By Bhupen Goswami

Guwahati :   The Supreme Court today reserved the ruling of a petition seeking the release of foreigners living in detention centres in Assam, while Assam and Central Government suggested a slew of high tech mass tracking technology including radio collaring to keep latch on the released foreigners. Noted lawyer Prashant Bhushan, who was appointed Amicus curie by the court after throwing out original petitioner Harsh Mander,  today strongly argued for the release of the detainees using some kind of mechanism to keep them in a latch. On the other hand Assam Government also filed an affidavit in a sealed cover in this regard, saying that radio collaring (read microchip), bio metrics , retina or any other improved mechanism available for mass tracking be used before releasing them.

However, the affidavit also said that the detainees had to stay a stipulated number of years inside the detention camp and then surety of Rs 2 lakh each for two Indians before being released with radio collaring. The Supreme Court on Thursday said that foreigners who could not be deported to their parent country could not be held forever in Assam’s detention centres and that it was not averse to ordering their release provided there was a way to ensure that they will be available whenever needed by the authorities. “We have no problem issuing orders for releasing them. The only question is how can we ensure their presence when required,” a bench of Chief Justice of India Ranjan Gogoi and Justices Deepak Gupta and Sanjiv Jain observed. The Chief Justice asked advocate Prashant Bhushan, whom it had appointed as amicus curiae, and Solicitor General Tushar Mehta to suggest how this could be ensured. Mr. Bhushan referred to an affidavit filed by the state which suggested making the detenues wear radio collar and the solicitor general pointed out that radio collar was one of the options being considered.

Mr Prashant Bhushan suggested that a cut-off period of six months could be set for deportation, failing which a foreigner could be released on fulfilling the conditions. The court was hearing a PIL highlighting the plight of foreigners in the state’s detention centres. The plea was originally filed by activist Harsh Mander. During a hearing on May 2, the court removed Mander as the petitioner after he sought the recusal of the CJI alleging bias, and replaced him with the Supreme Court Legal Services Authority as the petitioner. Meanwhile, Following the Supreme Court’s reprimand to the Assam chief secretary Alok Mehta for his failure to act against foreigners entering the state without documents, the state government has directed the border police wing to lodge an FIR against those declared foreigners by the special tribunals who have gone missing over the years.

As per the record of the home ministry, as many as 91,609 people were declared foreigners till March 2018 by the Foreigners’ Tribunals functioning in the state – of these, 72,486 have gone missing. The state government’s affidavit, submitted to the apex court on April 25, said 900 declared foreigners have been lodged in detention centres. Several of the detainees have challenged the orders in higher courts. As per the latest state government directive to the police, the FIRs would be lodged under the Passport Act and the Foreigners Act, 1949. Local media reports said a “manhunt” has been launched by the border police. “Necessary action will be taken against the absconders under the relevant sections of the Acts. It will also pave the way for attachment of the properties of the declared foreigners if they have made any,” Assam Tribune said, quoting “an official source” of the state police.

The May 9 report said, “Till yesterday evening, around 115 such missing declared foreigners have been caught by police across the state.” In 2009, the decision to open detention centres within the state jails was taken by the then Congress government to avoid declared foreigners from going missing. Early this year, rights activist Harsh Mander filed a petition in the Supreme Court to draw attention to the dismal condition of the six detention centres where the detainees have been living.

The jail manual is not implemented while dealing with such detainees, which meant that they don’t have the right to parole and work inside the jail premises. On April 25, the state government presented an affidavit suggesting the conditional release of the declared foreigners before the three-member bench led by Chief Justice of India (CJI) Ranjan Gogoi, which is hearing the case. The CJI reportedly reprimanded the state and the Central government for not taking any measures for the deportation of foreigners. It led Mander to file a fresh petition in the SC seeking CJI Gogoi’s recusal from the case claiming that his cross-questioning of the state chief secretary and the reprimand was due to his possible “bias” in the case. On May 2, Mander represented himself in the court seeking the CJI’s recusal and stated that his counsel Prashant Bhushan was no longer representing him. The CJI dismissed the petition stating that observation in the oral debate was made to test the case and that he took them to be the opinion of the judge. “You have to learn to trust your judges,” the CJI told Mander.