LETTER FROM THE EDITOR

August 1--15, 2005 - Vol. 15, No. 15

Vicious role of Congress and Left exposed
By Pramod Mahajan

It was the Congress party that brought about this Act and has consistently supported it. When the NDA government introduced the IMDT Repeal Bill in Parliament the Congress opposed it.

The recent Supreme Court decision striking down the Illegal Migrants (Determination By Tribunals) Act, 1983 (IMDT) as unconstitutional has been welcomed by the people of Assam and every nationalist in the country. The BJP is the only national party which had taken a consistent stand for the repeal of this Act. The historic decision is a vindication of its stand.

After the landmark Supreme Court decision, unfortunately, an attempt is being made by certain quarters to corner credit. To realise this partisan political interest, they have started a whispering campaign to question and discredit the BJP's commitment and efforts for the repeal of the IMDT Act. To put the record straight we are putting in black and white the activities of all the major political parties and organisations in Assam with regard to this Act vis-a-vis the observations of the Supreme Court.

Firstly, let us look into the Congress role in this regard. It was the Congress party that brought about this Act and has consistently supported it. When the NDA government introduced the IMDT Repeal Bill in Parliament the Congress opposed it. When it was sent to the Standing Committee of Home Affairs in Parliament after being introduced in the Lok Sabha, all Congress members in the committee opposed its repeal and stood for the IMDT Act both in letter and spirit. Even after the Supreme Court judgement eminent Congress leaders, like the Chief Minister Shri Tarun Gogoi and the Congress General Secretary Shri Digvijay Singh have gone on record saying that amendments and changes will be made in the law to circumvent the Supreme Court's judgement. The stand of the Congress and that of Bangladesh on illegal immigrants is the same: There are no illegal immigrants in Assam!!

Secondly, let us examine the position of the AGP with regard to the IMDT Act. The AGP made demand to repeal the IMDT Act for the first time in 1992. It took another 13 years after the IMDT Act came into existence for the AGP government to officially demand its repeal when the then Chief Minister P K Mahanta wrote a letter to the then Prime Minister I.K. Gujral on 22nd June, 1996 seeking repeal of the IMDT Act. It should also be kept in mind that AGP was in power from 1985 to 1990 and did nothing to repeal the Act. It was not that the AGP did not get an opportunity earlier to influence the decision on repeal of the Act. Shri Dinesh Goswami, an important AGP leader, was the Union Minister of Law in the V P Singh government during 1989-1990. AGP was also an integral part both of the Deve Gowda and

I K Gujral governments but they preferred to do nothing.

Thirdly, let us take into consideration the role of the AASU. It put forth its demand for the repeal of IMDT Act on September 20, 1990. The Assam accord signed between the AASU/AAGSP and Shri Rajeev Gandhi, there is no mention of the repeal of the Act. The leaders of the AASU failed to prevail upon Shri Gandhi to incorporate a provision to repeal the controversial Act. All they could achieve was clause 5.9 of the Accord which is all the more damaging to the cause: "The government will give due consideration to certain difficulties expressed by the AASU/AAGSP regarding the implementation of the Illegal Migrants (Determination by Tribunals) Act 1983". This typically bureaucratic wording subsequently proved to be a major stumbling block in any attempt seeking repeal of the Act. This ultimately paved the way for amendment of the Citizenship Act, 1955 in 1986 providing for regularisation of illegal immigrants who had landed up to July 1, 1986 in total contravention of the Assam Accord. The AASU chose to remain silent on that issue.

Now we also will examine the BJP's role dispassionately. It has always taken a consistent stand on the issue. It opposed the IMDT ordinance and later its adoption as an Act of Parliament even when Congress forced it in 1983. Six years earlier to the presentation of the present petition in the Supreme Court in 2000, Shri Hiranya Kumar Bhattacharya, the then Vice-President of the BJP filed a writ petition on behalf of the Party in the Guwahati High Court in 1994 opposing the IMDT Act. On coming into power the BJP-led NDA government tried to evolve a consensus in Parliament. That was necessary as NDA did not enjoy the required majority in the Rajya Sabha. Faced with the intransigent attitude of the Congress and the Left, it finally decided to go in for a joint session of Parliament, the way it was done for POTA Bill. The NDA introduced the Bill in the Lok Sabha in early 2000, and sent it to the Standing Committee on Home which unfortunately did not send it back to Parliament.

