Democracy endangered
Communalism Combat 
February  2005  

If you are a Muslim and Bengali is the language you speak, the Delhi
police needs no further proof that you are an illegal Bangladeshi
immigrant to be summarily deported

The rising tide of fundamentalist forces all over the world has
contributed significantly to the erosion of democratic traditions in
the name of 'freedom' and 'security'. Fear and paranoia are being
instigated and manipulated to subdue societies into obedience and
conformity. Cherished ideals of liberty and social and political
equality are being undermined. We believe it to be the responsibility
of citizens to resist the onslaught of reactionary and anti-democratic
forces and to contribute what they can to preserve, protect, and
strengthen democracy. The Citizen's Campaign for Preserving Democracy
is, hopefully, one of the many emergent initiatives in this direction
within the Indian polity.

We have been working in different areas of concern: with political
prisoners, for victims of communal atrocities, and against the
oppression of minorities, women, and the so-called lower castes.
Recently, we have tried to bring to public attention the propensity of
the State to declare certain sections of society as outside the pale
of citizenship. Our investigations over the last few months in Delhi,
into the issue of the purported "Bangladeshi" have revealed that there
has been extensive violation of the rule of law in this matter. Right
from round-up and arrest, to the supposed 'hearing' and deportation,
no lawful procedure is being followed by the authorities. The entire
process contributes to and manifests the criminalisation and
communalisation of the state and the corruption of its legal and
judicial institutions.

It is not only the human rights of "illegal migrants" that is under
threat at present. All marginalised groups, as well as large sections
of the informal working class, are being pushed to the edges of
society. Much of this is being done in the name of 'protecting the
environment' or 'beautifying the landscape' or 'preserving our
heritage'. There is at work a systematic process to disenfranchise the
poor so that they have no voice in democratic governance or decision
making or constitute a part of the 'political' landscape any more. The
Citizen's Campaign for Preserving Democracy pledges itself to the
struggle to preserve, protect, and strengthen India's democratic
traditions.

The political economy of migration

Human history is, in some senses, about the movement of people in
search of making their own history. For centuries, people have moved
from one place to the other. Driven by want, needs, aspirations, and
dreams, they have overcome enormous odds posed by geography and
climate to reach and inhabit the furthest comers of the planet. The
world as we know it today owes a great deal to the creative energy
unleashed by experiential learning, assimilation, and invention during
the course of this movement. The last few centuries of modern and
transnational development have witnessed how people have, either
voluntarily or through coercion, broken old ties and relationships and
tried to put down new roots. This has also been interpreted as a
search for "freedom": freedom to move, to seek opportunity, to make
one's fortune.

On one hand, modem (or capitalist) development has given birth to the
modem nation state, with its attendant ideologies of democracy and
development, whose basic thrust is to homogenise markets and reproduce
conditions for the free accumulation and expansion of capital. On the
other hand, it has simultaneously moved to restrict the free movement
of labour across the political boundaries of nation states. Thus, an
entire edifice of legal and constitutional frameworks has been
created, aimed at regulation, surveillance and disciplining of the
movement of people across borders. This has created two separate, but
closely linked, registers of legal and illegal mobility â both located
within the fabric of democracy.

Over the past few decades, this process has intensified. As
disparities of incomes and opportunities increase, many more people
leave their traditional boundaries to seek better livelihoods. Whether
it is IT professionals from South Asia seeking to enter the USA, or
Turkish peasants searching for menial jobs in Europe, people are
leaving their "homes" in ever-increasing numbers for whatever
opportunities that exist elsewhere. However, this free movement of
people is treated differentially by governments â some are welcomed;
others are dealt with harshly. It is in this context, that this report
deals with the specific issue of "illegal" immigration into India,
policies that are being made to ostensibly address the problem and the
actual manner in which it is affecting large sections of people who
may or may not be immigrants.

The drive in Delhi

Starting from 'Operation Push Back' in 1993, thousands of
Bengali-speaking Muslims have been picked up from various working
class settlements all over Delhi and forcibly pushed inside
Bangladesh. It has never been clearly established whether these people
were actually from Bangladesh or not. Instances from various parts of
Delhi have shown that Indian citizens from West Bengal and Assam,
working as ragpickers in Delhi, were routinely arrested on the charge
of being illegal immigrants. An association of concerned citizens,
voluntary groups, activists, and lawyers then decided to examine the
process of deportation of people to Bangladesh, and a study was
conducted between August and December 2004.

