseases, poverty and illiteracy. National security policy must ensure not only physical protection of the state; it must provide a framework for the growth of a healthy, progressive and democratic society. Political leaders and policy makers have to carefully balance the country’s defence and social needs.”[31] The global war on terrorism has highlighted the need for certain perquisites of National Security – sense of nationhood, a national vision, and a desire to safeguard national identity, culture, interest and its physical entity among the people. [32]
Viewed in this global scenario, the dimensions of National Security now encompass a wide spectrum - territorial integrity of the nation, securing national economy and fiscal structure from predatory operations, fostering national identity and the sense of nationhood among the people, providing social security for citizens, fostering a sense of security among the people, security of internal and international communications by all means including electronic, securing the environment from degradation and nuclear security. Illegal migration of foreigners regardless of their religion poses a threat to all these aspects of national security.
In a heterogeneous society like India, where the common ethos is the binding factor of nationhood, fostering national identity is a key element of national security. Foreigners seeking refuge in India like the Chakmas of Bangladesh, Tibetans from Tibet and Burmese students are products of situations where possibilities of their return to the home country exist. As they are recognized by their nationality, they do not threaten Indian national identity. On the other hand illegal immigration of foreign nationals covertly threatens national security as they hide their national identity and merge with the population. And this problem is in addition to citizens of Pakistan and Bangladesh, who come with legitimate travel documents, but do not return to their home country. In a counter affidavit filed in Supreme Court of India in a case filed by the All India Lawyers Forum for Civil Liberties (AIFCL), Joint Secretary, Home (Political Department), Government of West Bengal, had acknowledged “that between 1972 and 1997 a total number of 9,91,031 Bangladeshi nationals entered into Indian territory with valid travel documents but they did not return to Bangladesh and have overstayed.”[33]
Demography and illegal immigration
Though there are population changes in respect of all religionists, any discussion of demographic change in the country as related to national security brings to the fore the question of Muslim population changes. There are two reasons for this:
a. One is the issue of partition of India and creation of a homeland for Indian Muslims in Pakistan (now mutated into two homelands following the secession of the Eastern wing into Bangladesh.). Sections of Hindu population, particularly those of the Hindu right, believe that any perceived or actual abnormal growth of Muslim population in the country might lead to a partition of the country all over again. The emergence of Muslim extremist organizations like the Student Islamic Movement of India (SIMI) and years of involvement of Pakistan in Jihadi terrorism in Kashmir are pointed out as examples of Muslim ‘disloyalty’. They find center-left parties cultivating vote banks by pampering Muslim community through inequitable laws favouring Muslims and thereby compromising national security considerations.
b. The second issue is India’s fear of illegal immigrants compromising India’s security and territorial integrity. This fear is more because of nationality than religion. It has been fuelled by the large-scale illegal infiltration of Bangladeshis, predominantly Muslims, along border districts of India’s eastern and northeastern states. A number of small ethnic insurgent groups have been operating in some of the seven northeastern states of India. Prior to the creation of Bangladesh, Pakistan’s Inter Services Intelligence (ISI) had given refuge to some these groups in East Pakistan and provided arms and resources to them to carryout operations across the borders in northeast India. Though India helped in the creation of Bangladesh, some of these groups have continued to launch their violent forays from launch pads in Bangladesh. Bangladesh has consistently denied their existence on their soil. Thus the fear of illegal immigrants compromising border security is a genuine one.[34]
Even other eminent persons like TV Rajeswar, at present the Governor of Uttar Pradesh and former Governor of West Bengal and Lt General S.K. Sinha, Governor of Assam, had voiced their fears of drastic changes in demographic make up for reasons of national security. Rajeswar had said: “There is a distinct danger of another Muslim country, speaking predominantly Bengali, emerging in the eastern part of India in the future, at a time when India might find itself weakened politically and militarily. And second that the danger is as grave even if that third Islamic State does not get carved out as a full-fledged country’. [35]
Demographic changes in India have come through natural growth of population, migration of population, refugees, and illegal infiltration of foreign nationals. Irrespective of religious belief or ethnicity, the first two of these involve only Indian nationals and have limited and manageable impact on National Security. On the other hand, illegal migration of foreign nationals poses a major threat to National Security as it makes the question of nationhood meaningless. Indian history and culture are closely intertwined with India’s neigbhours – Pakistan, Nepal, Bhutan, Tibet (China), Myanmar, Bangladesh, Sri Lanka and Maldives. Its close interactions with these nations both in war and peace over generations have given Indian population a multi-ethnic, multi-religious and multi-lingual makeup. Both legal and illegal demographic changes of India are often the result of these neighbouring states’ internal situations as well as their relations with India. The partition of India, the occupation of Tibet by China and the creation of Bangladesh were some of the major events in the history of the Indian subcontinent that resulted in a flood of refugees flowing into India.
