“I cried alone,” Anjuma acclaimed, as the CJP Team delivered the judgement which granted her freedom from many ills, marking the end of her long and weary struggle.

Every week, CJP’s dedicated team in Assam, comprising community volunteers, district volunteer motivators, and lawyers, provides vital paralegal support, counseling, and legal aid to many affected by the citizenship crisis in over 24 districts in Assam.  Through our hands-on approach, 12,00,000 people successfully submitted completed NRC forms (2017-2019). We fight Foreigner Tribunal cases monthly at the district level.  Through these concerted efforts, we have achieved an impressive success rate of 20 cases annually, with individuals successfully obtaining their Indian citizenship. This ground level data ensures informed interventions by CJP in our Constitutional Courts. Your support fuels this crucial work. Stand with us for Equal Rights for All #HelpCJPHelpAssam. Donate NOW!

Anjuma, also known as Anjumanara, is the granddaughter of Geda Sheikh. Despite being born in Assam, she was labelled a ‘Doubtful Voter’ (D-voter) shortly after her name was enrolled in the voter list. The reasons for the move were unclear, but the plight, trauma, and fear that resulted in the wake of this move is always evident on the faces of those affected. Why do certain names and identities receive more such ‘doubt’? Our team on grounds narrates how this is a troubling trend and concern as certain people, it seems, are put through the process due to their identity.

The 1966 voter list is a crucial document for the people of Assam, containing the names of Geda Sheikh and Ahimon Bibi from Kaimari village, Goalpara (now Dhubri) district. Dhubri, located 281 km from Guwahati, has the lowest literacy rate in Assam according to the 2011 census. Despite this, the residents are diligent in preserving their documents.

Anjuma’s father, Amzat Ali used to work tirelessly to support his family. He first voted in the Golokganj Assembly Constituency after being included in the 1989 voter list. With his hard-earned money, he married off his daughter to Matiya Rahman in the same district. “I only wanted a happy life for my daughter,” Amzat had told the CJP team during their first visit to his home.

Anjuma and her husband worked as migrant labourers in the nation’s capital, Delhi for years. They returned to Assam to vote in 2009. But to their dismay they were informed by an officer that Anjuma had been marked as a D-voter. Distressed, she returned to her father’s house, seeking answers. The family was burdened with fear and uncertainty, dreading the possibility of detention. “I cried at night alone for my younger son,” Anjuma admitted that she had greatly feared about who would care for her infant son, Farijul Islam, if she were to be imprisoned in Assam’s notorious detention camps. According to CJP’s data, this fear is legitimate as these detention camps have seen around 29 inmates die.

So, to fight for her fundamental rights, the family worked harder to save money. On October 18, 2022, they moved to a brick factory in Ahmedabad, Gujarat, to earn more. The same day she received a notice from the Agomani Border Branch police asking her to prove her citizenship. Faced with the dilemma of a contractor refusing to let them leave and the need to defend her identity, she took little Farijul and travelled back to Assam the next day.

Her father, on a bicycle, rushed to the Dhubri DVM’s house with the notice. The struggle began on October 22 when Anjuma returned home and faced a long process of gathering proper documentation, appearing before the tribunal monthly, and running from office to office for certified copies. The family compiled strong evidence linking Anjuma to her father, Amzat, and proving her marriage to Matiyar Rahman. They bravely fought against the system attempting to strip her of her citizenship. CJP’s team stood by their side, attending to every requirement, unwaveringly.

Finally, on June 26, when Advocate Ishkander Azad from CJP’s legal team handed her the judgement copy, Anjuma was overwhelmed and in tears, as CJP’s state in-charge Nanda Ghosh and Dhubri district DVM Habibul Bepari stood with her at the end of the long struggle. She spoke with a trembling voice and bright eyes and struggled to express her gratitude for CJP’s invaluable help. Her husband, Farijul, also was present shyly in the background looking overwhelmed with the happenings.

The order may be read here:

Over the years, with their extensive boots on ground approach spread over multiple, including remote, districts of Assam, CJP has helped over 51 victims of the citizenship crisis regain their citizenship.

Related:

 CJP Assam: Standing Strong Amid Citizenship Crisis and Floods

CJP Assam: Standing strong come hail, come storm

CJP Victory! After 3 years of a legal battle, freedom fighter’s daughter, Seje Bala Ghosh, is finally declared Indian

 Frequently Asked Questions: Understanding the Citizenship Crisis in Assam

Women at the Forefront of CJP’s Work in Assam

From Fear to Freedom: Sader & Molina’s Citizenship Journey in Assam

The post CJP Victory: Indian woman regains citizenship, rejoices with CJP appeared first on SabrangIndia.

Brief background of the case-

The divisive bench of the Gauhati High Court was hearing a writ petition filed by the petitioner, Forhad Ali, against an order of the Foreigner Tribunal No. 2, Bongaigaon (Tribunal), declaring the petitioner to be a foreigner. The said order, dated October 29, 2019, had declared the petitioner to be a foreigner on the basis of a discrepancy in the name of his father. The documents relied on by the petitioner before the Tribunal, which consisted of Voter’s List of various years and the Jamabandi of a plot of land, stated his father’s name as Habi Rahman and Habibar Rahman, and the Tribunal rejected it on the grounds that such documents were not sufficient to prove that Habi Rahman and Habibar Rahman were one and the same person.

The loopholes within the observations made by the judgement–

1.  If enough documents were present for the High Court to question the order of the Tribunal, why was the case remanded back to the Tribunal?

