Statelessness & Citizenship Review 2020 2(1) the FTs lack ‘decisional autonomy’ 116 and unlike other ordinary judges in other courts of India, they are not insulated from arbitrary changes in service conditions. This decisional autonomy is central to the existence of a fair adjudicatory mechanism. Paragraph [3](9) of the FTO provides that the FT may refuse a prayer for examination of witnesses on commission for production of documents if, in the opinion of the FT, such a prayer is made to delay the proceedings. Given that the function and disposal rates of the FTs are being monitored by the High Court, which is also linked to extension of the contracts of the members of the FT, there is a premium in not investing further time by granting an opportunity to crossexamine and expeditiously close the proceedings, usually by declaring the person as a foreigner. The procedural rules empower the FT to receive evidence from the Superintendent of Police and even third parties with no apparent restrictions on locus standi. Interestingly, where documents are produced by the proceedee to establish that he has been living in Assam prior to 1971, the proceedee is expected to secure the attendance of the person issuing the document to personally come and prove the due execution and genuineness of the content of the document. 117 In a situation where the proceedees are generally powerless, there is no reason why a government officer issuing a ‘duplicate’ document for use in FT proceedings would, at his request (and expense), travel to a FT to depose. In fact, the FT was empowered in 2013 by insertion of [4] into the FTO to exercise the powers of a civil court and that of the magistrate to summon any person and examine them on oath and to require the production of any document. However, such powers are not resorted to as the FTs feel obliged to decide the case expeditiously (within 60 days) using reverse burden as the reason to not exercise their powers to summon documents or officers at the expense of the state — but for the person accused of being a foreigner to bring such persons to the FT. The FT also has the power to order internment or detention or to grant bail to the person being accused of being a foreigner on the subjective basis of whether or not the procedure has been able to establish, prima facie, that they are not a foreigner. The amendments to FTO in 2013 also empowered the FT to set aside in absentia orders after the proceedee has shown sufficient cause. It also empowered the FT to review its judgment on the ground of any mistake apparent on the face of record. 118 B FTs’ Power to Devise Their Own Procedure FTs are also empowered to regulate their procedure for disposal of cases expeditiously in a time bound manner. 119 In the State of Assam, 100 tribunals have been functioning and 200 more tribunals were established in 2019. It is not hard to imagine that each of the 300 (or more) tribunals have the power to regulate their own procedure, and consequently, different rules and procedure are likely to be 116 See John Ferejohn, ‘Independent Judges, Dependent Judiciary: Explaining Judicial Independence’ (1998) 72(2–3) Southern California Law Review 353. 117 See for instance, the Gauhati High Court judgment in Manowara Bewa @ Manora Bewa v Union of India [2017] Case No WP(C) 2634 of 2016 (Gauhati High Court). This judgment, on another aspect, was reversed by the Supreme Court of India in Rupajan Begum v Union of India [2018] 1 SCC 579 (Supreme Court of India). 118 Foreigners (Tribunal) Amendment Order, 2013 (India) GSR 770(E), inserting Paragraph 3C. 119 ibid. 133