As India progresses economically upward it has attracted both legal and illegal migrants who come in search of jobs. Due to special relationship status with India, some of these migrants like the Nepalese enter legally and have become part of Indian social fabric. However, not all immigrants seamlessly integrate into the national scene like the Nepalese. They upset the delicate socio-economic, religious, political and linguistic structure of traditional societies, which are largely agricultural. This results in social friction and upheaval. A very good example is the massacre of Bangladeshi Muslim immigrants in Nelli in Assam on Feb 18, 1983 by tribals costing as much as 1753 lives. The issue was alienation of tribal land and poverty.[36] In the case of illegal immigrants the problem is much bigger and multi-dimensional. The effort of illegal immigrants, to relinquish their identity and acquire Indian identity covertly causes social havoc. Their efforts lead to increased corruption, criminality, confrontation with local law and order machinery and compromises border security. If this occurs in the border states of India, as is the case of Bangladeshi immigrants, there are added dimensions of external intervention in internal security situations of the states – a euphemistic way of saying abetting terrorism and insurgency.
Illegal immigration of Bangladeshis after 1971 has been an ongoing process in many parts of India. Apart from the states of West Bengal, Assam and Tripura, which have been, seriously affected, Bangladeshi Muslims immigrants are found in Bihar and cities like New Delhi and Mumbai. As this paper is only dealing with demographic concerns in a democracy and national security, the author has not dwelt upon in detail on population issues as whole for the country but has chosen the example of Assam to explain the issues involved. This in no way should be construed as minimizing the magnitude of the problem faced in other states.
Illegal immigration in Assam
Immigration of peasant labour, most of them Bengali Muslims, had been an ongoing phenomenon in the plains of Assam even before partition. Even then this was not only an ongoing point of confrontation between Hindus and Muslims but also the Congress and Muslim League. This was a cause of concern perceived by British administration also. Sanjoy Hazarika quotes C.S. Mullen, Census Commissioner for Assam, commenting on the increase in Bengali settlers in Nowgong district going up by two thirds (from 300,000 to 500,000) between 1921and 1931 as: “the immigrant army has almost completed the conquest of Nowgong. The Barpeta sub-division of Kamrup has also fallen to their attack and Darrang is being invaded. Sibsagar has so far escaped completely but a few thousand Mymensinghias in North Lakimpur are an outpost which may, during the next decades, prove to be vulnerable for major operations.”[37]
Since then this phenomenon is continuing till date. Only the Bengali speaking Muslim immigrants come illegally because they are foreign nationals. They come because of land alienation, poverty, unemployment and lack of adequate social infrastructure in Bangladesh, which figures in the list of world’s poorest countries. They unwittingly transfer these pressures to Assam. These social pressures cause friction in communities as shown by the long spell of agitation launched by the All Assam Students Union in the eighties, which threw the ruling party out of office and paralysed normal life. But the concern is not because they are Muslims or Bengalis but for reasons of security, as eloquently brought out in 1998 by General S.K. Sinha.
In early November 1998, General S.K. Sinha had sent an official report to the President—‘Report on Illegal Migration into Assam submitted to the President of India by the Governor of Assam’. This report presents a bird’s eye view of the situation then. In this report, General Sinha drew attention to the differential decadal growth of population of Hindus and Muslims in Assam—33.7 per cent and 38.3 per cent in 1951-61, respectively; 37.2 per cent and 31 per cent, respectively, in 1961-71; and an estimated 41.9 per cent and 77.4 per cent, respectively, in 1981-91—and observed:
‘‘The Muslim population of Assam has shown a rise of 77.42 per cent in 1991 from what it was in 1971. The Hindu population has risen by nearly 41.89 per cent in this period. The Muslim population (as a percentage of total population) in Assam has risen from 24.68 per cent in 1951 to 28.42 per cent in 1991. As per the 1991 Census, four districts (Dhubri, Goalpara, Barpeta and Hailakandi) have become Muslim-majority districts. Two more districts (Naogaon and Karimganj) should have become so by 1998 and one more district (Morgaon) is fast approaching this position.
‘‘The growth of the Muslim population has been emphasised in the previous paragraph to indicate the extent of illegal migration from Bangladesh to Assam because...the illegal migrants coming into India after 1971 have been almost exclusively Muslims...Large-scale illegal migration from East Pakistan/Bangladesh over several decades has been altering the demographic complexion of this State,’’ Sinha recorded. ‘‘It poses a grave threat both to the identity of the Assamese people and to our national security. Successive governments at the Centre and in the state have not adequately met this challenge...I feel it is my bounden duty to the nation and the state I have sworn to serve to place before you this report on the dangers arising from the continuing silent demographic invasion...’’ [38].
There was no response from the government to this report as in the case of T.V. Rajasekar’s report also. Both were not right wing Hindu politicians, but former government servants of high reputation and governors appointed by the ruling Congress party!
The population growth figures in the border districts of Assam since then are as follows as per the census figures for 2001 which were published figures for 2001 [39]:
Percentage of growth of population between 1991 & 2001 in Assam districts bordering Bangladesh
District Muslims Non-Muslims Total
Dhubri 29.5 7.1 22.9
Goalpara 31.7 14.4 23.0
Hailakandi 27.2 13.3 20.9
Karimganj 29.4 14.5 21.9
Cachar 24.6 16.0 18.9
If this continues unchecked as General Sinha told the President, it ‘‘threatens to reduce the Assamese to a minority in their own state, as happened in Tripura and Sikkim.’’
