People waiting in a line in Assam (representational image)
(Representational Image) of people waiting in a line in Assam | PTI
Text Size:

Guwahati: The process of updating the National Register of Citizens (NRC) in Assam has been stormy from the very start. But the most contentious part of the exercise has been the figure of 40 lakh identified as non-genuine Indian citizens in the draft list drastically dropping to less than half at just a little over 19 lakh in the final NRC.

This, however, was far from a simple task. It took a complex, exhaustive and detailed process over six months, involving thousands of workers, hundreds of work hours and extensive hearings to arrive at the figure.

But not many seem to be happy with this number, finding it to be far less than what they expected. Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) president Amit Shah had been raising the pitch on the BJP’s success in identifying ’40 lakh infiltrators’ for months now. Shah, however, is hardly the only one.

Assam, which has for long grappled with the ethnic Assamese versus ‘outsider’ debate, has seen a range of political leaders peg the number of illegal immigrants at a variety of figures — 30 lakh, 40 lakh, 50 lakh and so on.

The All Assam Students Union (AASU), which spearheaded the anti-immigrant Assam agitation, feels 19 lakh is way too little.

After the draft lists raised expectations and satisfied stakeholders with a relatively high number, it was the process of ‘claims and objections’ that eventually told Assam it didn’t have 40 lakh suspected foreigners, and that the figure actually stood at less than 6 per cent of the total applicants.

ThePrint does a deep dive into what this process was all about, what it entailed, how much the final number can be trusted and what next for NRC.

The process

When the entire exercise of updating NRC was being planned between 2013 and 2015 — after the Supreme Court ordered the list be updated till applications were invited — it was felt that given its complexity and implications, an in-built design had to be provided to ensure double-checking and grievance redressal. This was the underlying mandate of the claims and objections process.

Claims meant that anybody left out of the draft lists could come forward to say they had been wrongfully excluded and ask for fresh verification. Objections meant that any individual could red flag someone’s inclusion and demand re-verification.

Of the around 40 lakh left out of the two draft lists, 36, 26, 630 people filed claims, of whom around 17,00,000 were able to prove their exclusion had been incorrect. Sources involved with the process claim the around 4 lakh people who did not file for claims “could be those who have absolutely baseless documents and are aware they wouldn’t be able to prove their citizenship”. Even those labelled as ‘doubtful voters’ or declared ‘foreigners’ by Foreigners Tribunal could take part in the process.

As for objections, around 2 lakh were received of which a mere 700-odd were found to be correct.

Once the second and final NRC draft was published at the end of July 2018, work for the next stage began. A standard operating procedure (SOP) was finalised on 1 November 2018, by the office of the NRC coordinator, in consultation with the Supreme Court that is monitoring the exercise. Following this, capacity building and specific training of officials involved with the project began.

Essentially, the officials had to be trained to figure out documentation discrepancy and how to read the documents, what questions to ask the applicants and how to determine whether the case was genuine or not. Authorities claim “it was designed to be a scientific process with clearly laid down guidelines”. Findings from the ground, however, reveal that given the number of people involved, a reasonable degree of discretion and subjectivity is bound to have crept in.

Claims and objections were invited and it was 15 February onward that this process of re-verification started.


Also read: Children out, parents in: The real challenge begins now that final Assam NRC is here


What it entailed

Effectively, the process entailed re-checking of each document at the back-end, but more importantly, taking this exercise to beyond paper-work to bring in ‘supporting evidence’. For this, extensive hearings were conducted, where family members were called to one spot as per specific slots allotted to them and attempts were made by the disposing officer to determine a family tree.

Hearings were conducted where more members of a particular descendent resided. This, however, meant several had to go through the inconvenience of travelling long distances at short notices to be able to make it for the hearing.

To give an example of the kind of discrepancies that arose, authorities explain that often a legacy mismatch was noticed. In some cases, descendants inadvertently brought out wrong legacy data of people with the same name as their ancestors and hence could not prove lineage. In certain other cases, legacy data was deliberately traded between people. The idea was to call all members who claim to be from one legacy at one spot to question and arrive at a conclusion.

All disposing officers had the necessary documentation and case history of each case on a computer screen in front of them. In all, around 3,500 disposing officers were at work. Each disposing officer had around two people for technical support and another 2-3 support staff on an average. Besides them, around 25,000-30,000 staff was designated to physically deliver the letters of date and place of hearing to each applicant who had filed for claims/objections.

Overall, authorities say nearly 40,000 workers were involved in the entire claims and objections process. Over 15 lakh hearings were conducted, with disposing officers working for an average of 10 hours a day, five days a week, for six months.

The NRC has cost the exchequer over Rs 1,100 crore.

Veracity of the final number

To put it pithily, there is no way to determine if the figure of 19.06 lakh is correct. This has been the first of its kind exercise and given there is no benchmark to determine what the number of illegal immigrants would be, this remains the only conclusive, albeit highly disputed, data.

All claims made by political leaders from across the spectrum of the number have no real scientific basis.

