Assam’s new deportation push: CM uses 1950 law to bypass tribunals, triggering uproar

In a controversial move that has sparked intense political debate, Assam Chief Minister Himanta Biswa Sarma on June 10 announced that District Collectors can now directly “push back” individuals identified prima facie as foreigners — bypassing the state’s established Foreigners Tribunals.

Sarma claimed the power stems from the Supreme Court’s 2024 verdict upholding Section 6A of the Citizenship Act and validating the long-dormant Immigrants (Expulsion from Assam) Act of 1950.

Addressing a special session of the Assam Assembly, Sarma said the state government has already deported 330 people to Bangladesh under this revived legal provision and is set to intensify the crackdown.

“By Supreme Court order, every DC in Assam is now empowered to evict any person they consider a foreigner,” the CM declared. “We will no longer wait for tribunals to decide. Deportation will now be a reality — even for names in the NRC.”

Sarma maintained that the 1950 Act allows state officers to expel foreigners if their stay is deemed detrimental to public interest. He emphasized that those arriving after the 1971 cut-off are not protected under the Supreme Court’s ruling and can be deported without delay.

However, the announcement drew immediate fire from opposition benches. Congress and AIUDF legislators accused the government of bypassing due process and risking wrongful deportation of Indian citizens. “On what basis will DCs decide someone’s nationality?” asked Congress MLA Zakir Hussain Sikdar. “The DC just ‘feels’ it? That can’t be the system.”

Leader of Opposition Debabrata Saikia challenged the very legal basis of the move, arguing the 1950 Act was short-lived and largely defunct since its inception. He reminded the House that even Nehru had once ordered a halt to its use after it led to mass confusion and wrongful targeting of Bengali Muslims.

“This Act doesn’t even mention pushbacks,” Saikia said. “And deportation requires verified confirmation of foreign nationality — not just a DC’s assumption.”

At the heart of the storm is the bypassing of Foreigners Tribunals — quasi-judicial panels currently tasked with determining an individual’s citizenship. Under standard protocol, those declared foreigners can challenge the decision in High Court or the Supreme Court. The new move, critics argue, demolishes that safeguard.

The Supreme Court’s October 2024 verdict did include a line stating that the 1950 Act remains "valid and operative," and should be “effectively employed” alongside Section 6A. But legal experts and rights advocates warn that invoking it for mass deportation without clear nationality proof could lead to violations of both domestic rights and international norms.

The state government, however, remains unfazed. “Religious persecution victims are exempt,” Sarma added, “but others will go. Even if they’re in the NRC.”

With Assam treading uncharted legal ground, and the prospect of identity-based expulsions growing, the debate over citizenship and belonging in India’s Northeast is set to deepen.