The study team consisted of members of Chintan Environmental Research
and Action Group, Bal Vikas Dhara, Aashray Adhikar Abhiyan, Aman
Trust, and Hazards Centre. During the study over 50 persons were
interviewed and fifteen detailed case studies were prepared. The study
team visited the respective police stations, the Foreigners Regional
Registration Office (FRRO), and the place of detention â to record the
processes of arrest, documentation, nationality determination,
detention, and deportation. Some cases were individually followed-up.
In addition, the national and international laws governing
citizenship, immigration, and deportation were also examined. This
report details the observations and conclusions of the study.

Identification of Bangladeshis

The Action Plan drawn up in May 1993 by the Government of the National
Capital Territory of Delhi (GNCTD) for the deportation of illegal
migrants, vests the local police with the job of detection and
identification of illegal migrants. The local police, already
over-burdened, undertakes this task through a network of local
informers, often from within the communities that are targeted, who
provide information about suspected illegal migrants. Thus, at the
very outset, the Action Plan lies enmeshed in a system that easily
lends itself to corruption and manipulation.

The interviews undertaken by the team clearly indicate that these
informers wield considerable clout in the locality and all
Bengali-speaking Muslims are required to keep them in good humour.
Failure to meet the informer's demands â for money or otherwise â
could mean loss of nationality. The findings also revealed that, in
practice, identification by the informer was the first and final
determination of nationality. The police relied solely and absolutely
on the informer's word. All pleas and submission of proof by the
detainees â of authoritative documents issued by agencies of Delhi
government or the Union government â invariably fell on deaf ears.

It was also seen that there was no scrutiny or enquiry undertaken when
documentary proof was submitted. These could range from ration card,
election card, school certificate, affidavit from the village
panchayat, to certificates from the MLA or MP. In a few cases, these
documents were torn up by the state authorities on the specious
grounds that they were false and fabricated. Thus, it can be concluded
that the Government of India has delegated its sovereign function of
identification and deportation of illegal migrants, in the interests
of national security, to a few assorted "informers".

Detention and arrest

The study revealed that the raids, detention and arrests were
conducted in marked contrast to the provisions laid down by the
Supreme Court and the Constitution. The guidelines issued by the
Supreme Court in its landmark judgement in 1997, in DK Basu v State of
West Bengal, regarding arrest, were observed only in their breach.
Even if the citizenship of the persons being arrested and detained is
uncertain, they still enjoy the protection of the Fundamental Rights
enshrined in Article 14 and 21, which provide that no person shall be
deprived of life or personal liberty except according to procedure
established by law, and was upheld by the Supreme Court (in Chairman,
Rly. Board v Chandrima Das [(2000)2 SCC 465]). But, in direct
contravention of the law, the raids included swoops on the so-called
illegal migrants in the dead of night and rounding up of men, women
and children from their bastis. People were not even given enough time
to get dressed properly or collect their documents. During other
times, family members, including minors, caught in the raid were
forced to face the situation alone, without being re-united with their
families.

While the government's own Action Plan requires that the local police
records the statements of two independent witnesses, none of the
people interviewed during the course of the study had ever seen the
police secure this corroborative evidence. On the contrary, many
complained of being beaten and threatened when they began to plead
their case. The SHO and ACP then routinely signed these poorly
prepared cases. All pleas and entreaties of the detainees for a
hearing were effectively silenced by physical assaults and verbal
abuse.

Legality and illegality

The issue of identity should be ideally settled by documentary proof.
However, in discussions with the police and other agencies, it emerged
that commonly used documents - like electoral identity cards, ration
cards, school certificates, and certificates from MLAs and gram
panchayats were not accepted. Informally, the study team was told that
only documents showing proof of ownership of land are admissible.
Given the economic status of those arrested and the fact that, in
India, more and more migrants to Indian metros are landless labour,
unable to eke out a living from daily wages, this is an unrealistic
demand and cannot be met. Not just by "Bangladeshis", but even by most
Indians. It is strange that the Indian government is reluctant to
accept other documents issued by its own departments.

