<b>XI LOK SABHA DEBATES, <i> Session IV (Budget) </i> </b> XI LOK SABHA DEBATES, Session IV (Budget) Friday , March 14, 1997 / Phalguna 23, 1918 (Saka)
Type of Debate: PRIVATE MEMBERS' RESOLUTIONS
Title: Further discussion on the resolution moved by Shri Jagat Vir Singh Drona regarding illegal immigrants.(Not Concluded) TEXT : 1532 hoursSHRI MANORANJAN BHAKTA (ANDAMAN AND NICOBAR ISLANDS): Mr. Deputy-Speaker, Sir, on the other day when I was speaking on this Resolution, I said that so far as this Resolution is concerned, it looks very innocent, but once we start discussing the purpose of the Resolution, then we would find that the subject is controversial and the subject is so serious that it would have a lot of repercussions on the whole country.
So far as the citizenship issue is concerned, after the Partition, refugees had come from different parts of Pakistan. Providing citizenship to them has not yet been decided.
After the Assam Accord was signed, in one stroke of pen, after a particular cut off date, all those people who are residing there became the citizens of India. But the matter regarding others is not yet finalised. As a result what is happening in Uttar Pradesh, particularly, Nainital, Pilibhit, Bijnaur and in many other areas is that people are coming with complaints that they are staying there for 25 years or 30 years but even then their pleas for citizenship not considered.
Here, I would like to mention about the letter written by an hon. Member, Shrimati Maneka Gandhi. I quote:
¨Éä®úä ºÉƺÉnùÒªÉ IÉäjÉ {ÉÒ±ÉÒ¦ÉÒiÉ ¨ÉäÆ Ê{ÉUô±Éä ¤ÉÒºÉ ´É¹ÉÉäÇÆ ºÉä BEò ʴɶÉä¹É ºÉ¨ÉÖnùÉªÉ ¨ÉäÆ xÉÉMÉÊ®úEòÉäÆ Eòä |ÉÊiÉ =iiÉ®ú |Énùä¶É |ɶÉɺÉxÉ uÉ®úÉ ={ÉäÊIÉiÉ ÊEòªÉÉ VÉÉ ®ú½þÉ ½þè* VɽþÉÆ =x½þäÆ VÉÒ´ÉxɪÉÉ{ÉxÉ +ɴɶªÉEò ºÉÖÊ´ÉvÉÉBÆ, VÉÉäÊEò ºlÉÉxÉÒªÉ |ɶÉɺÉxÉ ºÉɨÉÉxªÉ iÉÉè®ú {É®ú ={ɱɤvÉ Eò®úÉiÉÉ ½þè ´É½þ ¦ÉÒ xɽþÒÆ Ê¨É±ÉiÉÒ ½þè* <ºÉEòä ºÉÉlÉ-ºÉÉlÉ MÉÖ{iÉÉ EòɱÉÉäxÉÒ, VÉÉä¶ÉÒ EòɱÉÉäxÉÒ, xÉÖÊ®úªÉÉ EòɱÉÉäxÉÒ, ¨ÉÉè¡ò EòɱÉÉäxÉÒ, ®úÉxÉÒ EòɱÉÉäxÉÒ ´É +xªÉ BäºÉä IÉäjÉ ½þèÆ, ªÉ½þ ºÉ¤É <x½þÉäÆxÉä <ºÉ¨ÉäÆ ¨ÉäƶÉxÉ ÊEòªÉÉ ½þè* <x½þÉäÆxÉä ¤ÉiÉɪÉÉ ½þè ÊEò ÊEòºÉ iÉ®úÒEòä ºÉä BEò ʴɶÉä¹É ºÉ¨ÉÖnùÉªÉ Eòä ±ÉÉäMÉÉäÆ Eòä >ð{É®ú VÉÖ±¨É ½þÉäiÉä ®ú½þä ½þèÆ*
I would like to mention here that in this perspective it is not a small issue. This issue is a bigger one as we find that there are 30 lakhs of Nepalese citizens living in India; Bhutanese are living in India; Tibetans living in India; Sri Lankan Tamils and the LTTE people are coming to India. I would like to ask a question here. If this Resolution wants to deal with the citizenship issue and the illegal immigrants coming to other parts of the country in toto, then, I can understand that there is a point. If they are singling out one community only, then it seems that there is some motive behind it. In that case, I have my objection. I think that we will not do justice in this sphere.
Sir, one can raise the question of international Agreements. There was an Agreement with Nepal. There are also other Agreements. Even there was Nehru-Liaquat Agreement. There was an Agreement with Sheikh Mujibur Rehman and so on. On the basis of those Agreements, decisions had been taken about the minorities in Bangladesh, the erstwhile Pakistan. Nobody had made any assessment about them. By simply branding them as Bangladeshis and asking the Government to remove them is highly objectionable. I raise this objection here.
