3 ms·
If their families have been there since 1938, as is the case for one of the people mentioned in the article, where would you suggest they are citizens?
by blincoln 7y ago
If their families have been there since 1938, as is the case for one of the people mentioned in the article, where would you suggest they are citizens?
- cameronbrown 7y agoOP isn't wrong, but it's also Assam's fault for not properly maintaining it's border. Once you start making people stateless several generations removed from those who did cross illegally, that's on them.
- makomk 7y agoThe border in question wasn't even a border in 1938 because that predates the partition of India. Bangladesh, the country that certain Indian political factions are claiming these people are from, only came into existence in 1972 and mainly just recognises people who were permanent residents there in 1971 as citizens.
- yumraj 7y ago> If their families have been there since 1938 But they hadn't been. Don't base your opinion on a single article. A lot of process was followed after decades of issues and finally on the order of Supreme Court. In fact, the number of people identified by most counts is order of magnitude smaller than what it should have been.