1. Framing the Intervention 23 This evidentiary regime hinges on proving either one’s own presence in Assam before 1971 or establishing ancestral presence through documentary linkage. Legacy documents—such as pre-1971 electoral rolls, and land records —have become central to citizenship claims. This burden has fallen disproportionately on Bengali-origin Muslims, many of whom are landless, displaced, and undereducated. In addition to legacy documents, individuals are also required to produce linkage documents—records that connect them to an ancestor with pre-1971 presence in India. These documents are often even more difficult to obtain, particularly when family names have changed through customary practice, or when records were never formally maintained by either the state or poor households. For individuals tracing their claims through ancestry, the evidentiary threshold becomes doubly demanding. These structural vulnerabilities have made it extraordinarily difficult for many to assemble the documentation required to prove citizenship. Intermittent violence, stigma, and everyday exclusion has continued. The 2019 NRC exercise, involving applications from the 33 million residents of Assam, out of which 1.9 million—about 6% of the population—were eventually excluded.29 Excluded persons had the right to challenge their exclusion before the FTs, further heightening the stakes in these bodies.30 That same year, the Citizenship Amendment Act introduced a religious criterion for Indian citizenship by immunising nonMuslim immigrants from the “illegal migrant” label—a legislative change awaiting adjudication by the Supreme Court.31 Alongside the NRC, the Indian Election Commission’s tagging of “Doubtful Voters” (D-voters) has exacerbated legal precarity. As of 2024, the Election Commission reportedly classified approximately 370,000 people as D-voters,32 out of which over 51,500 have since been declared foreigners by the FTs, and cases involving 94,400 persons are pending before the FTs. D-voter status denies both the right to vote and legal security, and often leads to referrals to the FTs. 27 Rahim Ali (n 2) [37]. Citizenship Act 1955, s 6A. 29 Helen Regan and Manveena Suri, ‘1.9 Million Excluded from Indian Citizenship List in Assam State’ (CNN, 31 August 2019) <https://www. cnn.com/2019/08/30/asia/assam-national-register-india-intl-hnk> accessed 29 June 2025; Uma Menon, ‘India’s National Register of Citizens Threatens Mass Statelessness’ (Princeton Journal of Public and International Affairs, 2 June 2023) <https://jpia.princeton.edu/news/indiasnational-register-citizens-threatens-mass-statelessness> accessed 29 June 2025. 30 Foreigners (Tribunals) Order 1964, para 2(1B). 31 Citizenship (Amendment) Act 2019, s 2. 32 Syeda Ambia Zahan, ‘Assam: 22 Years on, RTI Finds Removes Doubts about 33 “D-Voters”’ The Times of India (22 November 2019) <https:// timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/guwahati/22-years-on-rti-finds-removes-doubts-about-33-d-voters/articleshow/72174241.cms> accessed 29 June 2025. 28