Sir, there is another important point. Since the Government of India is having a better relation with the present Bangladesh Government, I would like to request the Government to take up this matter with them. What about the alien, refugee properties? Those properties are not the properties of Bangladesh. The people had left and come here as refugees. What about that? What about their status today? I want to know whether the Government would like to discuss this issue with the Bangladesh Government.
there is a trend all over the world, that the people belonging to poor countries start migrating to the nearby rich countries for getting jobs and for earning their livelihood. Even Indians go to America or Canada or the Gulf or such other countries, whether illegally or legally, because they are affluent countries and just want to earn their livelihood.
SHRI VAIDYA DAU DAYAL JOSHI (KOTA):
´Éèt nùÉ>ð nùªÉÉ±É VÉÉä¶ÉÒ (EòÉä]õÉ) : nùºÉ-¤ÉÒºÉ ºÉÉ±É ®ú½þxÉä Eòä ¤ÉÉnù ¦ÉÒ xÉÉMÉÊ®úEòiÉÉ Ê¨É±É VÉÉiÉÒ ½þè*
SHRI MANORANJAN BHAKTA (ANDAMAN AND NICOBAR ISLANDS):
¸ÉÒ ¨ÉxÉÉä®úÆVÉxÉ ¦ÉEiÉ (+Æb÷¨ÉÉxÉ +Éè®ú ÊxÉEòÉä¤ÉÉ®ú uÒ{ɺɨÉÚ½þ) : Eò½þÉÆ Ê¨É±É VÉÉiÉÒ ½þè?
SHRI VAIDYA DAU DAYAL JOSHI (KOTA):
´Éèt nùÉ>ð nùªÉÉ±É VÉÉä¶ÉÒ (EòÉä]õÉ) : +¨É®úÒEòÉ ´ÉMÉè®úÉ ¨ÉäÆ Ê¨É±É VÉÉiÉÒ ½þè*
SHRI MANORANJAN BHAKTA (ANDAMAN AND NICOBAR ISLANDS): They give them green cards. They give them work permits. Why do you not introduce it here? I am not saying that I am not against illegal immigrants coming here and they should not be stopped from coming to this country. What I am saying is that all of them are not illegal immigrants. It is not correct to say that all are illegal immigrants. This country was one. Ethnically and culturally also, we were one. We had one citizenship. Only after partition of this country, this question has come up. At the time of partition, an assurance was given that the minorities who come to this part of the country will be provided shelter. You give them shelter. This is a bigger issue. At the time of Independence, we had a population of 33 crores. Today, it has gone up to 93 crores. Only because of increase in population, many problems have come and we are facing them today. So, the Government should try to examine all these matters.
What do you think of Nepali population who are coming to our country? What is your idea about them? Why are you not saying anything about them? They are also getting jobs. What about Tibetans? What about Bhutanese people? What about LTTE people who are coming to this part of the country? On all these questions, the Government should bring out a White Paper so that the magnitude of the problem can be known. Thereafter, a decision can be taken appropriately. But, today, singling out one community as Bangladeshis and branding them as foreigners is not correct. They might have come illegally. I am not against throwing out illegal immigrants. But my point is that in the name of illegal immigrants, you should not throw the refugees out.
You must understand that point. ...(Interruptions)
SHRI JAGAT VIR SINGH DRONA (KANPUR): May I just intervene for a moment? My Resolution is very clear. It is not aiming at any particular community. I said that all those who have illegally immigrated into India after 1975 should be identified and deported. Shri Bhakta, it is not against one community in particular. That is why, I want to correct. ...(Interruptions)
SHRI MANORANJAN BHAKTA (ANDAMAN AND NICOBAR ISLANDS): I am happy that you have clarified the position. Before that, whenever you all spoke, you had all only named the Bangladeshis and nobody else. You had only named the Bangladeshis and nobody else. Now I am happy you have clarified that you have included all those who are coming from other countries. ...(Interruptions)
SHRI JAGAT VIR SINGH DRONA (KANPUR): Shri Bhakta, I request you to go through my speech. It is not Bangladeshis alone, I have named Pakistan, I have named other countries and the majority of them have come from Bangladesh. That is what I have said. ...(Interruptions)
SHRI MANORANJAN BHAKTA (ANDAMAN AND NICOBAR ISLANDS): Sir, I would say that his Resolution is a good thing in one way. I must congratulate him. He has given us an opportunity to discuss this issue, particularly the citizenship issue and illegal immigrants issue. Now it is the responsibility of the Government to bring out a White Paper on this so that the magnitude of the problem is known and appropriate action can be taken by the Government. So, I request the hon. Minister, the Minister of State for Home Affairs, who is present here to give a specific reply, when he is replying to the House , what about the alien properties in Bangladesh, what about the Nepalese, the Tibetans and Sri Lankans, who are living here; what are their basis; what they are going to do with those minorities, who have come here and staying here for 25 or 30 years, -- even in some places they have been rehabilitated -- and how you are going to provide citizenship to them and how soon you are going to provide the citizenship.