One of the most common faces of corruption in India is bribery and it
is present during the process of identifying and deporting supposed
"illegal migrants" as well. Interviews with those who were set free
reveal that identification also operates as a function of payment.
Those who had the financial means to offer and pay bribes were usually
set free, regardless of any other proof. Interviewees recounted how
those unable to pay bribes were detained and then (presumably) sent
ahead. A rough calculation based on an average amount of Rs. 1,000
paid per individual to be freed suggests that there are considerable
sums to be made, including the amounts extorted by the informer.
Conferring arbitrary and extraordinary powers on the police, as has
been done by the government Action Plan, has led to in-built abuse
within the deportation process. It is apparent that the government
Action Plan confers extraordinary and arbitrary powers on the police.
The emergent abuse is inevitable, as it is inherent in the very
mechanics of the law, policy and procedure followed.

The Foreigners Regional

Registration Office

As per the Action Plan, the Foreigners Regional Registration Office
(FRRO)/civil authority acts as the coordinating agency. The
notification issued by the Delhi Administration in pursuance of its
power under section 3 of the Foreigners Act, 1946, empowers the FRRO
to scrutinise the proposals for deportation, and satisfy itself of
their illegal status by providing the concerned person with a hearing.
However, the study team did not observe the detainees being produced
before the FRRO on any occasion during its visits over three months to
the FRRO's office, although some ragpickers mentioned that they were
sometimes briefly produced before the FRRO. The team noted that while
the police vans with the alleged illegal migrants waited in the
compound of the FRRO office at Rama Krishna Puram, their papers were
taken in and duly signed by the FRRO, and a Leave India Notice issued
under the Foreigners Act. It may be pointed out that with a senior
police officer, of the rank of DCP, discharging the duty of the FRRO
in Delhi, the basic constitutional principle of separation of powers
stands seriously undermined.

The place of detention

Those arrested on suspicion of being Bangladeshis are detained by the
orders of the FRRO, at a place of detention near Shastri Nagar Metro
station. This is, in fact, a night shelter or Ren Basera, and a Baraat
Ghar (wedding hall), which have been occupied by the Task Force and
converted into a place of detention. It is a double storey building,
on a plot of land roughly about 10 meters x 20 meters. The building
bears the following information, displayed prominently on its front
facade: Slum & J.J. Vibhag, Baraat Ghar (Bhoo Tal), Ren Basera
(Pratham Tal).

Two armed police constables guard the gate, with more police personnel
inside. The first floor of the Ren Basera is being used for
residential purposes by the Task Force.

>From the accounts of some detainees, it was learnt that the conditions
of detention fall far below the prescribed national and international
standards:

à In violation of national and international rules, both men and women
detainees are kept together in captivity on the ground floor, i.e. the
Baraat Ghar.

à The basic amenities provided here are woefully inadequate. There are
only two toilets in the building, one of which is used exclusively by
the police staff, and the other is shared by male and female
detainees, in violation of their right to privacy.

à Even to use the toilet facility detainees have to seek prior
permission, which is refused sometimes.

à Items of necessity, such as blankets, are inadequate. According to
one narrative, a woman detainee who had two children asked for an
extra blanket because one blanket was not enough for them. Not only
was she refused the extra blanket, but was also slapped across the
face for her audacity. Other items of necessity, such as milk for the
children, have to be bought from the police at excessive rates.

à No regular visitation rights are available for the relatives of the 
detainees.

à Detainees are not allowed to offer prayers (namaaz), in direct
violation of Fundamental Rights (article 25, Constitution of India,
that guarantees freedom to profess and practice religion).

à Detainees are forced to perform odd jobs for the police, like
washing their motorcycles, sweeping the floor, cleaning toilets etc.,
which will attract section 374 of the Indian Penal Code that
proscribes unlawful forced labour.

à The team also heard several complaints of detainees being physically
assaulted by the police. Slaps, kicks and punches were part of the
treatment meted out to detainees. Degrading forms of punishment, like
forcing detainees to squat in the murga position, were routinely
reported.

