Assam Eviction Fallout: On Fear of Illegal Immigrant Influx

In the wake of massive eviction drives carried out by the Himanta Biswa Sarma government against alleged illegal immigrants over the past few weeks, several north-eastern states, particularly Manipur, Meghalaya, Nagaland and Tripura that share borders with Assam, have heightened vigilance to check the entry of displaced individuals. On high alert, the government of Nagaland has also issued an advisory asking all district administrations to take proactive measures to prevent such a development. Amid this chaos, the deputy commissioner of Niuland has claimed that more than 200 vehicles carrying evicted individuals were intercepted at various check posts in the district on the night of July 22, following which they were deported after necessary verification procedures. This has prompted districts bordering Assam and civil society organisations to urge their citizens to stay vigilant and report any unusual movement or suspected migration to the district administration. The fear of evicted individuals entering the state is not unfounded. It’s no doubt a matter of concern. However, a knee-jerk reaction that often loses steam before any positive outcome, as was witnessed during the initial days of Inner Line Permit (ILP) implementation in Dimapur, won’t bring a permanent solution to the pressing issue, though it requires urgent attention. To prevent any unprecedented scenario that could impact the demography of the state, the concerned authorities should take calculated action, both short-term and long-term.

One hot topic that evokes discussion in private circles as well as public forums is the perceived growing number of illegal Bangladeshi immigrants in Nagaland, particularly in Dimapur, Chümoukedima and Niuland districts. The fear of potential demographic change is apparent, but nothing moves on the ground. It is not something that can be addressed in a few months or by the authorities alone. Be it ILP implementation or prevention of illegal immigrants, active community involvement, besides robust enforcement strategies and persistent checking of documentation, is required due to porous borders the state shares with other states. It has to be a continuous and on-going process. While each state should have a systematic mechanism in place to check the entry of illegal immigrants, the Assam government’s approach of evicting the suspects instead of deporting them to their countries is perplexing. The state’s concerns, like environmental degradation and increased human-wildlife conflict arising out of unauthorised settlements in reserved forests, are real and should be addressed, but shoving them around between the states should have been avoided. One state’s solution should not become another state’s problem. The government of India can deport identified illegal immigrants to the countries they belong to without any bias based on religion, race or gender. They don’t have to be shackled during the deportation like the Donald Trump administration did to undocumented Indian immigrants earlier this year.