The report states that citizenship was denied even on the premise of minor spelling errors and confusion between honorific titles and precise names, whereas credible oral testimony was dismissed.
This was discovered based mostly on the evaluation of over 1,200 Gauhati HC orders, key Supreme Court docket judgments, orders of the FTs, and in depth interviews with legal professionals and litigants.
The circumstances that have been cited are: Barpeta resident Rahman Ali submitted paperwork for citizenship in 2012, itemizing his father's title as Khurshed Ali. The declare was rejected a yr later with the authorities ruling that this was a discrepancy as his father's title registered as Furshed Ali within the 1965 and 1970 voter rolls, despite the fact that it was accurately registered as Khurshed in 1989, 1997 and 2010.
One other case cited was: Maharjan Nessa's uncle's testimony was dismissed in 2019 as a result of he was unaware of when her father had bought land in Gobardhana village in Baksa district, which is irrelevant to her citizenship standing.
The third case was concerning to Ibrahim Ali's petition. It denied as a result of his father's title appeared as ‘Late Nurul' within the 1989 voter roll and ‘Nurul Islam' within the 1965 and 1970 voter rolls for Toktoki village in Nagaon district.Along with such rejections, there are over 85,000 pending circumstances. The FTs are anticipated to listen to one million appeals from these excluded from the Nationwide Register of Residents (NRC). The report titled ‘Unmaking Residents: The Structure of Rights Violations and Exclusion in India's Citizenship Trials' by the Nationwide Regulation College of India College and Queen Mary College of London phrases this a “burgeoning disaster”.
It argues that the FTs, fairly than being flawed exceptions, have turn out to be routine devices of exclusion.
The report has been revealed amid the brand new Immigration and Foreigners Act, 2025 that was handed by the Parliament not too long ago.
The report additional requires an pressing, basic rethinking of the authorized constructions governing citizenship in India, calling the present system not simply damaged, however actively unjust.
“Though the citizenship verification course of has ostensibly been carried out beneath the duvet of legislation and typically even beneath court docket supervision, our report exhibits that it fails to align with core constitutional and authorized ideas,” Mohsin Alam Bhat, legislation professor at Queen Mary College and co-author of the report informed TOI.
“Individuals are requested to supply unreasonable documentation. Worse, the system is designed to reject even the documentary and oral proof they do handle to supply.”
The report claims that a few of the causes for denying citizenship are in opposition to settled legislation.
As an example, FTs and the Gauhati HC rejected many essential official paperwork, reminiscent of gram panchayat certificates and voter rolls, over minor formatting flaws, inconsistencies in ink shade, or the absence of particulars like particular govt headers.
Moreover, slight variations in an individual's title, title, or age have been cited as floor to disclaim citizenship, despite the fact that such inconsistencies are widespread in rural information.
Even statements of witnesses together with members of the family with direct data have been dismissed simply because they may not recall particulars just like the exact yr a household moved to a village, the date of a wedding, or a beginning date.
Additional, FTs and the HC have typically dismissed post-1971 paperwork as “irrelevant” or “not proof of citizenship”.
This led to paperwork like Aadhaar, PAN playing cards, and ration playing cards, which may set up steady residence or familial ties, being rejected.
One other problem is the weakenin {qualifications} for FT members. In 2011, solely retired officers of the judicial service have been eligible. nevertheless, in 2015, advocates who had 10 years of expertise could possibly be appointed. In 2019, this was additional broadened to incorporate civil servants and legal professionals with solely seven years of expertise.
Bhat says, “The excessive court docket has adopted the identical slim method to proof because the tribunals, rejecting testimony and paperwork for minor, technical discrepancies with out contemplating them in totality, as settled evidentiary observe would require.”