The right to shelter

The misuse of the night shelter and Baraat Ghar as a place of
detention constitutes a very grave infringement of public policy and
State obligations. The diversion of the Slum & JJ (Jhuggi-Jhopdi)
Vibhag's unit, that should otherwise be made available as a night
shelter or a wedding hall, as a detention centre is indeed illegal,
unlawful, unconstitutional and unjust.

Deportation to the border

>From the FRRO the arrested persons are taken to the MCD Ren Basera,
where the police are waiting for them. They are kept at the Ren Basera
until there are sufficient numbers to fill a railway bogie.
Subsequently, they are taken to the Old Delhi railway station in
closed vehicles and put aboard a train. The Delhi police accompany
them to Malda station in West Bengal, from where they are transferred
to a Border Security Force (BSF) camp. Diplomatic protocol requires
that when deportation takes place, the embassy or high commission or
any other representative of the State of the country of origin of the
deportee be informed about the decision. This has not been undertaken,
resulting in a breach of international protocol.

Since the required procedure has not been followed, care has to be
taken by the BSF that their counterparts in Bangladesh (BDR) do not
know that the deportees are being pushed across the border. Hence, the
deportees have to be released in batches of two, and that too in the
middle of the night. Thus, it may take several days for the entire lot
of deportees to be evacuated from the BSF camp, and during the entire
time armed guards are deployed to ensure that the people remain
concealed within the camp. The people, both men and women, remain
completely at the mercy and whims of the guards. Several incidents of
rape, sexual harassment and physical violence have been reported by
those who have somehow returned from the border.

When the people are forced across the border, all their possessions
are taken away along with any signs that may point to their Indian
origin. If they have any money, that too is taken away. If there is a
sympathetic BSF jawan, he may exchange Indian rupees for some
Bangladeshi money. When there is sufficient inducement, the jawan may
even tell the deportee to come back when the police have gone so that
he/she can re-enter India. But the general trend appears to be to
forcibly push the people into No-Man's Land, regardless of the
weather, the condition of the people, and the terrain (jungle or
river). They are warned that if they turn back they will be shot as
infiltrators. As parting advice, they are also cautioned to tell the
Bangladeshi Rifles, if they are caught across the border, that they
are returning from some work or wedding from a particular village.
Thus, poor people, deliberately bereft of identity and citizenship,
have no option but to again take the path of illegality merely in
order to survive.

Violation of rights at all stages

Pursuant to an order of the Delhi high court in Chelan Duff vs Union
of India, (3710/2001, writ petition still pending) the Home ministry
formulated a further Action Plan on May 1, 2002 to expeditiously
detect and deport illegal Bangladeshi nationals from Delhi. As per
this plan, the commissioner, Delhi Police, is required to set up 10
Task Forces to identify the illegal migrants. Each Task Force is
assigned a quota of identifying 100 illegal migrants daily and this
number is to be increased later. Every alternate day at least 50-70
persons are to be sent by train from Delhi to Howrah for deportation.
This Task Force functions under a monitoring cell in the Home
department of the GNCTD, and reports to a high powered nodal authority
constituted by the Home ministry. This nodal authority, in turn, is
required to submit monthly reports to the Delhi high court.

It is indeed ironical that while the Delhi high court is monitoring
the functioning of the agencies engaged with the detection and
deportation of Bangladesh migrants, there is blatant infringement of
fundamental rights guaranteed by the Constitution, gross violation of
international human rights, and systematic derogation from due process
of law and principles of natural justice, which the court is mandated
to uphold and protect. The target quota system has given a further
impetus to corruption and coercion at the level of the local police.

Using the by now familiar rhetoric of "national security", the
cardinal principles of natural justice are subverted. Thus, no fair
and objective inquiry is held in Delhi to establish that the person
arrested is a foreign national. The basis on which a person is held to
be a Bangladeshi is never communicated to him and he/she is never
given a chance to rebut such findings. The right to fair hearing/trial
is an essential ingredient of the principle of natural justice. Under
the current law and Action Plan, however, the deportation order is
passed without any hearing and without disclosing the reasons which
led to the conclusion that he/she is a foreign national. This is then
detrimental not only to the process, but to the economically
disadvantaged Indian Muslim population too.