‘‘The long-cherished design of Greater East Pakistan/Bangladesh, making inroads into the strategic land-link of Assam with the rest of the country,’’ he warned, ‘‘can lead to severing the entire land mass of the North-East...from the rest of the country. This will have disastrous strategic and economic consequences.’’ After tracing in detail the way the demographic balance has been overturned in district after district adjacent to Bangladesh, General Sinha concluded: ‘‘This silent and invidious demographic invasion of Assam may result in the loss of geo-strategically vital districts of Lower Assam. The influx of these illegal migrants is turning these districts into a Muslim-majority region. It will then only be a matter of time when a demand for their merger with Bangladesh may be made. The rapid growth of Islamic fundamentalism may provide the driving force for this demand. In this context, it is pertinent that Bangladesh has long discarded secularism and has chosen to become an Islamic State. Loss of Lower Assam will sever the entire land mass of the North-East from the rest of India...
In this context, an observation on the security risk posed by such unchecked illegal immigrants in a report on the same subject of illegal migration of Bangladeshi Muslims forwarded to the president by the Governor of West Bengal T. V. Rajeswar pertaining to West Benagal is significant. He says in the report: “ A study of the border belt of West Bengal yields some telling statistics: 20-40 per cent villages in the border districts are said to be predominantly Muslim. There are indications that the concentration of the minority community, including the Bangladesh immigrants, in the villages has resulted in the majority community moving to urban centres. Several towns in the border districts are now predominantly inhabited by the majority community but surrounded by villages mostly dominated by the minority community. Lin Piao’s theory of occupying the villages before overwhelming the cities comes to mind, though the context is different. However, the basic factor of security threat in both the cases is the same.” There cannot be a more ominous warning.
Handling of the illegal immigrant issue in Assam
The handling of the illegal immigrant issue in Assam is a classic example how as a nation we have been trivializing national security considerations for reasons of political expediency and parochial interests. Main aberration is inflating electoral rolls to swell the number of voters, particularly on the eve of elections. Sanjoy Hazarika quotes of an incident when Moinul Haq Chowdhury, a former Cabinet Minsiter under Prime Minister Indira Gandhi and former Muslim League activist youth leader until independence, was involved in such traffic for purposes of elections. In the 1989 general election, Chowdhury “wanted the BSF to look the other way and allow 50,000 Bangladeshis to come into the constituency, vote and return”, an Inspector General of Border Security Force (BSF) at that time recounted to Hazarika. [40].
From time to time, governments both at Delhi and at Assam have taken half-hearted and shortsighted measures to check the illegal immigrants and push them back. But the problem has grown so big, that the nation as a whole will have to get into the act. It is interesting to note that aliens in Assam are not prosecuted by the state under Foreigners Act 1946, which is applied in the rest of India. In Assam, the Foreigners Act was used only to identify and prosecute illegal immigrants who came prior to 1971. Evidently this is a direct consequence of vote bank politics. The various enactments, both past and present for handling illegal immigrants applied only in Assam are as follows:
a. Immigrants (Expulsion from Assam) Act of 1950: According to this all the Hindus were considered refugees while Muslims were aliens. This discriminatory act was repealed in 1957.
b. Prevention of Infiltration from Pakistan (PIP) Act of 1964: The PIP raised a special border police force of 1,914 men headed by a Deputy Inspector General of Police. A total of 159 watchtowers and 15 patrol posts and six passport checkpoints were set up. But following the Indo-Pak war of 1965 and the creation of BSF the border security task was handed over to them. The Assam special border police were employed in the interior to identify and deport illegal immigrants.
c. Illegal Migrants Determination by Tribunal Act of 1983 (IMDT): This was passed as a political move to thwart the growing influence of AASU, which was paralyzing Assam. Significantly it was passed by a Parliament, which had no members from Assam due to a boycott of elections on this issue. Foreigners Act 1946, which applies to the rest of India, does not apply to migrants in Assam; this Act is to be used for such a purpose.
The IMDT Act came as a result of the Assam Accord signed on Aug 15, 1985, after vigorous agitation and ‘direct action’ by the people of Assam. It has laid down elaborate procedures for the detection and deportation of post Mar 25, 1971 migrants. It is to be applied in accordance with the Foreigners Act, 1946 and Foreigners (Tribunal) Order 1964. It is a complex and curious piece of legislation. According to this an Indian citizen living within a radius of 5 km has to file a complaint about the illegal immigrants identified by him for taking action to detect and deport him. He has to pay a fee for this. The state has established special tribunals in the 16 districts, where retired judges dispose off the petitions. The results achieved are disappointing to say the least. Sanjoy Hazarika gives the following statistics for the work done under the IMDT between1983 to 1987 in Dhubri only: [41]
Total cases brought for investigation: 46,882
Cases found to have merit by police: 15,921
Dead cases by the time brought to trial: 7,940
Shifted elsewhere: 2,838
Addressee untraced: 5.143
Cases brought before tribunal: 2,314
Cases completed 2,260
Not found as foreigners: 2,233
Declared as foreigners: 908
It is clear that nobody has taken the security concerns of the problem really seriously and the IMDT Act is flawed from its inception. A number of writ petitions on the various defective aspects have been filed in the Supreme Court of India. The timeline on the progress of these cases is at Appendix attached. (The timeline also reflects on the entire process of government decision-making). The Government of India claimed that a bill to revise the enactment was to be placed before the Parliament and the Court adjourned the hearing on the cases on March 16, 2003. That is where the issue stands. The Illegal Migrants Laws (Repealing and Amending) Bill 1983 was filed on May 7, 2003 in the Rajya Sabha. It has not been taken up, evidently because the government at the Centre has changed. It appears that it is not a priority issue for any political party, which are reactively nit picking on actions taken by one another. As Arun Shourie eloquently puts it, “The executives can’t tackle the problem. The legislatures won’t tackle it. And this is how the courts tackle it.” [42] Where do we go from here is a question waiting for a long time to be answered? Meanwhile, illegal immigration continues unabated. More lives are lost by violent activities engineered by motley collection of insurgent groups ensconced in safe houses in Bangladesh. All of us stand helpless with our own priorities, which are other than a concern for national security.
