NRC Objection Process can be Misused for Vested Interests

Dharmanada Deb, Advocate –

Although the forms meant for objections are yet to be made available. But it was revealed from the SPECIMEN COPY OF OBJECTION FORM which was earlier uploaded by the NRC authority in their Website. The said specimen Form contains a clause whereby the objector would be liable to penalty if information submitted is found to be false. At the bottom left contains a declaration to be signed by the objector in the following terms:

_“I hereby declare that the facts mention above are true to be best of my knowledge and belief. If any information is found to be false I shall be liable for penalty as per law.”_

The provision of penalty and imprisonment is as per the Section 17 Citizenship Act, 1955, which provides that –

” *Offences* .— _Any person who, for the purpose of procuring anything to be done or not to be done under this Act, knowingly makes any representation which is false in a material particular shall be punishable with imprisonment for a term which may extend to five years or with fine which may extend to fifty thousand rupees or with both._”

But the process of NRC updation in the State of Assam do differ from the rest of the country and is governed by Rule 4A and the corresponding Schedule of the *Citizenship (Registration of citizens and issue of national identity cards) Rules, 2003.* These rules set out the manner of preparation of National Register of Citizens and rule 4 A make special provisions with respect to Assam. Rule 9 provides for the Registrar General of Citizen Register specifying the procedure for preparation of NRC and disposal of claims and objections.

Rule 17 of the rules are relevant as it provides that –

” *Penal consequences in certain cases* . – _Any violation of provisions of rules 5, 7, 8, 10, 11 and 14 shall be punishable with fine which may extend to one thousand rupees._”

The rules therefore do not even contemplate any penalty, leave alone any offence in respect of Rule 9 dealing with claims and objections. The Citizenship rules of 2003 under which NRC updating is carried do not create or define an offence in respect of Rule 9 dealing with claims and objections, but section 17 of the Citizenship Act is brought in which applies in terms of the Act only to those who have applied for grant of citizenship.

Therefore, the NRC authority published an advertisement in local newspapers later on and said that-

_“There is no penalty for rejection of any claim and objection.”_

The draft modalities (SOP) concerning the Objections process can prove to be problematic for several reasons.

For starters, anyone can raise an objection to the inclusion of anyone else’s name in the NRC. So even if you are among the lucky people to have made it to the NRC, it’s not over yet, because somebody can raise an objection about it.

The objector also does not need to belong to the same Nagrik Seva Kendra (NSK) as you! As long as the objection is filed at your NSK, it will have to be heard and examined. You will be required to be present for this process whether you like it or not! Imagine a complete stranger having that kind of power over your citizenship, your comfort, your life ?

Moreover, at present there is no limit to the number of objections one can raise or even a fee for raising an objection which could have acted as a minor deterrent to filing unlimited objections. Moreover, there is no penalty for the objector if the objection gets rejected. This means even if the objection against you is proved to be baseless, the objector will not suffer any consequences for harassing an innocent person or wasting the time or resources of the Claims and Objections officials!

All these provisions empower the objector and make it easy for them to harass people and bully people. Needless to say, people from socio-economically weaker backgrounds will suffer yet another form of oppression and will be forced to fight yet another uphill battle where the odds are against them.

Meanwhile, the Supreme Court has directed that the views of all stakeholders be sought on SOP and the case has been adjourned till August 28 .The bench said it had “read and considered” the SOP but was not commenting on any of the modalities suggested. The court said that SOP/modalities would be finalized on August 28, the next date of hearing.