The legal regime

Admission, deportation, stay and control of movement of foreigners in
India is governed by:
Passport (Entry into India) Act, 1920/ Rules 1950.
Registration of Foreigners Act, 1939/ Rules.
Foreigners Act 1946, and subsequent orders issued from time to time.
Indo-Bangladesh Visa Agreement, 1972.
The Illegal Migrants (Determination by Tribunals) Act, 1983

The central government, under section 3 (2) of the Foreigners Act,
1946 is empowered to make provisions for prohibiting, regulating or
restricting the entry of foreigners into India, or their departure
therefrom or their presence or continued presence therein. The
procedure provided by the Foreigners Act, 1946 and the Action Plan
formulated by the Home ministry for detection and deportation of
illegal migrants from Bangladesh in Delhi, is prejudicial to the
affected persons and in flagrant violation of articles 14, 19, 21, and
22 of the Indian Constitution as well as the obligations of the Indian
State towards International Conventions and Treaties, inter alia,
UDHR, ICCPR, ICSECR, CEDA W, Convention on the Rights of the Child
etc.

The Foreigners Act, 1946, in a fundamental departure from liberal
jurisprudence, reverses the burden of proof (sec. 9) and places the
onus upon the person concerned to prove his citizenship. The police is
not obliged to prove its case by the application of any basic standard
of proof. It thus replaces the cardinal principle of presumption of
innocence with the jurisprudence of suspicion. It would be pertinent
to pause here and consider that in a country where a large number of
people live and work as migrant workers, working in the burgeoning
informal unorganised sector, driven by economic compulsions, it is
extremely unlikely that they will hold any documents certifying them
as citizens of India. The growing emphasis in government policy on
documentary proof of identity may eventually disenfranchise the poor,
and particularly the Muslim minority.

There is no forum for appeal available under the Foreigners Act, 1946,
against a determination of nationality by the prescribed authority
under sec. 8, thus denying access to judicial remedy against a
decision taken in the arbitrary manner described above. The situation
is further aggravated by the fact that sec. 15 of the Foreigners Act,
1946 provides protection against legal prosecutions to persons acting
under this Act. This provision becomes more ominous, particularly when
read in conjunction with sec. 11(2), Foreigners Act, 1946, which
authorises the police to use "reasonably necessary" power, in the
discharge of it's functions under this Act. It thus grants immunity
from accountability and in that sense legalises human rights abuses.

Several petitions are currently pending before the courts, challenging
the arrest, identification, and deportation process:

à AI Lawyers Forum for Civil Liberties & Anr. vs. Union of India &
Others, Writ Petition (Civil) No. 125 / 1998, Supreme Court of India.

à S. Sonaval vs. Union of India, Writ Petition (Civil) No. 131/ 2000,
Supreme Court of India, (Seeking repeal of the IMDT Act, 1983).

à Jamaith Ulema - E - Hind & Anr. vs. Union of India & Ors., Writ
Petition (Civil) No. 7/2001, Supreme Court of India, (Opposing the
repeal of the IMDT Act, 1983).

à Abu Hanif alias Millan Master vs. Police Commissioner of Delhi &
Others, Special Leave Petition (Criminal) No.3778 / 2000, Supreme
Court of India, (Quashing of order holding the petitioner to be a
foreign national).

à Abu Hanif alias Millan Master vs. Union of India and Others, Civil
Original Jurisdiction, Writ Petition (Civil) No.418 / 2001, Supreme
Court of India, (Seeking the establishment of a tribunal and extension
of IMDT Act, 1983, in Delhi).

à Shekh Molla vs. S.H.O. Inderprastha Estate & Others, Criminal Writ
No. 382 / 93, Delhi High Court, (Seeking compensation for illegal and
unlawful deportation of nine Indian citizens to Bangladesh).

à Chetan Dutt vs. Union of India and Others, Civil Writ No. 3170/2001,
Delhi High Court, (Petition to take effective steps to check influx of
and remove illegal Bangladesh migrants from Delhi).