In regards to the discrepancies in the name of the father, the court objected to the finding of the tribunal and observed that, “No material is also available on record which may show that the names of Habi Rahman and Habibar Rahman appeared together in the same document to give an indication that they are different person. In Sirajul Hoque Vs. State of Assam & Others reported (2019) 5 SCC 534, the Supreme Court was of the view that the minor variation in the spellings of the name is not to be made a basis to conclude that the two persons may be different persons.” (Para 5)

Diving more into the issue and the documents provided as evidence, the Court held the opinion that a minor discrepancy in the name of the person being depicted was required to be ignored. Additionally, the Court provided that merely because of the discrepancy of the name between Habi Rahman and Habibar Rahman, between which there also exists a similarity and proximity, the petitioner’s application for citizenship could not be rejected under the law unless it was proved that Habi Rahman and Habibar Rahman were two different persons.

The bench had also noted that the tribunal had used an inappropriate arithmetic calculation on the age of Ali’s father to reject the voter lists that he furnished. Specific to the land documents relied upon by the petitioner as evidence, the High Court held that the petitioner discharged the initial burden of proof in the case and stated “The Exhibit-11 Jamabandi also contains the information that the land had been mutated in the name of Forhad Ali son of Habibar Rahman in place of Habibar Rahman in respect of a plot of land at Village Lotibari Part-III. As per the order of the Circle Officer dated January 18, 2017 in Mutation Case No. 2584/2016-17, and if the information contained in the Jamabandi is acceptable which shows that Forhad Ali is the son of Habi Rahman of Village Lotibari Part-III and the name of Habibar Rahman as Habi Rahman as appears in the Voters Lists of the year 1966 & 1970, the petitioner may have discharged the burden under Section 9 of the Foreigners Act, 1946.” (Para 15)

Even as the High Court made the aforementioned strong observations, it refuses to take the next logical step and instead takes a U-turn by remanding the matter back to the Foreigners Tribunal. The bench further urged the Foreigners Tribunal, a quasi-judicial bodies established under the Foreigners (Tribunals) Order, 1964 and the Foreigners Act, 1946, to re-examine the “complete Voters Lists of the years 1966, 1970, 1977 & 1985 in respect of the Village Lotibari Part-III as well as the information contained in the Exhibit-11 Jamabandi and pass a reasoned order”. (Para 16)

Furthermore, while emphasising on the duty of the Tribunal to pass a “reasoned order”, the bench holds that the said reasoned order can either be in favour of the petitioner and would prevail over the previous 2019 order of the Tribunal or may be against the petitioner, in which case the “consequences under the law may follow.”  (Para 17)

The said decision of the Court does not sit right and raises the big question- why did not the High Court bench did not reach a decision on the case of Ali itself, based on the observations made by them? By once again remanding the matter to the Tribunal and urging them to “pass a reasoned order”, the Court re-started the process of scrutiny for the petitioner. It is crucial to highlight here that after having received a negative unfavourable order by the Foreigners Tribunal, the petitioner had rightfully approached the High Court by filing a Writ Petition. Remanding the said matter to the Tribunal to re-examine the documents and pass a reasoned order, without even making any comment on the merits of the case, the High Court bench asserted that “till the reasoned order is passed, no coercive action shall be taken against the petitioners.” (Para 18) 

2.  How does, the Tribunals not following the law does established, warrant the involvement of an executive authority?

In its judgment, the High Court bench severely deprecated the Foreigner Tribunals for reaching conclusions in matters of citizenship without following the law established and materials produced cannot be accepted. The bench also specifically pointed to the Tribunals not providing any reason behind reaching the conclusion in the matter. Highlighting this trend, the bench in its order stated that “In course of the present proceeding as well as other proceedings, it has been noticed that in many cases, a proceedee had been declared to be a foreigner without stating the reason as to why the Tribunal arrives at such a conclusion and also not deciding the matter as per the materials on record. It is noticed that the Tribunals often state and describe the materials which the proceedee relies upon in course of the proceeding and thereafter merely arrives at a conclusion that in the view of the Tribunal, the proceedee is a foreigner.”

Shedding light on this very crucial issue of the Foreigners Tribunal not following the law established through legislative procedures, landmark judgments and precedents, the High Court held that any conclusion that is reached by the Tribunals in any matter will not be acceptable if they are not as per procedure established by law, based upon the documents provided and does not specify the reasons for decision taken. The bench in its order stated “Such procedure adopted would have to be deprecated. The Tribunals are entrusted upon the jurisdiction to adjudicate a reference made and decide upon the materials produced before it by giving reasons as to whether the materials indicated the person to be a foreigner or a citizen. Any conclusion arrived dehors any decision or adjudication cannot be an acceptable conclusion and it has to be construed that the Tribunals had not discharged the jurisdiction vested upon it under the law.” (Para 20)

Further slamming the Tribunals, the bench stated that they wanted to know the procedures being followed by the Tribunals in declaring a person to be a foreigner or a citizen as people who have been excluded from the National Register of Citizens for Assam or whose citizenship has been marked as “doubtful” appeal to such tribunals. The High Court pointedly mentioned the submission made by the Assam government that almost 85% of the cases that came to the Foreigners Tribunals eventually resulted in the proceedees being declared Indians. In its judgement, the court stated “We are particularly interested in view of a submission made by the learned counsel for the State of Assam in the Home Department that statistically speaking in about 85% of the referred cases, the proceedees have been declared to be citizens.”

In view of the same, the bench held that “We are concerned that if proceedees have been declared to be foreigner without stating any reason and without analyzing the implication of the materials being produced and if the same procedure is adopted to declare a proceedee to be a citizen, there is a good possibility that many number of proceedees who may be foreigners or illegal migrants have been wrongly declared to be citizens by the Tribunals.”