ROAD AHEAD
To conclude, as the aim of this paper is analytical rather than prescriptive there are no recommendations for implementation. It will be oversimplifying a complex problem confronting national security if the author ventures to suggest a prescriptive course. It involves action by the governments at various levels, political parties, intelligentsia, bureaucracy, diplomats, security forces and the common man. And it is a conundrum waiting to be solved within the process of a democratic government in a way it does not damage the relationship between the Hindu and Muslim populations in border areas who will be bearing the brunt of any action.
However, even a cursory glance of the three inter-related issues of democracy, demography and national security will reveal certain common issues that need to be urgently addressed by the nation. The traditional Hindu method of tackling a problem through sama, beda, dhana, dhanda can guide us in evolving integrated solutions These include:
a. Long-term solution: Evolving an integrated solution to proactively solution to solve or mitigate the problem and its fallout on national security. This would involve answering the question why the illegal immigrants come and find solutions thereof. It will involve improving relations with Bangladesh to achieve a win-win situation where the abysmally poor people there will find it profitable to stay and work in Bangladesh itself. There had been a number of analytical articles on this subject, including one by the author. [43]
b. National security concerns: This should become national priority number one. All political parties need to be educated on this. Pressure groups can be created to educate the public as well. Again this requires an integrated solution to make northeast a viable region where youth will have a stake in bringing peace there, so that they give up insurgency. Bangladesh itself is facing increasing militancy from Jihadi groups operating there.[44] It will have to be persuaded that it will be in their own interest to tighten illegal border traffic.
c. Hindu-Muslim relationship concerns: It is time we evolved a national consensus on addressing Hindu-Muslim concerns speedily rather than using them as political tools to gain power. This would depend upon where and how we want to take the nation forward so that democracy graduates from creating a ‘one percent society’ to become one of the tigers of Asia. [45] Many of the issues earlier discussed can be solved if only the nation makes up its mind. If the creative mind of the Indian can contribute to the growth of modern technology, this should not be a problem.
National security is not to be treated in isolation. The citizen should perceive the nation’s security as dearer than his own life. To achieve this level of perfection, we need to make his existence more meaningful and productive than live in hunger and penury. Governance has to be more responsive. A number of things need to be addressed urgently. The list seems endless: transparency as an article of faith, rule of law and strict law enforcement, judicial reforms to ensure fair and speedy dispensation of justice, sensitisation of bureaucracy for a human approach in governance, equitable laws for all regions and religions, introducing economic rather than religious or caste criteria for affirmative action, introduction of a national identity card system, strict enforcement of uniform immigration laws, and electoral reforms, to list a few. As the cliché goes if there is a will, there is way. As Swami Chinmayanda had said: “Everyone of us may not be able to at once to achieve the infinite expansion of universal oneness, but all of us are trying. Religion’s original task was to help us in gradually achieving this elevated vision. To lift the limited and selfish human being from his passion, greed, and hatred to this loftier vision of the world was the essential ideal of religion.”[46] There cannot be a better way to practice Hinduism in its true spirit than to do that.
None of the above issues are new; there had been any number of studies, commissions and official reports on each one of them. All of them are complex, time consuming and at least some are explosive. But a mature nation has to learn to bite the bullet and handle the unpleasant and difficult issues to become a great nation. It has to accept change and undergo trials and tribulations of restructuring itself to bring the benefits of a truly democratic nation to make it meaningful to the underdog; otherwise National Security will be at peril. Seeing the past record, chances of any real time progress appears bleak. But there is hope in youth; they don’t carry the pangs of partition and the hatred it generated. As Thomas Paine said “those who expect to reap the blessings of freedom must, like men, undergo the fatigue of supporting it.”
Notes
1. In this context Margaret Mead has said: “A society which is clamoring for choice, which is filled with many articulate groups, each urging its own brand of salvations, its own variety of economic philosophy, will give each new generation no peace until all have chosen or gone under, unable to bear the conditions of choice. The stress is in our civilization.”