Conclusion

It is true that the physical and cultural similarities of people
living on either side of the border makes it difficult for the
concerned authorities to distinguish between them. However instead of
evolving a judicious mechanism to determine the same the government
has accorded legitimacy to an arbitrary and discriminatory procedure.
The cumulative impact of this procedure is the systematic and targeted
harassment and abuse of a specific religious and linguistic minority,
viz. Bengali-speaking Muslims. In a polity where communal prejudice is
increasingly manifest in various sections of both the public and
government, this deportation drive, in the absence of necessary checks
and balances, begins to acquire the colour of ethnic cleansing in
contravention of the secular and plural foundations of Indian society.

The central government, under section 3 of the Foreigners Act, 1946,
had promulgated the Foreigners Tribunal Order, 1964 for the purpose of
determining the question of nationality of a person. Under this order
the central government is required to constitute a tribunal to give
its opinion after giving a reasonable opportunity to the alleged
illegal migrant to make a representation, produce evidence, and after
considering such evidence the tribunal is to pronounce its opinion.
The central government, despite repeatedly expressing anxiety over the
influx of illegal migrants from Bangladesh, has not constituted any
tribunal in Delhi, under the 1964 order.

Similarly, the Illegal Migrants (Determination by Tribunal) Act, 1983,
also envisages the constitution of tribunals, composed of judicial
officers, to determine, in a fair manner, the question as to whether a
person is an illegal migrant or not. But till date the IMDT Act has
not been extended to Delhi. It is being alleged that, since this law
adopts procedure grounded on principles of liberal jurisprudence and
notions of natural justice, it has failed to get rid of the illegal
Bangladeshi migrants. Hence, there is a growing chorus by right wing
forces and the Home ministry demanding the repeal of the IMDT Act and
doing away with principles like the right to equal treatment before
the law, right to fair trial, and the right to be deemed innocent
until proved guilty. There are even petitions pending before the
Supreme Court and the Delhi high court seeking the repeal of this
statute.

In the last two decades this kind of critique has captured the public
imagination where, instead of examining the root problems of
corruption, malafide and bias that are eroding the system, the demand
for efficacy is based on abandoning principles of natural justice and
international standards of human rights. As in the case of draconian
anti-terrorist laws, liberal principles of jurisprudence are projected
as the hurdles that need to be discarded. To silence any criticism,
the fear of national security and terrorist attacks is repeatedly
raised. At the receiving end of these arbitrary and illegal procedures
are poor people, many of whom work as ragpickers and live a life of
hardship and poverty. Their poverty and minority status makes them an
easy prey for the police.

If democratic norms and procedures are to be preserved for the greater
good of the nation and its citizens, it is crucial that citizens
resist this vicious cycle of inventing imaginary enemies against whom
the nation has to be made secure, in the process of which the ordinary
citizen is made more insecure. Through this report, the Citizens
Campaign for Preserving Democracy calls upon all concerned people to
support all movements to construct a more humane and egalitarian
society.

Demands

à All raids, arrests and detention to be strictly in accordance with
the law and guidelines laid down by the Supreme Court of India.

à Determination of nationality only through a fair enquiry in
accordance with the principles of natural justice, conducted by a
judicial tribunal as envisaged in the Illegal migrants (Determination
by Tribunals) Act, 1983.

à The Illegal Migrants (Determination by Tribunals) Act, 1983, to be
extended to Delhi and other states.

à That the night shelter and wedding hall at Shastri Nagar, Delhi,
presently being misused as a place of detention, be vacated
immediately.

à Establish and administer a detention centre in accordance with
national and international standards.

à That documents issued by state and central government agencies be
regarded as valid documents of citizenship.

à The excessive and arbitrary powers given to the Task Force (Police)
by the Home ministry's Action Plan, May 2002, to be withdrawn. All
determination of nationality only through a legally constituted
judicial tribunal.

à Deportation from Indian territory to be in compliance with
international law and diplomatic protocol. n

Excerpted from a report, 'Democracy, Citizens and Migrants:
Nationalism in the era of Globalisation, Delhi 2005, published by the
Citizen's Campaign for Preserving Democracy, Hazards Centre, 92-H, 3rd
floor, Pratap Market, Munirka, New Delhi 110 067).

Reply via email to