CRITICAL ASIAN STUDIES 175 government of Assam to update the NRC. This process began in February 2015, when every person in Assam who claimed Indian citizenship was required to submit proof of their ancestry (or birth) in the country prior to 1971:164 Various processes, flawed in varying degrees, were put in motion—from the “family tree verification” process to the initial rejection of gram panchayat certificates that mostly affected women who had married and changed residence … “illegal” migrants were more likely to be in possession of “documentary citizenship”—papers like ration cards and voter cards—certifying their citizenship, while natives and their descendants might well have no documentation at all. In a society in which the poor typically have few if any documents, this inversion is not surprising.165 In the final NRC list published on August 31, 2019, 1.9 million Assam residents were excluded from voting lists, potentially rendering them stateless.166 Women were particularly impacted, and many families had some members excluded. A significant proportion of those excluded were Hindus, which somewhat dented the BJP’s championing of the NRC.167 Those not on the list were given 120 days to appear before Foreigner Tribunals which would either ascertain or deny their claims to citizenship. Those whose claims were rejected were to be detained and deported. Calling the entire exercise “the biggest mass-disenfranchisement of the twenty-first century,” Amnesty International and 124 other civil society organizations condemned this policy: … requiring individuals to prove their citizenship by providing documentary evidence dating back over fifty years, and excluding applicants on the basis of not being able to fulfil this evidentiary burden that sits solely on them, is an act of mass-arbitrary deprivation of nationality … 168 In Myanmar, extensive documentary evidence has been required since independence, and increased with the 1982 Citizenship Law. Non-taingyintha applicants are required to submit both their parents’ and all four grandparents’ citizenship documentation, or otherwise prove that they and/or their ancestors had settled in Myanmar prior to independence in 1948. However, by 1960, only slightly over 20,000 citizenship certificates had been issued, with an estimated 80,000 to 90,000 applications pending in 1982.169 In other words, to receive documentation under the 1982 Law, non-taingyintha were expected to produce documents that the state rarely issued and never required most citizens to hold. Those who are unable to prove that their parents were fully documented citizens are only eligible for associate or naturalized citizenship. Lack of documentation remains one of the most significant barriers to accessing any of the citizenship categories in Myanmar. Citizenship scrutiny card applicants can claim citizenship based on birth by documenting that their parents were taingyintha, but this can be complicated for people who follow a minority religion like Islam. Alternatively, applicants can document that their parents or grandparents possessed a Union Citizenship Certificate 164 Arraiza et al, 2020. Jayal, 2019:39. 166 Approximately 33 million Assam residents were included on voter lists. See India Today 2019. Article 1 of the 1954 Convention relating to the Status of Stateless Persons defines a “stateless person” as someone “not considered as a national by any state under the operation of its law.” UNHCR 1954. 167 Hindustan Times 2020. 168 Minority Rights Group 2019. 169 Rhoads 2023b; UKNA 1982. 165