Editorial 1 : How do Assam’s Foreigners Tribunals function?
Context
On July 5, the Assam government asked the Border wing of the State’s police not to forward cases of non-Muslims who entered India illegally before 2014 to the Foreigners Tribunals (FTs).
How did the FTs come about?
- The FTs are quasi-judicial bodies formed through the Foreigners (Tribunals) Order of 1964 under Section 3 of the Foreigners’ Act of 1946, to let local authorities in a State refer a person suspected to be a foreigner to tribunals.
- The FTs are currently exclusive to Assam as cases of “illegal immigrants” are dealt with according to the Foreigners’ Act in other States.
- Each FT is headed by a member drawn from judges, advocates, and civil servants with judicial experience.
- The Ministry of Home Affairs told Parliament in 2021 that there are 300 FTs in Assam but the website of the State’s Home and Political Department says that only 100 FTs are currently functioning.
What is the role of the Border police?
- The Assam Police Border Organisation was established as a part of the State police’s Special Branch in 1962 under the Prevention of Infiltration of Pakistani (PIP) scheme.
- The organisation was made an independent wing in 1974 and is now headed by the Special Director General of Police (Border).
- After the liberation war of Bangladesh, the PIP scheme was renamed Prevention of Infiltration of Foreigners or PIF scheme.
- The members of this wing are tasked with detecting and deporting illegal foreigners, patrolling the India-Bangladesh border with the Border Security Force, maintaining a second line of defence to check the entry of illegal foreigners, and monitoring people “settled in riverine and char (sandbar) areas”.
- This is apart from referring people of suspicious citizenship to the FTs to decide whether they are Indian or not based on documents.
- Cases of ‘D’ or doubtful voters can also be referred to an FT by the Election Commission of India and people excluded from the complete draft of the National Register of Citizens (NRC) released in August 2019 can appeal to the FT concerned to prove their citizenship.
How does an FT function?
- According to the 1964 order, an FT has the powers of a civil court in certain matters such as summoning and enforcing the attendance of any person and examining him or her on oath and requiring the production of any document.
- A tribunal is required to serve a notice in English or the official language of the State to a person alleged to be a foreigner within 10 days of receiving the reference from the authority concerned.
- Such a person has 10 days to reply to the notice and another 10 days to produce evidence in support of his or her case.
- An FT has to dispose of a case within 60 days of reference. If the person fails to provide any proof of citizenship, the FT can send him or her to a detention centre, now called transit camp, for deportation later.
Conclusion
- On July 11, the Supreme Court set aside an FT order declaring Rahim Ali, a deceased farmer, a foreigner 12 years ago.
- The apex court called the order a “grave miscarriage of justice” while pointing out that the Foreigners’ Act does not empower the authorities to pick people at random and demand that they prove their citizenship.
Editorial 2 : What is the role of the Finance Commission?
Context
The latest Finance Commission, which consists of five members including the chairman, was constituted in December last year and is expected to submit its recommendations by October, 2025. Its recommendations will be valid for five years starting from April 1, 2026.
What is the Finance Commission?
- The Finance Commission is a constitutional body that recommends how tax revenues collected by the Central government should be distributed among the Centre and various States in the country.
- The Centre, however, is not legally bound to implement the suggestions made by the Finance Commission.
- The Commission is reconstituted typically every five years and usually takes a couple of years to make its recommendations to the Centre.
How does the Commission decide?
- The Finance Commission decides what proportion of the Centre’s net tax revenue goes to the States overall (vertical devolution) and how this share for the States is distributed among various States (horizontal devolution).
- The horizontal devolution of funds between States is usually decided based on a formula created by the Commission that takes into account a State’s population, fertility level, income level, geography, etc.
- The vertical devolution of funds, however, is not based on any such objective formula.
- Nevertheless, the last few Finance Commissions have recommended greater vertical devolution of tax revenues to States.
- The 13th, 14th and 15th Finance Commissions recommended that the Centre share 32%, 42% and 41% of funds, respectively, from the divisible pool with States.
- It should be noted that the Centre may also aid States through additional grants for certain schemes that are jointly funded by the Centre and the States.
- The 16th Financial Commission is also expected to recommend ways to augment the revenues of local bodies such as panchayats and municipalities.
- It should be noted that, as of 2015, only about 3% of public spending in India happened at the local body level, as compared to other countries such as China where over half of public spending happened at the level of the local bodies.
Why is there friction between the Centre and States?
- The Centre and the States have been at loggerheads over the issue of sharing tax revenues for a while now.
- The Centre collects major taxes such as the income tax, the corporate tax, and the goods and services tax (GST) while the States primarily rely on taxes collected from the sale of goods such as liquor and fuels that are beyond the ambit of GST.
- The States, however, are responsible for the delivery of many services to citizens, including education, healthcare and the police.
- This has led to complaints that the Centre has reduced the power of the States to collect taxes and that it does not give enough funds to the States to match with the scale of their responsibilities.
What are the disagreements?
- The States and Centre often disagree on what percentage of the total tax proceeds should go to the States and about the actual delivery of these funds.
- States argue that they should receive more funds than what is recommended by the Finance Commission as they have greater responsibilities to fulfil than the Centre.
- They also point out that the Centre does not even share the amount of funds recommended by the Finance Commissions, which they believe is already too low.
- Further, States have complaints about what portion of the Centre’s overall tax revenues should be considered as part of the divisible pool out of which the States are funded.
- It is believed that cesses and surcharges, which do not come under the divisible pool and hence not shared with the States, can constitute as much as 28% of the Centre’s overall tax revenues in some years, causing significant revenue loss for States.
- So, the increased devolution of funds from the divisible pool, as recommended by successive Finance Commissions, may be offset by rising cess and surcharge collections.
- In fact, it is estimated that if cesses and surcharges that go to the Centre are also taken into account, the share of States in the Centre’s overall tax revenues may fall to as low as 32% under the 15th Finance Commission.
Conclusion
It is argued that more developed States with better governance are being penalised by the Centre to help States with poor governance. Some critics also believe that the Finance Commission, whose members are appointed by the Centre, may not be fully independent and immune from political influence.
