Supreme Court seeks Centre’s SOP on deportation of illegal immigrants

NEW new delhi: The sublime margaret court on fri asked the unification government to explain the standard operating procedure (SOP) being followed under its May 2 notification authorising a nationwide drive to identify and deport illegal immigrants, stressing that the Centre ought to dispel allegations that members of the Bengali-speaking minority community were being singled out.A bench of justices Surya Kant, Joymalya Bagchi and Vipul M Pancholi noted the sensitivity of the issue, observing that while national security and preservation of resources were paramount, the government must clarify its stance in view of allegations that language alone was being used as a presumption of foreign origin.Also Read | SC-mandated panel seeks ban on Conocarpus trees“We would like you to clarify that a certain bias in respect of exercise of powers is sought to be demonstrated in the petition… they cite use of language being a presumption of being a foreigner,” the bench told solicitor general Tushar Mehta, who appeared for the Union.On its part, the Centre defended the deportation exercise. “India is not a world capital for illegal immigrants,” Mehta asserted, calling it “unfortunate” that the West Bengal government was supporting the petitioner organisation challenging the drive. He said the problem of infiltration was eating into resources meant for citizens. “Unfortunately, there are immigrants using resources meant for Indian citizens and some governments are thriving on them,” he submitted.Also Read | SC to hear RJD plea on Sep 1 for two-week extension for voter registration in BiharDuring the exchange, Justice Kant, who had earlier authored a judgment on Section 6A of the Citizenship Act that dealt with conferring citizenship on migrants from Bangladesh, acknowledged the scale of the problem. “There is a lot of illegal immigration too and we cannot ignore that,” he said.At the same time, the bench pointed to India’s shared cultural legacy with its neighbours: “There are two sensitive issues involved in the matter -- one is national security, integrity and preservation of resources for us, which need not be said are of paramount importance. At the same time, we inherit a legacy of common culture…like in Punjab and Bengal that share borders with other countries.”Also Read | Centre tells SC states can’t move court over governors’ delayThe controversy originates from the Ministry of Home Affairs’ May 2 notification, which authorised verification and detention of suspected illegal immigrants across the country. In an earlier hearing on August 14, the court had refused to stay the order but sought responses from the Centre and several states on creating an inter-state mechanism to prevent harassment of genuine citizens.On Friday, advocate Prashant Bhushan, appearing for the West Bengal Migrant Workers Welfare Board, argued that Bengali-speaking Muslims from West Bengal were being targeted and detained on the suspicion of being “Bangladeshi”. He also contended that migrant workers were being subjected to arbitrary detention in violation of their fundamental rights to liberty and dignity.“This pregnant woman has been pushed out just because she spoke Bengali,” said Bhushan, referring to one Somali Bibi, who was allegedly deported to Bangladesh without any determination of her citizenship. He argued that the deportation was illegal not only because it lacked due process but also because there was no evidence of an arrangement with Dhaka to accept such persons.“The circular enables authorities to deport persons without any proper determination of whether they are foreigners or not. How can any authority push someone out without due process? ‘Bangladeshi’ is not even a language -- Bangla is spoken across West Bengal in many dialects,” submitted Bhushan, urging the bench to suspend the May 2 notification until adequate safeguards were put in place.Responding, the bench noted that the Union’s reply would be considered at the next hearing on September 11.At the same time, it agreed with Bhushan that the Calcutta high court should not have deferred the habeas corpus plea in Somali Bibi’s case on the ground that a larger petition was pending before the Supreme Court. “We request the high court to take up the habeas corpus for ascertainment of citizenship status of Somali Bibi and her relatives immediately and orders be passed expeditiously in accordance with law,” the bench ordered.It also underlined the legal distinction between “pushbacks” at the border and deportation of those found within Indian territory. “The forces can push back those who are trying to illegally enter. However, once they are already within the territory, the law prescribes for a procedure,” remarked the court, adding it is a “complicated issue” with different nations adopting different policies.