Alleging anomalies, APW calls for re-verification of 'aliens’ included in NRC draft

Guwahati (Assam), Aug 28, 2018:

Assam Public Works (APW) has alleged serious anomalies in update of National Register of Citizens (NRC) that enabled inclusion of names of suspected illegal immigrants in the final NRC draft published on 30^th July this year.

In an affidavit filed before the Supreme Court on 24^th August, APW president Aabhjeet Sharma alleged that names of illegal immigrants had been included in Dhubri, Kokrajhar, Chirang, South Salmara, Goalpara, Bongaigaon, Barpeta, Nalbari, Kamrup (Rural), Kamrup (Metro), Darrang, Udalguri, Sonitpur, Lakhimpur, Dhemaji, Morigaon, Nagaon, Hojai, Golaghat, Cachar, Karimganj and Hailakandi.

He urged the court to take cognizance of the matter and pass necessary orders for re-verification of names of illegal migrants included in NRC draft through family tree or any other ways in those districts during disposal of claims and objections.

To buttress his allegation, Sharma pointed out several instances of anomalies in family tree verification. He said a large number of fake certificates have been detected and used mostly by second generation like birth certificates, while most of the first generation had used electoral rolls as link document, which, according to him, is not dependable at all.

Sharma said an illegal immigrant usually entered his or her name in a post 1971 electoral roll by assuming as an offspring of someone whose name figured in a pre-1971 electoral roll, as there was no fool-proof method of detecting this fraudulent activity. He contended that the verification of family tree would have been fool-proof had it been done properly.

The APW chief explained that in the family tree verification, the offspring of a “legacy person” were asked to submit their family details, which were then compared through software. And the family trees of genuine offspring matched, while those of persons who assumed names in pre-1971 documents as ancestors did not match with genuine offspring.

But, according to Sharma, the family tree verification did not work properly as almost all data entry operators (DEO) working in NRC Seva Kendras (NSKs) of immigrant-dominated areas are from the immigrant community. This is due to the fact that the remuneration of a DEO is a meagre Rs 5,000 per month though the system integrator of Wipro gets around Rs 14,000 per month against each DEO. Recruited locally against a paltry Rs 5,000, the amount is not sufficient for a DEO to work from a distant place, he added.

Like DEOs, almost all LRCRs/ALRCRs and other verification officers working in immigrant-dominated areas too are from the immigrant community. And prior to their engagement, citizenship status of the DEOs was never verified though there was some police verification to check their criminal antecedents, he further pointed out.

The affidavit stated that many citizens had filed complaints before NRC authority that due to affinity towards their own community, these verifying officers with the help of DEOs, both of whom hailed from the same immigrant community, manipulated the family tree verification to include names of suspected foreigners in the NRC draft.

Subsequently, the complaints were verified and it was suggested that family tree verification in immigrant-dominated area where verification officers and DEOs belonged to the immigrant community, or either of them is from immigrant community, should be cross verified by another set of officers whose citizenship is beyond doubt. Software was also prepared by M/s Bohniman System Ltd through which family tree verification data already uploaded could be re-verified as the earlier software used for verification did not permit anyone, even the supervisory officers, to see the data already uploaded, he added.

Stating that the re-verifying software was also successfully tested, Sharma added that for some unknown reason, the State Coordinator of NRC did not allow re-verification.

Observing very high percentage of inclusion in NRC in immigrant-dominated areas, he said he suspected manipulations in the family tree verification and stressed re-verification/cross verification of the family tree under Sec 4.3 of the Schedule.

Meanwhile, terming inclusion of names of members of families from declared foreigners/doubtful voters in the final NRC draft in Morigaon district as a very serious matter, Sharma pointed out that it was not an isolated incident, adding there were similar instances in other districts.

He said he suspects manipulation of data at some level or some error in software, adding that most software had been used without proper tests or waiting for the software to settle down.

The affidavit referred to a teacher (Mohammad Khairul Islam), declared foreigner by a Foreigners’ Tribunal and Gauhati High Court, who was engaged in NRC update process at Mikirbheta NSK in Morigaon district and which came to light only after publication of the final NRC draft. It is possible that many such foreigners are involved in the NRC update process either due to oversight or as a design, the affidavit added.

It alleged that names of many declared foreigners have been included in large numbers along with D-voters’ families in Sonitpur district and provided documentary evidence in this regard.

According to Sharma, extensive use of IT in the process has rendered many clueless about the way the system functions as the number of people conversant with IT and software are only a handful. And Supreme Court, constrained by time, is unable to go deep into the nuances of the software being used and their efficacy in ensuring exclusion of names of foreigners, he added.

According to him, it could have been addressed if a third party technical audit was carried out with a panel created by and reporting only to the Supreme Court of India.

The APW president said though the apex court had engaged Upamanyu Hazarika for monitoring border issues of Assam, it had to depend on reports of the State Coordinator only for NRC update. As a result, the anomalies did not come to its notice, he added.

“A third party monitoring /evaluation is necessary who can get direct feedback from the field and report to the Hon’ble Court,” he stressed.

Pointing out that verification officers, who all are government servants, are not permitted to report anomalies in the verification process, he said unless their assessments were not taken into account, it won’t be possible to correct the mistakes already done.