Through the aforementioned observation, the bench made a very critical statement regarding the discrepancies and arbitrariness that have existed in orders of the Tribunals, resulting in the High Court questioning other orders delivered by the Tribunal which declared foreigners to be citizens. It is pertinent to highlight here that the bench also highlights that the said observations have been made by them after perusing through “a good number of judgments on a random sample basis from the Tribunals all over the State wherein the proceedees have been declared to be citizens.” (Para 23)

It is provided by the bench that out of the judgments viewed by the High Court randomly, some of them have passed a good reasoned order based on their analysis of the materials on record. However, the bench stated that “in many of the orders, the same procedure of describing the materials produced is adopted but without analyzing the implication of the materials or without stating any reason and without arriving at any decision, a conclusion is arrived that in the view of the Tribunal, the proceedee concerned is a citizen. In some of the matters, it is noticed that even there is no proper recording as to what material has been relied upon which would be a basis for the conclusion arrived.” (Para 23)

This procedure adopted by the Tribunals, according to the bench, “would have a far more serious consequence.”

Basing upon this “possibility” of the Tribunals wrongfully declaring the “foreigners or illegal migrants” to be citizens of India, the bench then “requires” for the Secretary to the Government of Assam in the Home Department to conduct a departmental review of all such matters wherein the person in question has been declared to be a Indian citizen. In furtherance to this, the bench empowers the state government to “take appropriate measures as may be available under the law” if any discrepancies are found in such orders of the tribunals.

In the judgement, the Bench states “we require the Secretary to the Government of Assam in the Home Department, to conduct a departmental review of all such references that had been answered by the Tribunals declaring the proceedees to be citizens and wherever it is noticed that any such conclusion or declaration had been made without any analysis of the materials or without providing for any reason thereof and without arriving at any decision, the authorities in the State of Assam in the Home Department to take appropriate measures as may be available under the law.” (Para 24)

Without delving into whether an executive authority has the right the review the orders of a quasi-judicial body and follow the legal principle of natural justice, the bench states that “a responsibility is entrusted upon the State of Assam in the Home Department for doing the needful as indicated.” (Para 25)

It is imperative to highlight here that while lamenting the Foreigners Tribunals of reaching conclusions that have no basis, the Gauhati High Court itself does the same. By using vague terms in regards to the state government of Assam to “take appropriate measures as may be available under the law” in cases where arbitrariness in order is observed, without providing any limit to the same, the Court has provided the government with extraordinary discretionary powers.  It is essential to note here that the High Court has not specifically provided any specific standards against which these previous orders of the Tribunals declaring persons to be Indian citizens are to be compared.

Another question that the conclusion of the said order raises is why the particular statistic of 85%, which has been provided by the state government and then supported by a random perusal of orders by the High Court bench, forms the basis of this one-sided review? The loophole behind only requiring the review of the orders declaring persons in question to be Indian citizens by the state government has not been answer at all. If there are such glaring mistakes in following procedures of law being committed by the Tribunals, why did the bench also not call a review of the orders where person in question had been declared a foreigner? Does that particular order of declaring an Indian citizen to be a foreigner not a miscarriage of law?

The complete order can be read here:

A paradox?

As a report by the Scroll has correctly noted, this ruling has restored, encouraged, and even put a legal stamp on the mistrust that stems from a broader, albeit unfounded, belief in mainstream Assamese nationalist discourse that the National Register of Citizens identified far fewer “illegal Bangladeshis” than it ideally should have. In many respects, the ruling of the High Court reinforces the negative discourse surrounding the National Register of Citizens, a counting procedure that is inextricably connected to the Foreigners Tribunal system.

It is disappointing that, despite correctly pointing out a contradiction in the legal system, the Court may have done more harm than good in its attempts to find and address the arbitrariness of the Foreigners Tribunal system. Those who were deemed Indian citizens by the Tribunals will likely face another executive nightmare as a result of this order’s retroactive applicability. The court has undermined the principle of separation of powers and runs the risk of subjecting the entire tribunal system to the whims of the executive branch by requesting a disparate body, the Assam government, to use its discretion to review and implement the orders of the Foreigners Tribunals. It remains to see whether this judgment of the High Court will open the Pandora’s Box and lead to even more cases people in Assam, most of whom are underprivileged and impoverished, will be declared foreigners or a miraculous decrease in such number will be the result.

It has been pointed out in a report of The Telegraph, pursuant to the order of the High Court, the Assam government has been planning to offer a “crash course” for members of Foreigners Tribunals at the National Law University and Judicial Academy, Assam.

Related:

Gauhati HC: “Foreigner’s Tribunals declaring applicants/proceedees to be citizens/foreigners without following law, analysing material placed on record”

Assam: Fourteen persons despatched to detention camp, families left frantic

Assam: After taking an oath to uphold Ambedkar’s Constitution, the BJP CM invoked the Gita to promote caste-based occupation    

Targeting free choice in marriage, ‘Love Jihad’ clause likely in bill to ban polygamy: Assam

Trend of divisive politics continues, 3 hate speeches by Assam CM in poll bound states

The post Should the State Government intervene in cases of arbitrary orders by the Foreigners’ Tribunal? appeared first on SabrangIndia.

The said order had been passed by a divisive bench of the High Court upon observing a worrying trend in the orders of the foreigner tribunals whereby declarations regarding one’s citizenship is given based merely recording material without analysis or failing to assign any reasons for their declarations.

“As almost 85% of the references have resulted in the proceedee being declared to be citizens, where it is noticed that in many such cases neither any decision nor any proper adjudication had been made and a conclusion had been arrived without stating any reason or without even analyzing the implication of the materials produced.” 

Findings of the Tribunal in the said case:

The divisive bench of the Gauhati High Court was hearing a writ petition filed by the petitioner against an order of the Foreigner Tribunal No. 2, Bongaigaon (Tribunal), declaring the petitioner to be a foreigner. The said order, dated October 29, 2019, had declared the petitioner to be a foreigner on the basis of a discrepancy in the name of his father. The documents relied on by the petitioner before the Tribunal stated his father’s name as Habi Rahman and Habibar Rahman, and the Tribunal rejected it on the grounds that such documents were not sufficient to prove that Habi Rahman and Habibar Rahman were one and the same person.

