Assam fights for inner line permit rights

Himangshu Ranjan Bhuyan

(himangshur1989@gmail.com)

The demand for the Inner Line Permit (ILP) regime in Assam has picked up tremendous speed in recent years, especially after the Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA). Being a state with centuries of experience with battles against illegal migration and demographic transformation, Assam is again at a junction where questions of identity, culture, and political rights are once again at the forefront of popular debate. The ILP system, which governs the arrival of non-residents in some of the northeastern states, has been perceived as a safeguard that may protect the indigenous people from further demographic transformations. However, its implementation in Assam remains a contentious issue, involving legal, economic, and political considerations.

The ILP system, first introduced by the British in 1873 under the Bengal Eastern Frontier Regulation, was designed to restrict the movement of outsiders into tribal-dominated areas. This was meant to protect the socio-cultural fabric of indigenous communities from external influences. ILP is implemented today in Arunachal Pradesh, Nagaland, Mizoram, and Manipur, where special permits are required for non-residents to enter and stay. These restrictions have enabled these states to maintain their population structure and traditional lifestyle. Assam, however, despite its high demographic pressures from migration, has not been accorded ILP status, and hence increasing demands have been made for its implementation.

The Citizenship Amendment Act passed in December 2019 has increased the demand for ILP in Assam. The CAA offers a route to Indian citizenship for persecuted religious minorities from Bangladesh, Pakistan, and Afghanistan who arrived in India prior to December 31, 2014. Though the Act is exempted from regions under ILP and the Sixth Schedule of the Constitution, it covers significant sections of Assam, fuelling concerns that it will create an influx of migrants, changing the demographic composition of the state further. The 1985 Assam Accord had established March 24, 1971, as the cut-off date for the identification and deportation of illegal migrants. Several people are convinced that the CAA discredits this agreement by validating the entry of post-1971 migrants and invalidating decades of battle to safeguard the indigenous character of Assam.

Supporters of ILP in Assam believe that ILP is the sole legal tool which can keep outsiders out of the state and land, saving the rights of native people. Different bodies, such as the All Assam Students’ Union (AASU) and other ethnic organisations, have been leading this demand, stating that Assam needs to be given the same kind of protection that the northeastern states are getting. They highlight that Arunachal Pradesh, Nagaland, Mizoram, and Manipur, even with much lower populations than Assam, have received ILP coverages, while Assam, which has been the most affected by migration pressures for decades, has no such cover.

But the call for ILP is confronted with serious hurdles. At the top of the list of the major concerns is its possible economic effect on Assam. Differing from those states where ILP is being implemented, Assam possesses a varied economy comprising labour-dependent industries and investments in the state by external entities. Tea, the oil industry, trade, and tourism form part of Assam’s economy, and ILP implementation would curtail the migration of skilled experts, merchants, and labour, thus decelerating economic progress. Business groups worry that ILP laws would generate a negative investment and industrialisation climate. Most non-Indigenous communities have also been settled in Assam for generations, adding to its economy and society. Preventing them from moving about freely may result in unrest and destabilise the social fabric of the state.

The legal and constitutional viability of applying ILP in Assam is another big stumbling block. Whereas northeast states with ILP safeguards have distinctive constitutional provisions for their specific demographic profiles, Assam has a more heterogeneous population structure. Implementation of ILP would involve sweeping legal changes, which may be contested in the courts. The Indian Constitution guarantees the freedom of movement within the nation, and subjecting Indian citizens within Assam to entry restrictions may find legal opposition. The ILP has so far not been extended by the central government to Assam, presumably for these constitutional and economic reasons.

The state government of Assam has taken a cautious stance on the ILP issue. Although recognising the indigenous people’s concerns, the government has not taken any concrete step towards implementing ILP, questioning its socio-economic implications. Assam Chief Minister Himanta Biswa Sarma has said that Assam has safeguarding mechanisms, including land legislation that keeps non-indigenous individuals from buying property in tribal belts and blocks. ILP supporters, though, claim that such mechanisms are insufficient and lack the full-fledged protection provided by ILP. They think that without strict entry controls, Assam will continue to be beset with demographic problems, which will imperil its linguistic and cultural heritage.

The struggle for ILP in Assam is not just a call for a legal safeguard but an expression of deeper concerns about identity, migration, and political representation. The state has seen waves of protests and agitations, ranging from the Assam Movement of 1979–1985 to the anti-CAA protests in recent times. The call for ILP is an extension of these movements, symbolising a greater demand for the acknowledgement of indigenous rights. But any policy decision regarding ILP has to consider the larger ramifications on Assam’s economic stability, legal system, and social cohesion.

A middle path could be to enhance existing protective laws, enforce stricter border controls, and provide constitutional protection to indigenous communities without derailing economic development. Other options, including the award of ILP to specific areas or the establishment of special zones with restricted entry, have been proposed, but they need to be thought through. The controversy surrounding ILP in Assam is not yet over, and the next few years will tell if Assam follows its neighbouring states in introducing ILP or takes other measures to counter the problems caused by migration and demographic changes.