2. Background paper issued by the President, Rashtriya Jagriti Sansthan for this conference.
3. The author considers the year 1971-72 a watershed in the history of Indian democracy. Major events like the India-Pakistan war of 1971 that resulted in the birth of Bangladesh, imposition of a state of emergency for the first time ever by the Indian Prime Minister Mrs. Indira Gandhi, her defeat at the polls later and the emergence of the first-ever coalition Government at the Centre had their genesis in this period. Indian politics and centralized political functioning had never been the same thereafter
4. I understand the term Hindu used in this paper as explained by Dr. Frank Gaetano Morales, as “… an individual who accepts as authoritative the religious guidance of the Vedic scriptures, and who strives to live in accordance with Dharma, God’s divine laws as revealed in the Vedic scriptures. In keeping with this standard definition, all of the Hindu thinkers of the six traditional schools of Hindu philosophy (Shad-darshanas) insisted on the acceptance of the scriptural authority (shabda-pramana) of the Vedas as the primary criterion for distinguishing a Hindu from a non-Hindu, as well as distinguishing overtly Hindu philosophical positions from non-Hindu ones.” Does Hinduism teach all religions are the same? See http://www.dharmacentral.com/..
5. The word jihad comes from an Arabic root j-h-d, with the basic meaning of striving or effort. It is often used in classical texts with the closely related meaning of struggle, and hence also of fight. The word jihadi is used here to mean who fights. See Bernard Lewis, The Crisis of Islam. Phoenix Books, 2003, page 25.
6. Chambers 21st Century Dictionary, Allied Chambers (India) Ltd, New Delhi.
7. Swami Vivekananda, Interviews, Pages 226-227, The Complete Works of Swami Vivekananda, Vol. V, Advaita Ashrama, Calcutta. 1992
8. Alberuni’s India, abridged by Ainslie T Embree, New York, Norton 1971, chapter 14.
9. This contrasts with Pakistan, which had tried to distance itself from the moorings in composite Indian culture by creating a notional Islamic culture of Turkish and Arabic origin. The author feels this as one of the reasons for the growth of Jihadi terrorism in Pakistan
10. Any citizen, who has a grievance of public interest, can file a petition in the higher courts of India including the Supreme Court. Under this dispensation first offered by Justice Bhagawati of the Supreme Court, citizens’ complaints have been admitted as legal petitions at the Supreme Court.
11. Quoted by Dr. Laurence J. Peter, Quotations – Ideas for our time, Page 153, Quill William Morrow, New York. 1992
12. Unfortunately in their interaction with Hindu society, Muslims appear to have picked up the practice of caste differences also. R.Upadhyay, South Asia Advisory Group, NOIDA, “Muslim brotherhood -A key to Communal politics in India” Paper No 1072, Aug 30, 2004 states: “Theoretically, the Muslim community is a caste-less society but in practice Indian Muslims are socially divided between the descendants of Muslim invaders, converts from upper caste Hindus and lower caste Hindu converts. Shaikh, Sayed, Pathan and Moghuls who belong to upper strata of Muslim society and popularly known as Ashraf Muslims do not maintain equality in social interaction with their co-religionists, who belong to their pre-Islamic lower caste Hindus like barber, washerman, weaver, butcher, scavenger and so on. Still carrying the mental burden of their pre-Islamic castes, they continue to suffer from inferiority complex in their social interaction with upper caste converts. Though, there is no religious binding, the inter-marriage between different groups of Indian converts is not common in Muslim society.” http://www.saag.org/
13. Swami Vivekananda, Pages 425-416, The Complete Works of Swami Vivekananda, Vol. VI, Advaita Ashrama, Calcutta. 1992
14. This part of the paper is based upon Hardy. P’s, Sources of Indian Tradition, second edition, Vol. I, New Delhi, Penguin Books India (P) Ltd, 1991
15. For instance Moghul emperor Akbar’s great grandson Dara Shikoh (1615-1659) as a follower of Qadirir order of Sufis had studied Hindu philosophy and mystical practices. He was accused of heresy by the orthodoxy) Hardy. P. ibid p-471.
16. Shah Wali Ullah made significant contribution for the re-establishment of Islamic political authority in India. It was the political theory of Wali ullah that kept the Indian Muslims emotional social disorder and deprived them of a from forward-looking vision. Being proud of his Arab origin, he was strongly opposed to integration of Islamic culture in the cultural cauldron of the sub-continent and wanted the Muslims to ensure their distance from it. ""In his opinion, the health of Muslim society demanded that doctrines and values inculcated by Islam should be maintained in their pristine purity unsullied by extraneous influences" (The Muslim Community of Indo-Pakistan subcontinent by Istiaq Hussain Qureshi, 1985, People's Publishing House, Lahore, page 216 quoted by R Upadhyay ibid.). Waliullah did not want the Muslims to become part of the general milieu of the sub-continent. He wanted them to keep alive their relation with rest of the Muslim world so that the spring of their inspiration and ideals might ever remain located in Islam and tradition of world community developed by it". (Ibid. page 215). In the opinion of R. Upadhyay, the religious-political ideology of Wali Ullah made a permanent crack in Hindu--Muslim relation in this sub-continent, which undermined the self-pride and dignity of integrated Indian society. (R Upadhyay, Indian Muslims under siege? South Asia Advisory Group, NOIDA, Paper No. 1160, Nov 9, 2004. http://www.saag.org/)
17. B. Raman, Minority separatism in India – The Muslim minority, paper presented at a conference on “Ethnic Minorities and Great Power Strategies in Asia” held at Honolulu from October 12 to 14,2004, under the auspices of the Asia Pacific Centre for Security Studies. (B. Raman, South Asia Advisory Group, NOIDA, Paper No. 1144, Oct 18, 2004. www.saag.org)
18. This refers to the traditional gurukul form of education, which is almost extinct now. A student lives with his guru and learns at his feet, treating him as a guide to life than mere knowledge.