Decision of the High Court:

Minor discrepancies in the name to be ignored- The court had objected to the finding of the tribunal in the aforementioned case and observed that, “No material is also available on record which may show that the names of Habi Rahman and Habibar Rahman appeared together in the same document to give an indication that they are different person. In Sirajul Hoque Vs. State of Assam & Others reported (2019) 5 SCC 534, the Supreme Court was of the view that the minor variation in the spellings of the name is not to be made a basis to conclude that the two persons may be different persons,” the Court had said, as per the report of LiveLaw.

The Court had held the opinion that a minor discrepancy in the name of the person being depicted was required to be ignored. Additionally, the Court also provided that merely because of the discrepancy of the name between Habi Rahman and Habibar Rahman, the petitioner’s application for citizenship could not be rejected under the law unless it was proved that Habi Rahman and Habibar Rahman were two different persons. Therefore, the Court remanded the said matter to the Tribunal to re-examine the documents and pass a reasoned order.

Tribunals not following the law established- In its order, the Court deprecated the aforementioned trend being adopted by the Tribunals and it was noted that any conclusion reached by the Tribunals without following the law established and materials produced cannot be accepted. As per LiveLaw report, the bench observed:

“Such procedure adopted would have to be deprecated. The Tribunals are entrusted upon the jurisdiction to adjudicate a reference made and decide upon the materials produced before it by giving reasons as to whether the materials indicated the person to be a foreigner or a citizen. Any conclusion arrived dehors any decision or adjudication cannot be an acceptable conclusion and it has to be construed that the Tribunals had not discharged the jurisdiction vested upon it under the law.”

The Court further noted that in some other cases, a proceedee had been deemed to be a foreigner by a Tribunal without providing any explanation for the said decision. As per the bench, some of these decisions had been made by the Tribunal without even referencing to the evidence that was available on record. With regards to this, the Court also emphasised on the instances where the same procedure (or lack thereof) had been employed by the Tribunal to wrongly declare a proceedee to be a citizen or a foreigner. The court deprecated the conduct of the Tribunal, deeming it to have serious consequences.

As per the LiveLaw report, the Court stated: “But we are afraid to observe that in much many more other orders, the same procedure of describing the materials produced is adopted but without analyzing the implication of the materials or without stating any reason and without arriving at any decision, a conclusion is arrived that in the view of the Tribunal, the proceedee concerned is a citizen. In some of the matters, it is noticed that even there is no proper recording as to what material has been relied upon which would be a basis for the conclusion arrived. Such procedure adopted would have a far more serious consequence.”

Accordingly, as provided by the report of LiveLaw, the Court directed the Secretary to the Government of Assam, Home Department, to conduct a departmental review of all such references that had been made by the Tribunals declaring the proceedees to be citizens. Subsequently, it was directed by the Court that wherever it was noticed that any such conclusion or declaration of proceedings had been made without any analysis of the materials or without providing for any reason thereof and no decision had been arrived at, the Home Department would be free to take any appropriate measures as may be available under the law.

It was further opined that if any action or measure was taken, then it should strictly comply with the required procedure of law as may be applicable for the purpose and should also comply with the principles of natural justice.

“we require the Secretary to the Government of Assam in the Home Department, to conduct a departmental review of all such references…and to take appropriate measures as may be available under the law. Any further action that may be taken pursuant to this order, the result thereof be put up in the public domain or before the people of the State for their knowledge, as the matter of illegal migrants in the State of Assam is an issue which may affect the entire State,” the Court added, as per LiveLaw.

Related:

Assam: Fourteen persons despatched to detention camp, families left frantic

Assam eviction drive compels evicted women to take drastic steps

A decade of suffering, unyielding pursuit of citizenship by Assam woman

ECI’s final de-limitation order seals fears of Muslim marginalisation in Assam

Assam Citizenship Crisis: Family forced to prove deceased member’s citizenship

The post Gauhati HC: “Foreigner’s Tribunals declaring applicants/proceedees to be citizens/foreigners without following law, analysing material placed on record” appeared first on SabrangIndia.

It was in March 2020, Seje Bala Ghosh, a 73-year old, a widow resident of North Bongaigaon (Ward 10) of Assam was served a “declared foreigners notice” demanding that she appear before a Foreigners’ Tribunal (FT) in Assam never mind the fact that her name had appeared in the final draft list of the National Register of Citizens (NRC) released on August 31, 2019.

Yesterday, November 21, after she collected the order from the FT, she was all smiles and then, after reaching home with Team CJP, there was time for reminiscing. “My mother contributed 50 rupees to the Indian Defence Fund during the War. At the time, 50 rupees had a huge value. We could buy four kilograms of rice only at 1 rupee at that time. Our father used to send us to the local shop to buy this. We could buy 250 ml of oil only at One Anna!”

Suddenly, on a sombre note, with lips trembling, she emotionally recalled, “At the age of 73 years, this government has made me go to Court. Maybe this was written in my destiny. But Bhagwan (God) will make them pay. I will not say anything more, Bhagwan is watching everything, I had to suffer a lot, my hand and my foot were fractured due to the intense harassment caused by this case.”

She further added, “It’s not enough that I am declared an Indian. The fact that I had to go to a Court for this is so shameful for me and I will never forget this because I am not a Bangladeshi!”

Dignified and proud, 73 year-old, Seje Bala Ghosh has a particularly interesting and illustrious ancestry.

Her father Lt. Digendra Chandra Ghosh, was a close associate of the prominent revolutionary freedom fighter Chandra Sekhar Azad.