With these words, I thank you very much for giving me this opportunity.
(ends)
DR. ARUN KUMAR SARMA (LAKHIMPUR): Mr. Deputy-Speaker, Sir, the problem of infiltration of foreigners is the unfortunate outcome of partition after Independence.
Sir, I represent Assam, the North-Eastern Region. After our boundary was fixed, the border in the eastern side, that is East Pakistan now, presently termed as Bangladesh, was open till 1957. But the border in the western sector with West Pakistan was sealed at the time of partition. Not only that, even after 1957, because of very liberal approach to East Pakistan, which is now termed as Bangladesh, a large number of infiltrations took place to Assam and in other parts of the North-Eastern India. This problem had further aggravated after the Pakistan war in 1965 when a large number of refugees crossed over to the Indian side and stayed back. In 1964 some Tribunals were formed under the Foreigners Tribunal Act for identification of foreigners and their deportation. That was also stopped in 1969 because of political influence. This problem had further aggravated when in 1971 Bangladesh was formed, a large number of population of all the religious communities, irrespective of any religion, Chakmas, Buddhists, Hindus and Muslims, settled down in different parts of the North-Eastern Region.
Negotiations were there. Indo-Mujib pact was there. But a very little emphasis was made to send back the refugees at that time. At that time, when the situation became very much alarming, the people of Assam under the leadership of All Assam Students Union and All Assom Gana Sangram Parishad initiated a mass movement through Gandhian methods. After Independence, this was the first mass movement based on Gandhian theory. It was the first non-violent movement. But the people of Assam at that time were termed as parochial, chauvinists, anti-nationals, secessionists and so on.
I am happy that today after a lapse of 20 years, in this House, the Members of this august body of this country, are expressing their concern for the increased infiltration from across the border. It is not only from Assam border but also from Bangladesh, Nepal and Tibet borders, and also from some other countries. Infiltration takes place from Pakistan also.
I listened to the contention of some of the hon. Members when they spoke last Friday. It was alleged that the All Assam Students Union which ultimately led to the formation of Assom Gana Parishad and is now in power, has forgotten the issue. I strongly object to such a contention. Who were the signatories of the Assam Accord? The Central Government was also a Party and during that time, the Government which was in power was a signatory to the Assam Accord. Lot of problems were created. There were some discriminatory Acts which existed like the Illegal Migration (Determination by Tribunal) Act, 1983. Not only that Act, there are many other Acts which were aimed at protecting the infiltrators who have crossed over to Assam.
The so-called IMT Act which is aimed at protecting the interests of the minority, is a discriminatory Act. This Act is applicable only to Assam and not to other parts of the country. If the entire nation is interested to keep some infiltrators, still interested to allow some of the infiltration to take place, to give them shelter and to give them voting rights, we have no objection. But they should do it in some other parts of the country also. But why is Assam always made a dumping place for all the burden of all the population, irrespective of Hindu or Muslim at the cost of our identity, at the cost of our cultural and economic interests in the region?
It is heartening to note that in some parts of the North-Eastern region, the original inhabitants were reduced to minorities, as for example Tripura. In the national interest, Assam has shown its greatness by accepting a large number of refugees up to 1971 and they were given citizenship rights as per the clauses of Assam Accord.
={ÉÉvªÉIÉ ¨É½þÉänùªÉ : +É{É BEò ʨÉxÉ]õ ¯ûÊEòªÉä* <ºÉ Ê®úVÉÉ䱪ÉÚ¶ÉxÉ EòÉä nùÉä PÉÆ]õä +±ÉÉì]õ ½þÖB lÉä, VÉÉä {ÉÚ®úä ½þÉä SÉÖEòä ½þè* +MÉ®ú ½þÉ>ðºÉ SÉɽþä iÉÉä BEò PÉÆ]õÉ ¤ÉgøÉ nùäÆ*
SHRI P.R. DASMUNSI (HOWRAH):
¸ÉÒ {ÉÒ.+É®ú.nùɺɨÉÖƶÉÒ (½þÉ´Éc÷É) : ={ÉÉvªÉIÉ ¨É½þÉänùªÉ, +É{É ºÉ¨ÉªÉ ¤ÉgøÉ<ªÉä, ªÉ½þ ¤É½þÖiÉ ¨É½þi´É{ÉÚhÉÇ ¨ÉɨɱÉÉ ½þè*
MR. DEPUTY-SPEAKER : All right, you continue.
