M. Mohsin Alam Bhat & Aashish Yadav these tribunals as quasi-judicial bodies and not as traditional courts of law. Members – not judges – preside over the tribunals without any security of tenure. As the need for tribunals has increased, the government has simultaneously lowered the minimum qualifications for these members.12 Towards the end of the 1990s, a distinctly securitised discourse against Bengali Muslims started emerging. The most profound example of this was the report by the state’s governor Lt Gen S.K. Sinha, who described Bengali immigration as a concerted Islamic infiltration that would compromise national security and proliferate Islamic terrorism. The religious framing of the immigration controversy has only become sharper with the rising political salience of the Bhartiya Janata Party (BJP) that now rules both the central and state governments.13 The securitised rhetoric in Assam has been accompanied by numerous speculative assertions that the state is overrun by ‘illegal migrants’, despite the complete absence of any official or rigorous data. Assam’s National Register of Citizens The Indian Supreme Court has played a significant role in the immigration debate. In 2005 and 2006, the Court controversially struck down the IMDT Act.14 The Court explicitly endorsed the anxiety about uncontrolled immigration and the threat of Islamic terrorism. It noted that the IMDT Act had failed to identify large enough numbers of illegal migrants and placed the burden of proof on the suspected foreigner in tribunal proceedings.15 The most critical involvement of the Court was its initiation of the NRC in 2013.16 The bench led by Chief Justice Gogoi bemoaned the ineffectiveness of the existing policies. It directed the update of the NRC, last prepared in 1951, which contained the particulars of all citizens of the state. The Court assumed the supervision of the NRC enumeration. In a series of executive-sounding orders, it approved the nature of mandated documentary evidence, verification procedures and deadlines.17 The threat of citizenship revocation With the Court’s involvement, there was an unprecedented social and political consensus for the NRC. Most sections, including the Bengalis, saw in it a comprehensive resolution of the immigration controversy. However, numerous civil society organisations soon raised serious concerns as the NRC process started rolling out. The biggest worry predictably was the unavailability of original government documents, many of which either were not maintained carefully or difficult to procure. Many members of the transgender community who had been disowned by their families were unable to submit documents in the absence of cards reflecting their preferred identities. Women, who are disproportionately illiterate and poor, were 12 Indian Express (14 June 2019), NRC deadline nearing: Criteria for Foreigners’ Tribunals members changed. https://indianexpress.com/article/north-east-india/assam/nrc-deadline-nearing-criteria-for-foreignerstribunals-members-changed-5779685/. (consulted 25 June 2020) 13 Gillian, M. (2002), ‘Refugees or infiltrators? The Bharatiya Janata Party and “illegal” migration from Bangladesh’, Asian Studies Review 26(1):73. 14 Sarbananda Sonowal v. Union of India (2005) 5 Supreme Court Cases 665; Sarbananda Sonowal v. Union of India (2007) 1 SCC 174. 15 M. Mohsin Alam Bhat, Twilight Citizenship. https://www.india- seminar.com/2020/729/729_m_mohsin_alam_bhat.htm. (consulted 25 June 2020) 16 Assam Sanmilita Mahasangha v. Union of India (2015) 3 SCC 1. 17 The Supreme Court did this in a series of orders, including Assam Sanmilita Mahasangha v. Union of India (2019) 9 SCC 79; Assam Public Works v. Union of India (2017) SCC Online SC 1885; Assam Public Works v. Union of India (2018) SCC Online SC 3366; Assam Public Works v. Union of India (2018) 9 SCC 229; Assam Public Works v. Union of India (2018) SCC Online SC 1014; Assam Public Works v. Union of India (2019) 9 SCC 70. 28 Robert Schuman Centre for Advanced Studies Working Papers