With such an illustrious legacy and upbringing, she walked with her head held high. Then came the vicarious “notice” that cast the “Bangladeshi slur” on her, made Seje Bala feel ashamed, compelled as she was to “prove” her “Indian citizenship”. Since March of 2020, until November 2023, three years and eight months after the shocker from the Tribunal, volunteers and lawyers of Citizens for Justice and Peace (CJP) worked with her. And, finally she was declared Indian! Yesterday, on November 21, we formally received the written copy of the order that had been orally pronounced earler this month.

1 of 3

 

On behalf of team CJP, Assam state-in-charge Nanda Ghosh (author of this piece), legal team member and advocate, Dewan Abdur Rahim and his junior advocate Sahidur Rahman handed over the copy of the judgement to her.

CJP has, in the sixth year of its work in Assam assisted dozens of persons obtain or retain their citizenship status in Assam besides leading class action cases in the Gauhati High Court and the Supreme Court.

Brief background of Seje Bala’s case:

Seje Bala’s father, Digendra Ghosh, moved to Assam from the Sherpur town in the erstwhile Maymonshing district of what was then called East Pakistan. According to the refugee registration certificate dated March 7, 1951, Digendra Chandra Ghosh, son of Padma, is duly registered as refugee along with his four other family members. The refugee certificate bears the official seal and is signed by Deputy Commissioner of the then Goalpara District of Assam.

The family registered as refugees and took shelter in Bongaigaon. Their names were included in the 1951 NRC enumeration in Bongaigaon. The names included in 1951 NRC of her family were of the father of Seje Bala Ghosh, Digendra Chandra Ghosh her elder brother Dhiren Ghosh a.k.a Manik Ghosh, her elder sisters Manada a.k.a Usharani Ghosh and Sudharani Ghosh. It needs mention here that the name of her mother Barada Bala Ghosh was not included in the 1951 NRC as she had –at the time —gone to her natal home (parental home) due to her pregnancy.

Barely a few days later, Seje Bala Ghosh was born at her maternal grandfather’s house in Bilashipara of Goalpara District, according to Sudharani Ghosh and Usharani Ghosh (her sisters) who are still living. To continue the narrative of this beleaguered family, after staying for a few days in a refugee camp at Bongaigaon, the family shifted to Darrang District. Digendra Chandra Ghosh as well as his four other sons and daughters had also been issued a passport in the year 1960. The address of Digendra Chandra Ghosh in his passport was recorded as resident of village Balagora, PS- Mangaldoi in the undivided Darrang district.

Seje Bala Ghosh and her younger brother Haribhakta Ghosh informed CJP that their father died in 1961 in that village. The names of Barada Bala Ghosh, wife of Digendra Chandra Ghosh and Manik Ghosh son of late Digendra Chandra Ghosh were both thereafter included in the 1966 voter list with the same address from where the passport of Digendra Chandra Ghosh has been issued. The two persons who were included in the 1966 voter list are the mother and elder brother of Seje Bala Ghosh respectively.

CJP’s efforts

After CJP had taken up her case we set about compiling all her documents. She was asked to appear for the hearing at a Foreigners’ Tribunal (FT) but it was not easy.  One of her sons had died, and the other has not been able to find any work due to the Covid-19 lockdown at the time. The family was barely surviving and mostly due to the kindness of neighbours and a nephew.  Meanwhile, tragically, Seje Bala’s health had deteriorated significantly. When she learnt about the possibility of an impending FT hearing on the question of her citizenship after the lockdown had been lifted, she fainted and fell to the ground, in shock, fracturing her arm in the process!

“I cannot eat because of the tension. I cannot sleep. I had to take sleeping pills,” Seje Bala told CJP’s Nanda Ghosh, recalling this traumatic period.

“Through this period, our team faced many challenges at the time of counselling her, offering reassurance and support. When Seje Bala was immobilised with a broken arm our senior woman team member, Papiya Das visited her as well, offering crucial mental health support. Advocate Dewan Abdur Rahim, who is a key member of our legal team actually visited her home several times to effectively complete the documentation process and complete other official formalities. On one day she even had to attend the hearing at the Tribunal with a broken arm and in a terribly sickly condition. ”

The legal battle in Seje Bala’s case

As mentioned above, it was after she received the dreaded notice from the Assam Border Police of Bongaigaon district that CJP’s Team shockingly found that she was “tagged” as a suspected foreigner hailing from Bangladesh after March 25, 1971! Our involvement and inquiries revealed that these baseless allegations by the Investigating Officer (IO) making such irresponsible noting(s) on her file, were and are false, concocted and made with an ulterior motive. Police personnel concerned never even once visited her house in connection with this case. Worse, the IO in the case never even recorded any statements from her and any other witnesses and submitted these (as is required by practice) along with the inquiry report to the Tribunal.

To further pin-point both procedural and substantive malafide by the IO, the name and statements of so called witnesses, that the CJP Team found tagged with the case record were nothing but motivated by a desire to make out a false case. At the time of investigation (post 2004), the IO in this case had not even issued any notice to Seje Bala  to ensure her appearance before the Tribunal with required documents to prove her citizenship as is required under law.

So, first, the IO simply submitted a concocted (or false) inquiry report without any investigation against her. Thereafter, the IO has not even taken the trouble to acquire and then submit any documents from her — passport and/or any other documents— along with the inquiry report in the case that actually demonstrate that she is a foreign national.

Finally, Seje Bala Ghosh had to undergo this physical and procedural harassment – alleviated only thanks to CJP – despite the fact that this case is barred by the law of limitation. The case was initially “registered” in the year 2004 (states the order of the Superintendent of Police (SP) (Bongaigaon).  Yet Seje Bala Ghosh received a 2004 notice, during the Covid-19 lockdown, in March 2020, 20 years after the so-called “investigation” had been conducted.

A victory at last! But at what cost? 

Is Seje Bala a Bangladeshi?

We at Team CJP have been persistently active on the ground addressing the Citizenship Crisis. Our experience has found that it is hapless, marginalised Indians, especially women, who are targeted and harassed, viciously slurred with the label of “Bangladeshi.”

