With Court bringing ‘closure’ on Section 6A, focus in Assam shifts to NRC, and that CAA question

The plea in the apex court, apart from challenging the validity of Section 6A, sought 1951 as the cut-off for inclusion into the NRC as against the existing March 25, 1971.

The NRC was published in 2019 but the Registrar General of India (RGI) is yet to notify it, with both the BJP-led Central and state governments maintaining that it is not acceptable in its current form.

The Assam Public Works (APW), an NGO whose petition led to the Supreme Court-monitored NRC in the state, has also expressed its unhappiness with the exercise. “The Court verdict opens the doors for pleas which are seeking a reverification of the NRC,” the NGO’s president Aabhijeet Sarma said.

“Now that the matter has concluded in the apex court and the cut-off is 1971, our next step will be seeking reverification of the draft NRC. We have already filed a petition seeking 100% reverification in all 22 districts. We are waiting for the government to file an application. Everyone says they are unhappy with the NRC, they should file an application now,” Aabhijeet told The Indian Express.

Critics of the 2019 NRC which include the APW, Assam government and All Assam Students’ Union (AASU), allege that the process of the exercise is flawed as it excludes “indigenous people” while including a large number of “foreigners”. They also claim that the number of people who entered the state after the March 24, 1971, cut-off is far higher than 19 lakh – the number of people excluded from the 2019 NRC.

Sarma has said that his government is in favour of 20% reverification in the districts that border Bangladesh and 10% in other districts.

However, some differing opinions apart, the SC ruling was largely welcomed by political parties and civil society groups. Among those who hailed the ruling was the AASU, with its advisor Samujjal Chattacharya saying that the state and Central governments should approach the apex court seeking reverification of the NRC.

“It is now the duty of the state and Central governments to form a time-bound action plan to implement the Assam Accord. The ruling also lays bare the problem of illegal immigration into Assam and the problems restricting the influx of migrants after 1971, which was the main aim of the Assam Accord… With regard to the NRC, the government must seek reverification now that the cut-off issue is closed. The people of Assam want results,” Bhattacharya said.

With voices in support of reverification of the NRC growing, a lawyer who worked extensively on citizenship cases said the issue had been raised in the Supreme Court even before the 2019 NRC was finalised, but was dismissed.

In July 2019, a Supreme Court Bench comprising then Chief Justice Ranjan Gogoi and Justice Rohinton Fali Nariman had observed that NRC coordinator Prateek Hajela had submitted that 27% reverification had been done during the course of the exercise and further sample verification was not necessary.

The All Assam Minority Students’ Union (AAMSU), on the other hand, has welcomed the “closure” given by the apex court and urged the government to notify the 2019 NRC. “Even as the Assam Accord was accepted by all sections, we saw that some groups tried to push the state back into the 1980s by demanding a 1951 cut-off. We are not in support of foreigners. If anyone has illegally entered the country after 1971 – be it Muslims or Hindus – they should be pulled up without harassing Indian citizens. Those people included in the 2019 NRC must be given certificates and the government should take steps to deport those who did not make the cut,” AAMSU president Rejaul Karim said.

The Opposition – the Congress, Raijor Dol and Asom Jatiya Parishad – is trying to use the Supreme Court ruling to question the government over another sticky law, the Citizenship (Amendment ) Act (CAA), which enables fast-tracking of citizenship for Hindu, Sikh, Buddhist, Jain, Parsi, or Christian migrants from Pakistan, Bangladesh, and Afghanistan who entered India before December 31, 2014. The CAA has faced staunch opposition in the Brahmaputra Valley region of the state, with allegations that it is in contradiction of the Assam Accord.

“The Assam government must take responsibility for removing those who have entered India after 1971, be it Hindu, Muslim, Christian, Jain or Parsi… The Supreme Court ruling’s biggest takeaway is that the CAA cannot be implemented in Assam. Those opposed to the CAA must approach the apex court against it as the chances for a favourable verdict are bright,” Raijor Dal leader Akhil Gogoi said.