2021 Statelessness & Citizenship Review 3(1) 2019 excludes 1.9 million people and leaves them at risk of de jure statelessness. 26 Once the excluded people have received their certified copy of rejection from NRC authorities, they can appeal to the Foreigner's Tribunal against their exclusion. 27 If they fail to appeal, the Central or State Government may seek judicial determination on their citizenship status. 28 If this is sought by the Government, the Tribunal will adjudicate the individual’s status and declare them either a citizen or non-citizen. Though the possibility of seeking an appeal before the High Court/Supreme Court remains, the scope of writ jurisdiction is limited and largely excludes questions of facts. 29 The process of ascertaining citizenship through the executive model has been mired in controversies and has crippled the lives of many in Assam. The daunting task of discharging the burden of proof lies on each individual: they are required to provide documentary evidence which establishes Indian ancestry dating back to 1971. 30 This requirement for evidentiary paperwork overlooks the fact that documentation and record-keeping is not part of the social practice of the rural, illiterate and poor population. The severe, annual floods in Assam make the possession of legacy data even more difficult for the less privileged. These claims of citizenship have been and continue to be scrutinised by the quasi-judicial body called Foreigners Tribunal, whose working has been called out because of its opaque functioning, inherent bias, legal and factual inconsistencies. 31 These Tribunals are often chaired by the executives and lawyers rather than judicially trained judges. 32 It has led to situations where the officers have proceeded ex parte against the claimant and ended up ‘manufactur[ing] … foreigners’. 33 The lack of judicial independence can be seen from the fact that systemic rewards are set out by the Government for the officers who declare a large number of citizens as foreigners. In contrast, others have been terminated for being too lenient in their adjudication. 34 Once a person is declared a foreigner by the Tribunal, the person stands effectively stateless unless they can prove their link with any other country. 35 Although the Court has instructed the Government to devise a plan to deport the 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 Sangeeta Barooah Pisharoty, ‘Final NRC Published in Assam; 19.06 Lakh Applicants Left Out’, The Wire (online, 31 August 2019) <https://thewire.in/rights/final-nrc-publishedassam>. The Foreigners (Tribunal) Amendment Order 2019 (India) s 3A. ibid s 3B. Talha Abdul Rahman, ‘Identifying the “Outsider”: An Assessment of Foreigner Tribunals in the Indian State of Assam’ (2020) 2(1) Statelessness and Citizenship Review 112, 136. See Nur Begum v Union of India (2020) 3 GLT 347. Rohini Mohan, ‘Inside India’s Sham Trials That Could Strip Millions of Citizenship’, Vice News (online, 29 July 2019) <https://news.vice.com/en_us/article/3k33qy/worse-than-adeath-sentence-inside-indias-sham-trials-that-could-strip-millions-of-citizenship>. Prashant Bhushan and Cheryl D’souza, ‘Conduct of Foreigners Tribunals in Assam is questionable’, The Indian Express (online, 20 September 2019) <https://indianexpress.com/article/opinion/columns/assam-nrc-final-list-foreignerstribunals-6011356/>. Rahul Karmakar, ‘When You Can’t Find Foreigners, You Manufacture Them: Human Rights Lawyer Aman Wadud’, The Hindu (online, 27 June 2020) <https://www.thehindu.com/society/when-you-cant-find-foreigners-you-manufacture-themhuman-rights-lawyer-aman-wadud/article31922657.ece>. Sagar, ‘Case Closed’, The Caravan (online, 6 November 2019) <https://caravanmagazine.in/law/assam-foreigners-tribunals-function-like-kangaroo-courtspersecute-minorities>. Foreigners Act (n 12) s 8. 262