CJP has already helped several such victims “declared Indian” before the Foreigners Tribunals after grueling and patient intervention and work.

So this too, finally, is another CJP victory achieved in the first week of November, 2023, Seje Bala Ghosh has been declared Indian (not foreigner or Bangladeshi)! However we finally received the order only on November 21, 2023 from the Tribunal. So, on behalf of team CJP, Assam state-in-charge, Nanda Ghosh, legal team member, advocate Dewan Abdur Rahim and his junior advocate, Sahidur Rahman, took Seje Bala Ghosh to complete final formalities and then handed over the copy of the judgement.

November 21 will (hopefully) be the last day that Seje Bala will ever have to visit the dreaded Foreigner’s Tribunal. After completion of all official formalities, Nanda Ghosh and Ashikul Hussain drooped her home.

“Before that, every time the team met her over the past three years and eight months, Seje Bala would be in tears. Yesterday, November 21, she was a changed person, talking and smiling a lot, looking well and healthy.”  When CJP Secretary, Teesta Setalvad congratulated her over the phone, she showered the entire CJP team with prayers and best wishes.

Before we returned back to our homes, we spent some time with her. “I don’t know what to say! I have been severely harassed and I have to acknowledge that thanks to Baba (referring to both CJP volunteers and her nephew) I finally got my justice today, after more than three years. My advocate (Dewan Abdur Rahim) was also very supportive. I pray for you all, stay well!

The order may be viewed here:

Related:

Seje Bala Ghosh: Freedom fighter’s daughter asked to prove that she’s Indian!

Ailing daughter of freedom fighter forced to appear before foreigners’ tribunals

This ‘suspected foreigner’ has a Chandrashekhar Azad Link

The post How Seje Bala Ghosh, a freedom fighter’s daughter slurred as Bangladeshi is finally declared Indian appeared first on SabrangIndia.

CJP’s Team Assam has been diligently reviewing this newly released draft voter list. Their primary focus has been in identifying and documenting the details of D voters for further communication. This marks the meticulous detail and dedication with which CJP adheres to ensuring human rights are protected in Assam.

Additionally, they have also been checking for any errors in individuals’ names, parent’s names, ages, and other relevant information that might be of help to people to make their case in the tribunals. Despite repeatedly encountering network issues in Assam while attempting to download the voter list, CJP’s team members struggle to aid people.

District Voluntary Motivator Habibul Bepari and Community Volunteers in the CJP team have been working efficiently to help D-voters. One such story to emerge from this ongoing citizenship crisis in Assam is that of Ashraful Sk from Jhaskal village under the Agomoni police station in the Dhubri District of Assam. Ashraful has been a lifelong resident of Jhaskal since his birth. Born and raised in this remote corner of Assam, Ashraful’s early life was marred by the lack of access to or educational opportunities due to dire poverty and lack of basic amenities that he and his family suffered with. As he grew older, to make ends meet he worked tirelessly on the family’s land. Despite many socio-economic hurdles, Ashraful was able to fend for his family and complete his duties as best he could. He has married off his daughter and his son is currently pursuing his studies, but, disaster struck when he discovered his name marked with a dreaded “D” on the voter list in 2007 as he tried to participate as a voter in the elections.

1 of 3

 

The shock of this revelation put him in a frenzy of disbelief. Seeking to fix the issue and take part in the democratic process, he immediately visited the house of the Booth Level Officer to inquire about his status. However, his pleas fell on deaf ears as the BLO offered no response. However, he remained undeterred, and he took the matter to court multiple times and even personally visited the Election Office himself. He even tried to approach the Foreigners Tribunal and tried to find out what was the reason behind the ‘D’ status for him.

Even though he was an illiterate farmer, Ashraful remained determined. Struck by emotion during his recall, Ashraful told CJP that he was prepared to undertake any job even if it has to be bonded labour, to fix this – however resources, and endless hope remained out of his reach and he had reluctantly resigned himself to being unjustly labelled as a “D” voter.

There was no clear end to his troubles and 2019 brought a new calamity for Ashraful as his daughter sought to enrol her name in the voter list in her husband’s village. However, the BLO of that locality denied her the right to vote because of her father’s status as a “D” voter.

Desperate and helpless and in absolute panic, Ashraful approached several advocates for assistance with the hope that someone would aid him. However, advocates placed high fees and none came to his help in his time of desperation. His hopes fell further when an advocate subjected him to racial slurs. This deeply hurtful experience weighed heavily on Ashraful’s heart and compelled him to abandon hope for justice in his fight against the “D” label that had unjustly plagued him for over a decade.

The plight of Ashraful is one among many. The challenges faced by Ashraful and others in similar situations highlights the urgent necessity for affordable legal representation and a more just and humane approach to addressing such issues. In Assam, people like Ashraful battle multiple battles, including poverty, discrimination, lack of education and poor health.

In March 2021 CJP also filed a plea in the Gauhati High Court seeking directions for effective modalities for legal aid in terms of having trained panels of lawyers and adequate front offices in light of the impending appeals to be filed before Foreigners Tribunals by those excluded from National Register of Citizens (NRC) exercise in Assam. The NRC final list had come out on August 31, 2019 and since then those excluded from the list have been living a life in limbo and trying desperately to prove their citizenship and they are in dire need of legal aid.

However, CJP continues to stand as a beacon of hope. CJP has aided over 50 and counting people to regain their status as Indian after proving it in courts. The organisation, as a mammoth wave, continues its work from legal aid, everyday assistance in the process, to legal awareness workshops, thus creating a comprehensive means of tackling unawareness, helplessness and despair is undertaken by CJP’s humanitarian endeavour in Assam. CJP’s team also checks on people who are caught in the citizenship crisis, aids them in procuring their documents, and fixing any errors that may have arisen due to lack of resources, illiteracy or mistakes. Thus, their unwavering dedication to fighting injustice and discrimination remains unshaken. As new challenges emerge in Assam, such as the draft of voter list, delimitation commissions, they are determined to work against all odds for citizens, embodying the spirit of democracy and equality even in the most challenging of circumstances.

