2. Institutionalised Arbitrariness This compromises the quality of adjudication in the Tribunals. The state conducted no formal examination, imposed no training requirements, and offered no continuing education in immigration law, citizenship law or constitutional adjudication. Unlike district judges—who undergo rigorous selection via a written examination and training,161 and whose decisions are subject to appeal—FT members operate in a legal vacuum, with no mandatory professional development and virtually no accountability. This erosion of competence is made more troubling by the absence of an appellate structure. In effect, these tribunal members serve as both trial and final adjudicators in matters of immense legal and existential consequence. To bring the FTs in line with domestic and international standards, a complete overhaul is necessary. Tribunal members must be appointed through transparent, independent procedures. Independent bodies should oversee appointments and promotions, and formalised training in constitutional and citizenship law should be mandatory. Without these structural guarantees, FTs lack the competence necessary to perform their adjudicatory functions, and their decisions lack legitimacy. 148 HRC ‘Concluding Observations of the Human Rights Committee: Azerbaijan’ (12 November 2001) UN Doc CCPR/CO/73/AZE, para 14; HRC ‘Concluding Observations of the Human Rights Committee: Paraguay’ (24 April 2006) UN Doc CCPR/C/PRY/CO/2, para 17. HRC ‘Concluding Observations of the Human Rights Committee: Bolivia’ (5 May 1997) UN Doc CCPR/C/79/Add.74, para 34. 150 UN Commission on Human Rights ‘Report of the Special Rapporteur on the independence of judges and lawyers, Mr. Param Cumaraswamy, submitted pursuant to Commission on Human Rights resolution 1995/36’ (1 March 1996) UN Doc E/CN.4/1996/37, para 92. 151 HRC ‘Report of the Special Rapporteur on the independence of judges and lawyers’ (2 May 2018) UN Doc A/HRC/38/38, para 48, 49. 152 HRC ‘Concluding observations on the second periodic report of Angola’ (8 May 2019) UN Doc CCPR/C/AGO/CO/2, paras 37, 38; HRC ‘Concluding Observations of the Human Rights Committee: Republic of the Congo’ (25 April 2000) UN Doc CCPR/C/79/Add.118, para 14. 153 HRC ‘General Comment No. 32’ (n 47) para 19. 154 HRC ‘Concluding observations of the Human Rights Committee: Honduras’ (13 December 2006) UN Doc CCPR/C/HND/CO/1, para 16; HRC ‘Concluding observations of the Human Rights Committee: Tajikistan’ (18 July 2005) UN Doc CCPR/CO/84/TJK, para 17. 155 Foreigners (Tribunals) Order 1964, para 2(2). 156 Rahman (n 21) 126-128. 157 Government of Assam, Political (B) Department, ‘Terms & condition for appointment of Judicial Officer as Member, Foreigners Tribunals, Assam’ (25 May 2011) No. PLB.163/2010/181. 158 Government of Assam, Political (B) Department, ‘Terms & condition for appointment of Advocates as Member, Foreigners Tribunals, Assam’ (29 July 2015) No. PLB.163/2010/229. 159 Government of Assam, Political (B) Department, ‘Terms & condition for appointment of retired Civil Servant as Member, Foreigners Tribunal, Assam’ (6 June 2019) No. PLB.136/2019/13. 160 Government of Assam, Political (B) Department, ‘Terms & conditions for appointment of Advocate as Member, Foreigners Tribunals, Assam’ (6 June 2019) No. PLB.136/2019/14. 161 According to available records, the most recent training for Foreigners Tribunal members was conducted in August 2015, lasting a mere four days. See Gauhati High Court, ‘Notification No. HC.VII-133/2014/3342/A’ (1 August 2015). 149 61