19. R.Upadhyay, Indian Muslims under siege? South Asia Advisory Group, NOIDA, Paper ibid
20. Ayaz Amir, “A ‘sincere’ approach to Kashmir”, Dawn weekly, July 17, 2004. http://www.dawn.com/weekly/ayaz/20040611.htm
21. In his "Last Pilgrimage" address Prophet Mohammed said, "Oh ye people, a Muslim is another Muslim's brother and thus all Muslims are brothers among themselves”; see M.R.A.Baig, The Muslim Dilemma, Page 12, 1974 (quoted by R Upadhyay ibid).
22. Mohammad Yasin, A Social History of Islamic India, Second Edition, 1974. Pages 3 & 69 (quoted by R Upadhyay ibid).
23. Asghar Ali Engineer, Islam and Muslim, 1985, Page 127.
24. Rafiq Zakaria; Indian Muslims - Where they have gone wrong? Bharatiya Vidya Bhavan, Mumbai-400007. 2004
25. For a detailed analysis of minority laws in Pakistan, see Shazia Rafiq, The Plight of Minorities In Pakistan August, 2004, http://www.pakistanweekly.com/Opinion1.htm
26. Ayaz Amir, ibid, Dawn weekly, July 17, 2004
27. See Bernard Lewis, The Crisis of Islam, Phoenix, Orion Books Ltd., London, 2003, for a background on Wahabism and its growth with the patronage of the Royal House of Saud.
28. In the words of U.S. Treasury Department official and expert on financing of terrorism David Afhauser “What (Saudi-funded mosques and other Islamic institutions) taught was an unforgiving, intolerant, uncompromising and austere view of the faith that became kindling for Osama Bin Laden’s match,” as stated in a U.S. Congressional hearing. For detailed analysis of Saudi involvement see http://www.townhall.com/columnists/joelmowbray/jm20040623.shtml
29. Rajmohan Gandhi, Understanding the Muslim Mind, Penguin Books, New Delhi 1987
30. Gen. V.P. Malik, Changing Paradigms of Security: Need for Multi-Disciplinary Approach, paper published in www.ORFonline.org, June 11, 2004
31. Ishfaq Illahi Choudhry, Secret Challenges of South Asian Country in the coming Decade: An Overview, BISS Journal, Dhaka, Vol. 21, No. 1, 2000.
32. B. Raman, presentation on ‘Issues in National Security’, ORF, Chennai, September 26, 2004
33. Ccounter affidavit filed in response to writ petition(civil) No. 125 of 1998 filed in the Supreme Court of India. Quoted by Sanjoy Hazarika, Rites of passage, Penguin Books India, New Delhi, 2000, page 306
34. See Wilson John, The Roots of Extremism in Bangladesh, Observer Research Foundation, New Delhi, Jan 2005, http://www.orfonline.org/
35. Quoted by Arun Shourie, The silent demographic invasion, part-1 to 3, http://www.indianexpress.com/full_story.php?content_id=56631#
36. Sanjoy Hazarika, ibid. Page 49-52.
37. Sanjoy Hazarika, ibid. Page 72.
38. Census of India published the population figures of Assam on its website; but these were taken off after three days evidently the ruling party found the political storm raised by the figures. Now officially the Census of India report does not carry these figures.
39. Quoted by Arun Shourie, ibid.
40. Sanjoy Hazarika, ibid. Page 57.
41. Sanjoy Hazarika, ibid. Page 135..
42. Arun Shourie, ibid.
43. Col R Hariharan, Bangladesh and India: Time to build a synergy in security, South Asia Advisory Group, NOIDA, Paper 1117, Sep 16, 2004. http://www.saag.org/papers12/paper1117.html
44. See Col R Hariharan, Banglabhai syndrome: is it vigilantism or Jejadi terrorism?, South Asia Advisory Group, NOIDA, Paper 1035 . http://www.saag.org/papers11/paper1035.html .
U.N. concern of links in Bangladesh with Al Qaeda are given in the daily New Age, Aug 30, 2004. See http://www.newagebd.com/front.html#4
45. T.E. Nainan presents an interesting cameo of India’s growth in India, the 1% society. See http://in.rediff.com/money/2004/sep/11guest.htm
46. Quoted by Swami Tejomayananda, Hindu Culture: An Introduction, Central Chinmaya Mission Trust, Mumbai-400 072, 2000
(Col R Hariharan, an MI specialist in counter-insurgency intelligence, served with the IPKF as Head of Intelligence in Sri Lanka. E-mail: colhari@yahoo.com)
Appendix
THE TIMELINE OF EVENTS RELATING TO
ILLEGAL MIGRANTS IN ASSAM
November 23, 1946: The Foreigners Act 1946 enacted. This gave to the Central Government certain powers in respect of the entry of foreigners into the territory of India, their presence therein and their departure from India.