Related:

Dalit woman declared as ‘Doubtful Citizen’, CJP steps in to help 

CJP की मदद से 97 साल की महिला को नागरिकता संकट से राहत

CJP moves NCM against arms training camps, weapon distribution events in Assam and Rajasthan

Family forced to prove deceased member is not a foreigner!

The post In the face of mounting obstacles, CJP provides ongoing hope to citizens appeared first on SabrangIndia.

Sukur and his story is the most fitting representation of those Indians who are oppressed by state functionaries. Sukur, born and brought up in India, was the only son of Abdul Jalil @ Abdul Jalil Sheikh and Majiran Nessa @ Majiran Bewa. He was born in the village of Kawadi No. 2 (Sonaikhola) under the Manikpur police station of the Bongaigaon district in 1981. He grew up in the same village.

Kaiya Sheikh was Sukur’s grandfather. His grandfather and father had both died a long time ago. He has previously stated that he is his parents’ only son and is entitled to the rights, privileges, and protection guaranteed by the Indian constitution and other laws.

Notably, Sukur is also a regular voter. It was only after careful verification and investigation that the Election Officer of the concerned area recorded/enrolled his name in the Electoral Roll. Since, only Indian citizens can have their names added to the electoral roll, no doubt should even have arisen regarding his citizenship. Additionally, his parents and grandparents are both Indian citizens, thus, making him an Indian citizen by birth.

Meeting Sukur Ali and his family:

Throughout CJP’s journey of assisting Indian citizens in Assam, the team has come across many instances of people from socially and economically disadvantaged backgrounds facing greater challenges in defending their citizenship. However, about a year ago, we came across the case of Sukur Ali, a man who begs for a living and was expected to defend his citizenship, even though his name was already present on the National Register of Citizens (NRC).

Sukur Ali’s neighbor had informed the CJP team that the Bongaigaon Foreigners’ Tribunal (FT) had served him with a notice.  When the team had promptly gone to meet Sukur Ali at his house, it was discovered that both Sukur Ali and his mother had developmental issues.

“They are extremely impoverished and lack the resources to fight a case in the FT. Please assist them,” the neighbors had requested the CJP Team.

While the nature of their mental disability remained unclear due to the absence of proper certificates describing their mental disabilities or disorders, the economic hardship this FT case would place on the family became clear when the team had met them.  In Sukur’s family, there is his 80-year-old mother Marijan Bewa, who was struggling to stir a pot with a ladle in her wrinkled feeble hands, as she cooked the family’s meal over a low flame in the open, and his wife, Jameela Khatun, was caring for their 2-year-old daughter.

Sukur also has a 4-year-old son who was completely unaware of his family’s predicament. Behind them was a hut that was so dilapidated that it was a surprise that it was still standing.

“He left home this morning and has yet to return,” Jameela said of her husband, who was out begging for food so his family could eat for one more day. It was evident that the family was clearly traumatized by the FT notice.

CJP Team Nanda Ghosh and Advocate Abdur Rahim with Sukur ali and his family

Sukur Ali in front of his home with his wife and children

Sukur Ali with his wife Jameela Khatun

Team CJP and Sukur Ali’s neighbours with him and his family

The case against Shukur and CJP’s helping hand:

The case against was based on the allegation that Sukur was a suspected foreigner. In the inquiry report submitted by the investigating officer in Sukur’s case, false allegations had been submitted against him, deeming that he had migrated here from East Pakistan (Bangladesh).

It is crucial to note here that no proper investigation had been conducted in this case. The Investigative Officer of the case had never even visited his home or the homes of the so-called witnesses in the case, as mentioned in the inquiry report. The I/O had falsely written/recorded the statements of the opposite party and the so-called ‘witnesses’, without even questioning them, and then submitted a false inquiry report.

Before the FT, a member of our legal team had stated unequivocally that Sukur is Indian by birth. In the written statement, it was clearly mentioned that “The I/O of the case did not seize and submit any documents, such as the passport or any other relevant documents, along with an inquiry report to substantiate their claims of the opposite party (Sukur) being a foreign national.”

It was further mentioned in the statement that the I/O of the instant case never took any statement from the opposite party (Sukur). “Thus, it would not be a reach to say that the names of the witnesses tagged with the case record are nothing, but an attempt to build a false case against the opposite party.”

It was also pointed out that during the time of investigation the I/O of this instant case had not even issued any notice to the opposite party for appearance or produced any documents to prove the citizenship of the opposite party, as is the due process of law.

The Legal Process and the hurdles faced:

The CJP Team began reviewing Sukur’s documents and discovered that his name was on the NRC. The name of Sukur Ali’s late father, Abdul Jalil Sheikh, was also present on the 1966 voters list. Additionally, Sukur’s mother was still a voter.

When it came to land documents, however, there appeared to be some sort of family feud. Despite the fact that they had some land documents, one of Shukur’s relatives took possession of all of them and had refused to part with them. Despite repeated requests from Sukur’s neighbors, who were doing everything they could to assist the impoverished family, he was still unwilling to share the photocopies.

In light of this, we enlisted the assistance of Mr. Rahim Ali, a well-known and highly respected retired teacher who lives in the same village, and is also a supporter of CJP. “This is very unfortunate,” he had said after learning about the family’s predicament, particularly the issue of land documents. “I will do everything I can to help you,” he said, promising his full support.

Thereafter, the team began with the process of arranging for a bailor. This is because, according to the rules of the Bongaigaon Foreigners Tribunal, a bailor is required for the primary level hearing of FT cases. We located a bailor and asked him to retrieve his documents. We also asked the villagers to stand by Shukur Ali’s, providing him moral support and other assistance, as was needed. 

