The Supreme Courts Constitution Bench, led by Chief Justice of India (CJI) DY Chandrachud, has delivered a pivotal verdict regarding the constitutional validity of Section 6A of the Citizenship Act. This provision governs Bangladeshi immigrants who entered Assam between January 1, 1966, and March 25, 1971, allowing them to register as Indian citizens. Immigrants entering after March 25, 1971, however, are not eligible for citizenship.Historical context and backgroundThe issue of illegal immigration in Assam gained momentum after Bangladeshs independence from Pakistan on March 26, 1971. Local student organisations, like the All Assam Students Union (AASU) and Assam Gan Sangram Parishad (AAGSP), protested against the unchecked influx of immigrants. In response, Section 6A was introduced as part of the Assam Accord in 1985, an agreement reached under then-Prime Minister Rajiv Gandhis government. The provision sought to address the concerns of Assamese groups by regulating the entry of immigrants into Assam and identifying those who entered after March 25, 1971, for deportation.Legal challenges and petitioners concernsSeveral petitions were filed challenging Section 6A, claiming that the influx of illegal immigrants from East Pakistan (now Bangladesh) had significantly altered Assams demographic balance. Petitioners argued that this posed a threat to the rights and cultural identity of the indigenous Assamese population. They contended that Section 6A essentially legitimised unauthorised immigration, undermining the states demographic fabric.Section 6A explainedUnder Section 6A, individuals who arrived in Assam before January 1, 1966, are granted full citizenship rights. Those entering between 1966 and 1971 are granted similar rights but with a ten-year restriction on voting. Petitioners have raised concerns about why Assam was the only state subjected to this provision, which they believe led to a rise in unauthorised immigration and cultural disruption.Focus of the courts examinationThe court made it clear that its focus was on the constitutionality of Section 6A and not on Assams National Register of Citizens (NRC). The government, in its affidavit, acknowledged the challenges in detecting and deporting illegal immigrants. It also pointed to West Bengals policies, which hindered border control and fencing efforts along the Indo-Bangladesh border, a critical national security measure.Border challenges and government responseThe Centre highlighted the challenges of managing a porous 4,096.7 km border with Bangladesh, which includes rivers and difficult terrain. Assam shares only 263 km of this border, but the situation is complicated further by West Bengals 2,216.7 km stretch, which poses significant challenges for border management.With the Supreme Court having reserved its decision, this ruling is expected to have a profound impact on Assams demographic landscape, citizenship policies, and the future of immigration controls in the region.