Moreover, the Assam Accord of 1985 — which forms the basis of NRC — pegs the cut-off date to determine those who immigrated illegally from Bangladesh before 24 March 1971. Migration, however, has been happening since much before and the 1979-1985 Assam movement actually talked of a much higher number because it took into account pre-1971 immigrants as well.

There is also no absolute basis to determine the religious breakup of those excluded given the NRC application form did not ask for the applicant’s religion. Sources, however, say around nine lakh of the total excluded would be Hindus, mainly those of Bengali origin.


Also read: With Assam NRC, the truth is also out — it was a pointless exercise all along


What next

The immediate mandate for the office of the NRC coordinator may have been to update the 1951 list, but the task is far from over.

Each one of those excluded who want to appeal to the Foreigners Tribunal will need to approach their local NRC office for an ‘exclusion certificate’ on the basis of which they can approach the tribunal. Thus, the NRC headquarters will have to ensure each document is in place and is dispatched to the relevant local centre.

The NRC will also have to be regularly updated, much like the revision of electoral rolls, to account for births, deaths, fresh migration and more. The NRC directorate, therefore, will function just like the office of the chief electoral officer in terms of the mandate to revise the list.

However, how often the list will be revised and how is a modality that is yet to be worked out.

Subscribe to our channels on YouTube & Telegram

Why news media is in crisis & How you can fix it

India needs free, fair, non-hyphenated and questioning journalism even more as it faces multiple crises.

But the news media is in a crisis of its own. There have been brutal layoffs and pay-cuts. The best of journalism is shrinking, yielding to crude prime-time spectacle.

ThePrint has the finest young reporters, columnists and editors working for it. Sustaining journalism of this quality needs smart and thinking people like you to pay for it. Whether you live in India or overseas, you can do it here.

Support Our Journalism

VIEW COMMENTS

4 COMMENTS

  1. What is deeply depressing and wicked was the thousands of frivolous objections to the poor and most vulnerable Muslims who were included in the registration the first time.
    Thousands of these targeted Muslims (equal citizens of India) were put under the stress of going through the process again.
    The objections were organised by one political party who sought to communalise the issue for political ends.
    This was the most unjust and inhumane aspect of this whole sordid story.
    Many poor citizens of India who cannot understand the process are being left out. The Supreme Court should provide legal aid and assistance to these people

  2. The objections were mostly Hindus filing objections against their fellow Muslim citizens.
    around 2 lakh were received of which a mere 700-odd were found to be correct.
    This whole exercise was made communal and targeted towards Indias Muslim citizens by forces who will eventually cause our country to split.
    This whole exercise has been a abomination against the poor and illiterate who do not have the resources to fight, or the literacy or documentation.
    This will be a karmic curse on the nation.

  3. More than six months ago I had written the following comment about NRC right here, as a comment to an article on THE PRINT. I still stand by it. In fact I am very happy that my wish of then is about to be fulfilled – – that this cruel and inhuman exercise is about to end in a massive confusion. Here’s my comment :

    “This whole idea of NRC in a country like India encompassing that part of its past when there were no computers and all data was ONLY paper-confined, IS HIGHLY UNFAIR. I went to school in towns, big or small — but not remote villages — and I remember how difficult it was to make copies of certificates (on a typewriter; there were no Xerox machines then), and then find a “Gazetted Officer” to attest them. Originals got moth-eaten. The art or science of LAMINATION had not arrived yet.

    Situation could have been only worse in villages, and more so in remote villages. In fact there was no “document culture” in our country then — such was the blissful simplicity or naivety of our people of those times. My father was in a transferrable job, and I do not remember if my parents had any voting cards, or frankly, if they ever went for voting, or if their names were there on any voting lists. By today’s yardsticks they just did not exist those many years ago!

    If any NRC kind of exercise is conducted 50 years FROM NOW, the situation will be entirety different. There will have been computers and computer records, and each person’s own pen drive or portable hard disk with all his or her data on it, LAMINATED paper certificates etc. etc.

    In our country of remote villages, scarce awareness of, and lack of facility for creating and copying documents 50 YEARS AGO, the VERY IDEA of NRC is, I would even say, CRUEL. I do not know what the final result of this exercise will be. I will personally be very happy if it ends in a massive confusion, with the powers that be realizing that it was a futile effort to begin with. After all, if the question comes up of uprooting entire families who have called their home their home for 50 years and no one has questioned them for doing so until now, then shouldn’t the benefit of the doubt be applied to them? That, yes, that indeed is their home? If the phrase THE BENEFIT OF THE DOUBT cannot be applied to them, then in what situations will this phrase ever be justified to be applied, and indeed the question will arise as to why this phrase has even survived in the civilized society for so long?”

    • I could not agree with you more Mr Sanjib Batala.
      This is cruelty towards the poor. Nobody has to prove citizenship the onus must be on the government to disprove this.
      This must not be made into communal thing, many Hindus have suffered too.
      The same communal party has also organised riots in India for decades is causing the poor from both communities to suffer.
      That is why I say Karma will catch up with these wicked people who play communal politics.

Comments are closed.