It is worth noting here that FT’s cases are frequently decided in unconventional manners, with unusual terms being used. Sometimes the individual declared as a foreigner is made to use the terms ‘projected father’ or ‘projected mother’.  For minor spelling errors or surname changes, people are sometimes classified as foreigners.

Thus, another issue that needed to be tackled was that in the written statement of Sukur, it was claimed that the actual and correct name of the mother of Sukur is ‘Majiran Nessa’. Traditionally, in Muslim communities, after the death of the husband, some Muslim women change their title to ‘Bewa’ rather than ‘Khatun’. thus, in this case, Sukur’s mother’s name was written as ‘Majiran Bewa’ after his father died. This meant that ”Majiran Nessa” and ”Majiran Bewa” were the same person.

The problems mentioned above are only a small sample of the challenges that the CJP team encountered while conducting groundwork and legal work in this case. Many issues also came up while obtaining the necessary documentation from various offices. Since there was no one to assist the team with any type of documentation from his family, they had to visit various government offices several times, especially for certified copies.

The gains and the losses:

Sukur Ali was finally declared an Indian citizen by the tribunal after a year of hard work. But, this victory was also accompanied with losses, as Sukur Ali’s ailing mother, who remained concerned about the case till the end, passed away just a few days before he was declared Indian. With this fear and apprehension that her son will be a foreigner, his old mother left forever, and could not hear the good news.

When the CJP team went to Sukur’s house with a copy of his judgment, his wife became emotional and began crying.

“We don’t have anyone,” she explained. “My husband is also physically and mentally disabled. Although he appears to be in good health, he does not understand anything and cannot speak properly,” she continued.

“However, the children and I have little to eat with what he has begged for all day. My mother-in-law recently died. Meanwhile, only Allah knows how much of my time is spent in trouble and worry as a result of this foreign case!” she added.

“Thank you very much for assisting us,” she continued.

“We could not have prosecuted this case without Citizens for Justice and Peace. We are overjoyed to be getting justice. It was critical for us to obtain justice for this helpless family,” she said, expressing her gratitude.

The important question that the story of Sukur leaves us with is that, until when will innocent and helpless people go through this pain, till when will we find a permanent solution? How long will this hateful politics continue where people who are barely making ends meet are suddenly declared foreigners, being seen only for their surnames? Who is benefitting from targeting these poor, helpless, deprived people, half of whom have no other wish than to lead their simple lives? 

Related:   

Victory! Mojibor Sheikh released from Assam Detention Centre with CJP’s help

CJP comes to the aid of Assam beggar served FT notice

CJP Impact: Another woman saved from the spectre of facing statelessness in Assam! 

Scapegoats and Holy Cows: Crime and Justice Delivery in the Age of Sectarian Nationalism

Crackdown on child marriage claims four lives, including three women and one child

Families protest arrests as questions mount on child marriage crackdown in Assam

Hate Watch: Himanta Biswas Sarma on ‘Love Jihad’ during the Gujarat poll campaign

Assam: New criteria for government jobs singling out minorities?

Gauhati HC sets aside ex parte order declaring woman as a foreigner after her death

The post CJP brings a sliver of hope for a differently abled beggar who had been suspected to a foreigner appeared first on SabrangIndia.

The Supreme Court Friday, November 18, issued notice to the Assam government on a plea filed by 89 members of Foreigners Tribunals in Assam, challenging their discharge from service by the State of Assam [Pranab Bora vs Union of India].

All these members were appointed on contractual basis pursuant to a Supreme Court direction passed on May 30, 2019, which called for establishment of additional Foreigners Tribunals.

They were discharged by way of a notification dated October 14 which has noe been challenged before the top court.

It was a bench of Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud and Justice Hima Kohli that issued notice to the State of Assam and sought its response.

“We will issue notice. Serve it to the standing counsel of Assam,” the Court directed.

Foreigners Tribunal are a creature of executive order under tje Foreigners Act of 1946, a colonial legislation. They deal with cases of Indians arbitrarily declared foreigners, apart from some foreigners read illegal immigrants who may have entered from Bangladesh or have been residing in Assam without appropriate documents.

A total of 221 persons were appointed to Foreigners Tribunals in 2019 pursuant to the top court’s directions. 

The plea filed through advocate Kaushik Choudhury contended that the order issued by the Assam State discharging the petitions, is absolutely arbitrary, discriminatory and in complete violation to the fundamental rights of the petitioners under Article 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India.

During the hearing today, Senior Advocate Gopal Sankaranarayanan informed the bench that around1 lakh such cases are pending in Assam 

“It is pertinent to mention that contrary to the stand of the respondents, petitioners were on the duty of deciding the Foreigners reference cases at the time of their forfeiture and as on date admittedly more than 1 lakhs …reference cases are pending in Assam,” stated the plea.

The petitioners further said that the State misclassified the service by misinterpreting the fact that their service was be decided only by/through the National Register of Citizen (NRC) related issues and, since the NRC is not yet published and rejection slips not yet issued, their service is forfeited.

It was also pointed out that there were other members previously appointed to Foreigners Tribunals on contractual basis though their service has been extended from time to time.

“While previous Tribunal Members were allowed to continue in their service as on date, the petitioners service was forfeited which apparently is discriminatory. The Government has put the petitioners in a different class merely because the appointment was made in view of the direction of this Hon’ble Court and without there being any valid reason and without even informing and taking leave of this Court,” the plea said.

Related:
Guwahati HC raps Assam govt, salaries of 221 Foreigner Tribunal members unpaid
A look at how Foreigners’ Tribunals have fared since 2015

The post 89 Members of Assam Foreigners Tribunals move Supreme Court against dismissal from service appeared first on SabrangIndia.