DR. ARUN KUMAR SARMA (LAKHIMPUR): This is a serious subject and I am happy to learn the concern of our hon. Members who are present here. The people of Assam have shown their good gesture by accepting a large number of refugees and also infiltrators keeping national interest in view. Those who have come from Bangladesh or from some other parts of the country to a definite period, that is, up to 1971 have been given citizenship status.
They were also given the voting rights. But it should not be that for 100 years to come the infiltration will take place, that all the infiltrators will be given shelter, land, economic benefits, economic status, the right to vote and the right to decide their political destiny. This situation requires attention from all corners of the House and I would like to appeal to all the parties. We have to remove the obstacles which stand in the way of prevention of infiltration of foreigners. The members of some parties have mentioned that the Illegal Immigrants (Determination by Tribunals) Act is the only Act which can protect the interests of the minorities.
This Act is a discriminatory Act because of which a number of people have crossed over to India through other boundaries, they have come and settled in Assam and they are getting all sorts of protection through this Act. It is in the interests of the Indian minorities who were given citizenship after they were accepted as per the Assam Accord. The Indian minorities who have been shifting their homes since time immemorial. It is in their interest that this Act is modified as provided in the Assam Accord and if it is not amended, it should be repealed.
l552 hours (Shri Chitta Basu in the Chair)
I want to clarify this point. This Act is applicable only to Assam and the entire responsibility of identification of the infiltrators is shifted to the common citizens. For identification a citizen has to file a petition with sufficient evidence to prove that a particular person is a foreigner, he has also to pay a fees for that and after that he has also to depose before the tribunal to prove that a particular person whom he has alleged as a foreigner was a foreigner.
It is a discriminatory Act; it discriminates against the prevailing laws of the country, the Constitution, the rights of the Indian citizens residing in the country and it is also a discriminatory Act which is applicable only to Assam. Therefore, this Act requires an immediate review or a suitable modification should be made by which the Act should be made applicable to the entire country, not only to Assam. I must reiterate that Assam should not be made a dumping ground for all the infiltrators or for all the refugees. I strongly condemn the attitude of a former honourable speaker who tried to antagonise or allege that the Assom Gana Parishad which was sponsoring the Assam Movement at one time is keeping silent now.
I must prove my contention that it is during the five-year period that the AGP was in power all negotiations were taking place with the Government of India and the process of identification and deportation of foreigners was started. Also, in the Common Minimum Programme which was issued when the United Front Government was formed it was mentioned that Assam Accord should be included in the agenda of the CMP. That was included. I want to read only one paragraph with your permission, from the Common Minimum Programme. " ASSAM-AND THE NORTH EASTERN REGION
The problem of infiltrators or foreigners into Assam will be resolved on the basis of the Assam Accord to which the Central Government is a signatory."
Not only that. When the hon. Prime Minister visited the North-Eastern region in the month of October, there was a discussion on the question of foreigners. It is a published notification. "New Initiatives for the North-Eastern region."
It says:-
"One of the important factors impinging on the identity of the people of the North-Eastern States is the question of foreigners. I have reviewed this issue in some details during my discussions with All Assam Students Union and also several others. It was represented that the laws existing for the detection of foreigners such as Illegal Migrants' Determination by Tribunal (IMDT) Act, 1983 as amended have not proved to be effective. We would take steps to repeal the ineffective laws and strengthen the legal and administrative measures for dealing with foreigners in consultation with the States. Further, the policing of the border including fencing at appropriate places would be strengthened."
Not even one year has been completed after the United Front Government has assumed office. Very recently, day before yesterday, the All Assam Students Union came and met the hon. Home Minister where it was decided to have clause by clause review of the progress of implementation of the Assam Accord. The hon. Prime Minister is committed that the Assom Gana Parishad is a part of the United Front and we are actively pursuing the matter. We should not be termed that we are slowing down the process and we are keeping mum. This is a national issue. We initiated it 20 years back. Now, because the problem is extended to other parts of the country, all are concerned. At that time, when we initiated it, we were termed as anti-national, parochial, anti-Indian and so on. The insurgency activities have cropped up because the Assam Accord was not implemented in true spirit. The Assam Accord is an outcome of the non-violence movement, Gandhian movement. The hard-liner extremists' outfit has taken the advantage of saying that there is no meaning of any negotiations, any understanding with the Government of India because there is no value of the non-violence and any Accord.
[NEXT PAGE]