Still our opponents have the cheek to say that the BJP did nothing to repeal the IMDT Act when NDA was in power. WE PLEAD NOT GUILTY. Here are some of the extracts of the historic Supreme Court judgement to prove our point.

1) In para 3 of the judgement "Reference has been made to certain other meetings with the officers of the Government of India on 6th April, 1998 and 23rd September, 1998 wherein it was informed that the repeal of the IMDT Act was under active consideration of the government. It is averred that the President of India in his Address to the Parliament in February 1999 said that the repeal of the Act was under the active consideration of the Government. In a meeting held on 18th March, 1999 between the Government of India, Assam and AASU where it was assured that the repeal of the IMDT Act was under final consideration of the Central government and measures would be taken to identify foreigners and steps will be taken to seal the border."

2) Para 4 of the judgement says: "... A copy of the reply given by Shri I D Swami Minister of State for Home Affairs in the Rajya Sabha on 8th March, 2000 has been riled as Annexure R 2 to the counter affidavit, wherein the Minister had said that in the State of Assam foreign tribunals under the Foreigners Act, 1946 are functioning for detection of illegal migrants who had come to the State of Assam after 1st January, 1966 and up to 24th March, 1971 and the Illegal Migrants Determination Tribunals under the IMDT Act have been constituted for detection and deportation of illegal migrants, who had entered into India on or after 25th March,1971. The Hon'ble Minister had further stated that the Government is of the view that application of the IMDT Act to the State of Assam alone is discriminatory and a proposal to repeal the said Act is under consideration of the Government."

3) Para 8 of the judgement reads: "The Union of India filed a counter affidavit...that the matter of constitutional validity of the IMDT Act does not depend on political issues, but depends on facts and legal grounds. The relevant part of the opening part of the affidavit... is reproduced below:

"...that detection of illegal migrants, who belong to the same ethnic stock as Indians is not an easy task. However large-scale illegal migrants from Bangladesh have not only threatened the demographic structure of the area, but have seriously impaired the security of the nation, particularly in the present circumstances. The need for expeditious identification of illegal migrants is more pressing now than ever. It is not a matter of dealing with a religious or linguistic group. It is a question of identifying those who illegally crossed over the border and continue to live in India contrary to the Indian law and Constitution.

The facts and figures which have been stated by the Union of India in its, affidavit riled in the case titled "Jamiat Ulema E Hind & Another V/S Union of India and others, clearly indicate that it is the existence of the IMDT Act, which has been the single factor responsible for dismal detection and expulsion of illegal immigrants in Assam. It has also been pointed out that in the neighbouring states, where this law is not in force the process of detection (although far from satisfactory) has been far more effective than in the State of Assam. The application of the IMDT Act,1983 in Assam virtually gives the illegal migrants in the State preferential protection in a matter relating to the citizenship of India. This is clearly unconstitutional and violative of the principles of equality. The affidavit of the State seems to suggest that the matter has now become a political rather than a legal issue... ".

All these quotes from the Hon'ble Supreme Court judgement clearly show beyond doubt that the BJP-led NDA government always took a positive stand about repeal of the IMDT Act that may have helped the Supreme Court to come to its decision. One must not forget here that the moment Congress-led UPA government came into power last year it changed the stand of the Union Government in the Supreme Court and opposed the repeal of the IMDT Act.

The purpose of this explanatory note is neither to score brownie points nor to corner any credit, but to put the issues in proper perspective. Our commitment to the repeal of the IMDT Act has been unwavering and consistent and it stands vindicated by the Supreme Court and thereby our elation. At this defining moment of the history of Assam, we would like to unite all nationalist forces of Assam and of the country to see that the striking down of the IMDT Act by the Supreme Court remains a finality and all efforts to subvert this judgement come to a naught because the Congress suffers from the habit of doing a la Shahbano to nullify Supreme Court Judgements.