5. Embedding Violations: Role of the Assam’s High Court Conclusion In sum, the Gauhati High Court’s inconsistent application of legal standards, reliance on undefined terminology, and frequent resort to ad hoc reasoning have deeply undermined the integrity of the sufficient cause standard. Rather than functioning as a safeguard of due process, the standard has become so ill-defined and inconsistently applied that it fails to offer meaningful guidance either to defendants or to the Foreigners Tribunals. The cost of this legal incoherence for individuals caught in these proceedings is stark. The High Court’s interpretation of sufficient cause leaves defendants with no real opportunity to justify their absence in a way that satisfies the Court. No matter what steps they take, or what hardships they face—whether serious illness, inadequate legal representation, or procedural confusion—the standard remains unattainable. This reality is starkly illustrated in the story of Md. Nurul Islam, who approached the High Court in 2012 seeking to set aside an ex parte order that had declared him a foreigner. Like many others, he found no clear legal pathway to establish his claim. Md. Nurul Islam before the bench led by Justice Ujjal Bhuyan466 Md. Nurul Islam was declared a foreigner in 2012 by FT Nalbari. Notice was sent to him in 2005 after his case was transferred from the IMDT where it had been languishing since 2002. By 2005, FTs had not been functionally operational since 1983, and had only reprised their role after Sonowal I was pronounced in July 2005. When Nurul visited FT Nalbari in 2005, he met someone who, by posing to be staff, convinced Nurul to pay him to handle his case. Being unfamiliar with FTs, Nurul paid him, and returned home feeling assured that his case will be taken care of. However, he later realised that he had been cheated as he was never represented in the hearings. It was then that Nurul sought the advice of the Gaonburah of his village who told him to go to the FT. The FT allowed him time to file a written statement. But, when, on the advice of the Gaonburah, he met somebody else to help run the proceedings, he got swindled out of money for the second time. This is how Nurul ended up being marked absent for 4 years before the FT, and was 146 declared as a foreigner in 2012. In 2012, Nurul approached the Gauhati High Court. Upon perusing his plea, however, Justice Ujjal Bhuyan termed it as a “silly” and “untenable” story that did not disclose special or exceptional circumstances. Simultaneously, he disparaged Nurul for displaying a “callous” attitude, and not “cooperating” with the FT, ignoring the reality: Nurul kept trying to participate in proceedings, by paying people to help him navigate the proceedings, seeing it as the heavy price of admission.467 466 467 Md Nurul Islam (n 454). ibid [6].