September 23, 1964: The Foreigners (Tribunals) Order 1964 put out by the Central Government. This provided that any question as to whether a particular person is or is not a foreigner was to be referred to the Tribunals that were being constituted for the purpose.
October 15, 1983: Despite the existence of the Act of 1946 and despite the fact that it applied to the whole of India, the Illegal Migrants (Determination by Tribunals) Act was enacted in 1983 by Parliament to provide for the determination of illegal migrants and their deportation. This Act was made applicable only to Assam, and more specifically only to those foreigners who had entered into India after March 25, 1971, and were not in possession of valid passports or travel documents or other legal authority to enter India.
August 15, 1985: A Memorandum of Settlement was entered into between the All Assam Students’ Union (AASU), the State of Assam and the Union of India, commonly known as the ‘Assam Accord’. Among other things, the Accord provided:
‘‘The Government will give due consideration to certain difficulties expressed by AASU/AAGSP regarding the implementation of the Illegal Migrants (Determination by Tribunals) Act, 1983.’’
December 7, 1985: In pursuance of the Accord, the Citizenship Act 1955 was amended in 1985 and a new Section 6A was inserted into the Act.
span >
January 27, 1990: A ‘‘time frame’’ for ‘‘clause-wise implementation’’ of the Assam Accord was prepared, and signed by the Union Home Ministry and the Chief Secretary of Assam. It stated that a decision on the repeal of the Act of 1983 would be taken by February 28, 1991.
September 20, 1990: At a meeting between the Union Home Minister, Chief Minister of Assam and representatives of AASU, the Government ‘‘noted’’ the demand of the representatives of AASU that the Act of 1983 be repealed, and assured the representatives of AASU that it would initiate discussions with other political parties on the subject.
span >
August 11, 1997: At a meeting regarding the implementation of the Accord, the Central Government stated that although necessary administrative and organisational framework in the form of setting up tribunals and providing requisite staff to them had been set up, the results achieved had been extremely poor, and that there was a need to analyse carefully why the system had failed and what needed to be done to achieve the objective of detection and deportation of foreigners. On behalf of AASU, its president stated at the meeting that the former prime minister had visited Assam in October 1996 and had informed AASU that a decision had already been taken to repeal the IMDT Act.
April 6, 1998: At a meeting between officials of the Ministry of Home Affairs, Government of India, officials of the government of Assam and representatives of AASU, it was decided that the proposal made by the officials of the government of Assam and the representatives of AASU seeking the repeal of the Act of 1983 would be put up to the new Government for a decision.
September 23, 1998: Another meeting was held between the Government of India, government of Assam and representatives of AASU, the parties to the Assam Accord. The participants were informed that the repeal of the IMDT Act was ‘‘under the active consideration’’ of the Government.
February 1999: In his address to Parliament, the President of India stated that the repeal of the IMDT Act was ‘‘under the active consideration’’ of the Government.
March 18, 1999: At a meeting between representatives of the governments of India and Assam, and the representatives of AASU, the Government reiterated that the repeal of the IMDT Act was ‘‘under the active consideration’’ of the Government. Measures being taken to identify foreigners—for example, issue of photo identity cards—and the steps being taken to seal the border were also discussed.
July 1, 1999: At a further meeting, the representatives of AASU urged that an ordinance be issued to repeal the IMDT Act. They were again assured that the matter was ‘‘under the active consideration’’ of the Government of India.
March 2000: As nothing but nothing was happening, an erstwhile president of AASU, Sarbananda Sonowal, thought it would be a good idea to take the matter to the Supreme Court—after all, here was an institution that had been seizing the initiative on so many matters in which the Executive had not acted, or not been able to act. Accordingly, he filed a petition in the Supreme Court. He argued that the Act ought to be struck down as it so patently flew against the Constitution, and as it was patently discriminatory—laws applicable in the rest of the country made it so much easier to detect and deport foreigners than this law that had been imposed on the region of the country that was most afflicted by their invasion.
He had the greatest difficulty in finding a lawyer who would argue the case in the public interest. Mr Ashok Desai took up the case. That was in March 2000. Since then the case has come up a score of times. Several Chief Justices have come and gone. A Congress government has replaced the AGP government in Assam, which had filed an affidavit supporting the petition. This new government has filed an ‘‘additional affidavit’’—reversing the stand of the government of Assam as stated in its original affidavit! The Government at the Centre too has changed. Successive orders of the Supreme Court tell the tale. Here they are:
• April 17, 2000: Let a copy of the Writ Petition be served on the amicus in Writ Petition (c) No 125/98. To be heard along with that Petition.
• May 1, 2000: Additional Solicitor General prays for six weeks’ further time to furnish the status report. We grant the prayer.
• July 17, 2000: The delay in filing the status report is condoned. Copy of the status report has been furnished to counsel for the parties. Responses, if any, to the status report may also be filed within four weeks.
