Supreme Court Upholds Section 6A of Citizenship Act (Assam Accord)

Back in 1971, when the Bangladesh Liberation War broke out between Pakistan and Bangladesh/ East Pakistan, lakhs of people came to India seeking refuge. And Assam became one of the main destinations for these immigrants.

But the Assamese were worried about the rising number of migrants. In response, the Govt. of India signed the Assam Accord in 1985. One of its major outcomes was introducing Section 6A in the Citizenship Act 1955.

On 17 October 2024, the Supreme Court made a landmark ruling on the constitutional validity of Section 6A of the Citizenship Act (In Re: Section 6A Citizenship Act 1955). But what does this ruling mean? Let's discuss this super important judgement's background, key arguments, and implications.

Assam Accord and Section 6A of the Citizenship Act,1955?

The Assam Accord was a political agreement signed in 1985 between the Government of India and the leaders of the Assam movement, who were protesting against the large-scale migration from East Pakistan (now Bangladesh) into Assam.

The goal of the Accord was to protect the local population of Assam while addressing the humanitarian crisis of migrants fleeing from violence.

As part of the Accord, Section 6A was added to the Citizenship Act 1955. Section 6A of Citizenship talks about 'Special provisions as to citizenship of persons covered by the Assam Accord’

Case Overview

Why is Section 6A Challenged?

The petitioners argued that:

1. Violation of Equality (Article 14): Sec 6A's cut-off date for citizenship (24 March 1971) in Assam is discriminatory. It differs from the rest of India, where the cut-off is July 1948, thus violating the right to equality under Article 14 of the Constitution.

2. Discriminatory and Arbitrary: Sec 6A is "discriminatory, arbitrary, and illegal," as it imposes a separate standard for Assam compared to the rest of India.

3. Impact on Indigenous Rights: Sec 6A negatively affects the rights of Indigenous Assamese people by altering the state's demographic pattern, reducing them to a minority, and threatening their economic, political, and cultural well-being.

Arguments in defence of Section 6A:

The Centre and other respondents argued that:

1. Constitutional Power (Article 11): Article 11 of the Constitution gives Parliament the authority to make laws on citizenship, including the acquisition and termination of citizenship, allowing the creation of Section 6A without violating the right to equality.

2. Prevention of Statelessness: Striking down Section 6A would render many current residents "stateless" after enjoying citizenship rights for over 50 years.

Key issues in this Case

1. Does Section 6A of the Act giving citizenship arbitrarily?

2. Does Section 6A of the Act reduce the political rights of Assamese citizens?

3. Does Section 6A of the Act violate Article 14 (Right to Equality)?

Supreme Court's Judgement on Validity of Sec. 6A of the Citizenship Act

The Supreme Court, in its verdict, held:- 

1. The Cut-Off Date: The 25 March 1971 cut-off date was upheld as both rational and necessary. The date was tied to the end of the Bangladesh Liberation War, marking a clear historical turning point for migration issues in Assam.

2. No Arbitrary Classification: The Court ruled that giving Assam special treatment under Section 6A wasn't arbitrary. Assam’s unique demographic situation, with its small size and high percentage of migrants, justified a different approach compared to other states.

3. Legislative Competence: The Court confirmed that Parliament had the authority to legislate on issues related to citizenship and migration, especially in light of the crisis triggered by the Bangladesh Liberation War.

4. Balancing Humanitarian and Local Concerns: CJI emphasised that the Assam Accord was a political solution to a highly sensitive issue. Section 6A strikes a careful balance—offering relief to displaced migrants while protecting Assam's local population from being overwhelmed.

5. Article 29 and Cultural Identity: The Court concluded that the petitioners failed to show that migrants had undermined Assam's cultural and linguistic heritage, protected under Article 29.

Conclusion

This decision is a big deal because it reinforces Assam's special provisions under the Assam Accord. It also raises questions about how India, as a whole, will continue to manage migration, citizenship, and the protection of local populations.

FAQs

Q.1. What was the Assam Accord?

The Assam Accord was a Memorandum of Settlement signed between the Rajiv Gandhi-led Union government and the All Assam Students' Union (AASU) in 1985 to end a 6-year-long agitation against the entry of Bangladeshi migrants into Assam.

Q.2. What is Clause 6 of the Assam Accord?

Clause 6 of the Assam Accord (1985) provides constitutional, legislative, and administrative safeguards to protect the cultural, social, and linguistic identity of Assamese people amidst demographic changes due to migration.

Q. 3. What is Sec 6A of the Citizenship Act, 1955?

Sec 6A of the Citizenship Act, 1955 talks about Special provisions as to the citizenship of persons covered by the Assam Accord

Q. 4. What is held in case In re: Section 6A of the Citizenship Act, 1955?

The Supreme Court upheld the validity of Section 6A of the Citizenship Act, which grants citizenship to Bangladeshi immigrants who entered Assam before March 1971.

Q.5. What is NRC?

The National Register for Citizens (NRC) is a list of Indian citizens containing all necessary information for their identification. It was 1st formulated following the 1951 national census. 

Q.6. Which is the 1st state to update the NRC?

Assam is the 1st & only state to update it.