Bangladesh has formally protested remarks by Assam Chief Minister Himanta Biswa Sarma, amid growing concerns that India is violating domestic, international, and human rights laws through “pushback” practices along the border.
The Ministry of Foreign Affairs in Dhaka summoned Acting Indian High Commissioner Pawan Badhe on Thursday evening to convey its strong displeasure over statements that were described as derogatory to Bangladesh–India relations and misleading regarding the expulsion of so-called “disputed citizens.”
Director General (South Asia) Ishrat Jahan called in the envoy at 5pm, where officials formally communicated Dhaka’s displeasure. According to ministry sources, the remarks by the Assam chief minister drew “serious attention” at the highest levels of government.
In its response, Bangladesh rejected any suggestion of unlawful cross-border pushbacks and reiterated that issues related to migration and repatriation must be addressed through established bilateral mechanisms and in accordance with international norms. Dhaka also urged restraint from political leaders, warning that public statements on sensitive matters could strain otherwise cooperative relations between the two neighbouring countries.
Controversy over ‘pushback’ practices
The diplomatic tension follows an interview in Anandabazar Patrika in which Sarma acknowledged the existence of informal cross-border expulsions—commonly referred to as “pushbacks”—while suggesting such measures fall outside conventional legal frameworks.
In the interview, he stated that resolving the issue of “non-citizens” cannot always be achieved through legal means, describing it as an ongoing “struggle.” The remarks have triggered alarm among legal experts and human rights advocates, who say they amount to an extraordinary admission by a sitting constitutional office-holder.
Critics argue that such statements raise fundamental questions about accountability and the rule of law, particularly when they suggest the use of measures that bypass due process.
The issue is closely linked to India’s controversial National Register of Citizens (NRC), under which millions of residents in Assam have faced uncertainty regarding their citizenship status.
Violations of legal discourse
Experts in Bangladesh have warned that the practices would constitute serious violations of both domestic and international legal frameworks.
Former ambassador Md Sufiur Rahman said the acknowledgment indicates “grave violations of norms, practices and laws,” adding that India could be breaching its own legal obligations as well as international standards.
“The burden of proof normally lies with the state to establish whether a person is a citizen or not. But this case, the onus of proof is on an individual, against the might of State institutions,” he said. “Whether citizens or residents, they are entitled to legal protection and due process under any legal system.”
It is not clear whether the persons excluded from NRC as doubtful voters were pushed out even before they have exhausted all means provided to them by the Indian Supreme Court. If not, that constitutes a gross violation, he added.
According to the chief minister’s interview, individuals identified as “disputed citizens” are detained by India’s Border Security Force for periods ranging from 10 to 40 days before being transported to border areas and forced across, at night and in locations where Bangladeshi border guards are not present.
Rahman noted that such actions, if carried out without due process, would certainly violate fundamental human rights, including access to legal aid and protection from arbitrary detention.
He further emphasised that even if a person is proven not to be a citizen of India, deportation requires verification of their nationality and coordination with the purported country of origin or the receiving country. “Without establishing which country the individual belongs to, deportation itself becomes a violation of international law,” he said.
Bilateral mechanisms bypassed
Bangladesh and India maintain established bilateral arrangements to handle cases of cross-border movement and repatriation. These include both operational-level coordination between border forces and formal government-to-government level processes.
Under these mechanisms, individuals who inadvertently or otherwise cross the border are typically returned through coordinated efforts between border agencies. In more complex cases, lists of suspected nationals are exchanged between capital level authorities, followed by verification procedures before repatriation is carried out.
Rahman argued that the alleged pushback practices bypass these established channels entirely. “There are clear and agreed verification processes in place, but in this case they are completely ignored,” he said.
Risk of regional instability
Former ambassador Md Abdul Hye warned that such actions could have broader implications for regional stability.
“Pushbacks of this nature are not acceptable and may lead to instability in the region,” he said, cautioning that unilateral actions could undermine trust between neighbouring countries.
He also questioned the narrative that economic migration is driving large numbers of Bangladeshis into India, noting that Bangladesh’s per capita income now surpasses that of Assam.
“The idea that people are crossing into India purely for economic reasons does not hold when you look at comparative indicators,” he said. “What the region needs is cooperation, not policies driven by narrow political considerations.”
Security concerns for Bangladesh
Analysts have also highlighted potential security risks for Bangladesh if individuals are pushed across the border without proper identification or documentation.
Sufiur Rahman stressed the need for stronger vigilance along the border. “If people are being sent across without verification, it creates uncertainty about their identity and background, which might create a serious security concern,” he said.
He added that Bangladesh’s border authorities must remain alert and proactive in preventing any unauthorised entry. “Ensuring border security is essential to maintaining stability in bordering areas,” he noted.
The controversy has intensified scrutiny of border management practices on both sides, with observers calling for greater transparency and adherence to international norms. As diplomatic engagement continues, the episode underscores the fragile balance between domestic political agendas and the imperatives of good neighbourly conduct.