• August 28, 2000: Mr Ashok H Desai, senior counsel appearing for the writ petitioner in Writ Petition(c) 131/2000, has drawn our attention to an affidavit filed on behalf of the Union of India and, in particular, to the position detailed at page 214 of the ‘‘updated status position’’ attached to that affidavit, wherein it is stated that:
‘‘The Government is of the view that the Illegal Migrants (Determination by Tribunals) Act 1983, in its application to the State of Assam alone, is discriminatory. The proposal to repeal this Act is under active consideration of the Government.’’
Mr Desai has also drawn our attention to an affidavit filed on behalf of the State of Assam, respondent No 2, wherein it is stated on the affidavit of Shri D J Hazarika, Officer-on-Special Duty to the Government of Assam, that: ‘‘The State Government has thus been insisting upon the Central Government for repeal of the IMDT Act. Now, in the Counter Affidavit filed by the Central Government, it has been admitted that the Act is ‘discriminatory’ in nature and on such admission, the Act is liable to be struck down as unconstitutional.’’
Mr R N Trivedi, Additional Solicitor General, submits that he stands by the affidavit filed on behalf of the Union of India, but would like to seek further instructions in that behalf and prays for the matter to be adjourned and taken up in January 2001. We grant his prayer. In the meanwhile, ‘updated status reports’ may be filed by the Union of India and the concerned State Governments.
• January 8, 2001: WP(c) 125/1998 & 131/2000
Counsel for the parties submit that they have already filed counter/rejoinder. The additional document is still to be filed, let the same be filed within six weeks. The petitions shall be posted for final hearing before a three-judge Bench. To be listed after six weeks for directions.
• February 26, 2001: Issue notice in the impalement applications two other writ petitions pending. Let the parties complete pleadings in all these petitions within six weeks. Counsel for the parties shall also, within two weeks from the date of completion of the pleadings, file brief written submissions, not exceeding five pages each. They shall be at liberty to exchange written submissions between themselves. Learned counsel for the interveners are also permitted to file their response to the writ petitions as well as written submissions. To be listed for directions to fix time schedule for hearing after eight weeks.
• July 9, 2001: Counsel for the State of Assam prayer for four weeks time to file a further affidavit granted. Rejoinder, if any, to be submitted within three weeks thereafter.
• October 15, 2001: Writ Petition (c) No. 125 of 1998 .An application has been filed on behalf of the State of Assam seeking permission to file ‘‘a new counter affidavit’’. The application is supported by an affidavit of the Commissioner & Secretary, Home Department, Government of Assam. The affidavit filed along with the application treated as ‘‘an additional affidavit' and taken on record the new affidavit as an additional affidavit filed on behalf of the State of Assam. Mr Ashok Desai, learned senior counsel, prays for and is granted four weeks’ time to file his response to the additional affidavit filed by the State. Writ petitions to be after four weeks before a three-judge Bench for further proceedings.
The applicant through their learned counsel is permitted to assist the Court at the time of hearing of the case. The application for impalement is, accordingly, disposed of.
January 9, 2002: Put up this matter along with.
January 18, 2002: Reference I A No. 4 of 2001 and WP(c) No. 131/2000 on January 18, 2002. As these matters deal with the validity of the Illegal Migrants (Determination By Tribunals) Act 1983. In view of the controversy, rule was issued in all these matters. All the respondents have entered appearance and have filed their respective show cause. Put up for final disposal in the third week of April 2002.
April 15, 2002: On perusal of the prayers made in these petitions, it appears that in Writ Petition) No. 131/2000, the validity of Act 39/83 is under challenge and learned counsel for the parties pray that this matter may be heard and disposed of early. Mr Jain, learned senior counsel, also says that in Writ Petition) No. 7/2001, the same prayer has been made. In other matters, the question of implementation of the provisions of the Act and sealing of the border etc are under consideration. Therefore, the court directed that these two petitions may be delinked from this batch of cases and posted for hearing on 22nd April 2002. The counsel are requested to file written submissions in these two matters, if not already filed, in the meantime. Rest of the matter may be put up in July 2002.
• April 22, 2002: The petitioner has filed written submissions. Mr Sanghi appearing for the State of Assam is requested to file his written submissions. All other parties who want to argue asked to file their written submissions and serve copy of the same on the respective counsel for 10th of May, 2002. After hearing, the court directed that these petitions be listed on 13th of August 2002, along with WP(C) No. 581/2001, as it is submitted that the validity of Section 6A of the Citizenship Act 1955 is also under challenge.
• August 13, 2002: The matter is not listed.
• October 28, 2002: Asked to be put up on 20th November 2002.
• November 20, 2002: The matter did not reach the court.
• January 24, 2003: Matter to be list the matter in the month of April 2003 for directions.
• April 7, 2003: Matter to be listed the matter for directions in July 2003.
• July 7, 2003: Court says that a Bill has been introduced in Parliament for repeal of the Act, which is impugned in the present petitions. In that view of the matter, the hearing of the petitions was adjourned. Asks for listing of the petitions in January 2004.
• January 2004: The matter is not listed.
• March 16, 2004: Asked to call in the month of July 2004 as requested. By this time, the country was in the midst of the campaign for general election. The case was adjourned again. And that is where things remain
[Source: Arun Shourie, The silent demographic invasion, part-1 to 3, http://www.indianexpress.com/full_story.php?content_id=56631#]-
Concluded- Sri Lanka Guardian
Post a Comment