Amit Pandey
The Immigration and Foreigners Bill, 2025, introduced in the Lok Sabha, has ignited intense debate, with the ruling government hailing it as a long-overdue reform to strengthen border security and streamline immigration processes, while opposition parties and civil rights activists view it as a draconian measure that could threaten fundamental liberties. The bill seeks to overhaul existing immigration laws by introducing stricter visa regulations, enhancing government surveillance over foreign nationals, and granting sweeping powers to immigration authorities to detain, deport, or restrict movement based on broadly defined security concerns. As the legislation inches closer to a potential enactment, a critical question arises: Is this a necessary legal framework to protect national security, or does it grant excessive authority that could be misused for political and bureaucratic gains?
One of the primary concerns raised by critics is the ambiguity in defining who qualifies as a “threat” under the proposed law. The bill empowers officials to take punitive actions against individuals deemed to be engaging in “anti-national” or “suspicious” activities—terms that remain largely undefined. Does this vague phrasing open the door to arbitrary detentions and deportations? Could foreign residents, asylum seekers, and even long-term visa holders be subjected to surveillance or restrictions without due process? The government insists that these measures are necessary to curb illegal immigration, address national security risks, and bring India in line with global best practices in border control. However, opposition leaders and legal experts argue that such unchecked powers could be weaponized against dissenters, journalists, and activists under the guise of national interest.
Another contentious aspect of the bill is its potential impact on India’s refugee policies. The bill reportedly introduces provisions that make it easier to expel individuals who do not meet rigid immigration criteria, raising concerns about the fate of asylum seekers and persecuted minorities seeking shelter in India. Could this legislation violate India’s obligations under international refugee conventions? Will it create legal hurdles for those fleeing religious or political persecution? Moreover, some legal scholars argue that the bill could contradict constitutional guarantees such as Article 21, which upholds the right to life and personal liberty for all individuals, including non-citizens.
As the debate intensifies, many question whether the bill strikes the right balance between security and human rights. Can a robust immigration policy be achieved without compromising civil liberties? Or is this legislation a veiled attempt to centralize power and exert greater control over foreigners and citizens alike? With its far-reaching consequences, the Immigration and Foreigners Bill, 2025, remains a pivotal test of India’s democratic values and legal safeguards.
Bureaucratic Overreach:
One of the biggest criticisms of the bill is its potential to empower government officials with unchecked authority. The law provides immigration officers the power to detain, deport, and penalize individuals without adequate judicial oversight. This is seen as a serious risk for both foreign nationals and Indian citizens.
Under the Constitution of India, several legal provisions act as safeguards against arbitrary detention and harassment, ensuring that individual liberties are not curtailed without due process. Article 21 guarantees the right to life and personal liberty, mandating that any detention or legal action must be just, fair, and reasonable. Additionally, Articles 32 and 226 empower citizens to approach the Supreme Court and High Courts to challenge unlawful detention, providing a crucial check on executive overreach. Furthermore, Section 166 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) explicitly states that any government officer misusing their powers can be punished for criminal misconduct. These provisions collectively form a legal framework designed to prevent the abuse of authority and uphold democratic principles.
However, critics argue that the Immigration and Foreigners Bill, 2025, threatens to override these legal protections by granting unchecked powers to government officials. One of the primary concerns is the absence of a clear grievance redressal mechanism, leaving individuals who are wrongfully detained or harassed with limited options to seek justice. The bill authorizes officers to detain or deport individuals without requiring prior approval from the judiciary, effectively sidelining the role of courts in ensuring due process. This shift of power from the judiciary to executive authorities has raised alarms about potential misuse, with opposition leaders warning that the bill could become a tool of suppression rather than a framework for regulation.
Opposition leaders, including Mallikarjun Kharge and Sitaram Yechury, have strongly criticized the bill, arguing that it provides sweeping powers with no mechanisms for accountability. Congress MP Shashi Tharoor, in a fiery speech in Parliament, cautioned against the vague language used in the bill, stating, “This law could be used to target minorities, journalists, activists, and even innocent tourists under vague pretexts. Where are the checks and balances?” His remarks reflect growing apprehensions that the legislation, if enacted in its current form, could be misused to silence dissent and marginalize vulnerable communities.
On the other hand, the government has defended the bill as a necessary measure for safeguarding national security and regulating immigration more effectively. Union Minister Nityanand Rai, speaking in favor of the bill, asserted, “India welcomes foreigners, but it is the responsibility of the government to ensure national sovereignty and internal security.” The government insists that the bill aligns with global immigration norms and is essential for curbing illegal immigration. However, despite these assurances, the absence of independent oversight and judicial scrutiny remains a pressing concern, leaving many to question whether the bill prioritizes security at the cost of fundamental freedoms.
The Common Man’s Struggle: How the Bill Could Cause Mass Suffering
The implementation of the Immigration and Foreigners Bill, 2025, raises serious concerns for migrant workers, foreign students, and even Indian citizens who might get entangled in bureaucratic complexities. By removing key legal safeguards, the bill creates an environment where individuals—especially those without proper documentation—could face undue harassment, wrongful detention, or even expulsion without due process.
One of the most concerning aspects is its potential impact on long-term migrants and refugees, particularly from Bangladesh and Myanmar. India has long dealt with illegal immigration from these regions, but existing laws ensure that deportation undergoes legal scrutiny. Under the new bill, these checks are removed, meaning that even genuine refugees and legal long-term migrants could face arbitrary expulsion. This has sparked fears among human rights activists that entire communities could be displaced without any recourse.
The impact on common people is far-reaching. Migrant workers and small traders, many of whom lack formal documents, could be wrongfully detained and deported, severely affecting their livelihoods. Foreign students, an important demographic for India’s growing education sector, may also suffer as the bill grants officials the power to fine or expel them for minor visa delays, making India a less attractive destination for international education. Even Indian citizens, particularly activists, journalists, and political opponents, could find themselves under increased government surveillance, as the law lacks adequate safeguards against misuse.
A similar precedent can be seen in the implementation of the National Register of Citizens (NRC) in Assam, where thousands of genuine citizens were wrongfully excluded due to documentation issues. If misused, the Immigration and Foreigners Bill could lead to mass human rights violations, disproportionately affecting the most vulnerable sections of society.
Learning from Global Practices:
India’s Immigration and Foreigners Bill, 2025, has been introduced under the pretext of bringing immigration policies in line with global standards. However, a closer look at immigration laws in Western democracies reveals that these nations uphold strong legal safeguards against arbitrary detention and deportation—safeguards that India’s new bill conveniently ignores.
· United States: Under the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA), individuals detained on immigration grounds must be presented before a judge within 48 hours. The law also provides multiple avenues for appeal, ensuring that wrongful detentions do not go unchecked.
· United Kingdom: Immigration officers cannot detain individuals for an indefinite period without a court order. Deportation orders must undergo legal scrutiny, and individuals have the right to challenge their removal in court.
· Canada: Immigration laws in Canada mandate an independent tribunal to review all detention and deportation cases. Every individual, including asylum seekers, has the right to legal representation and an impartial hearing before any action is taken.
Despite claiming to modernize immigration laws, India’s bill strips away essential legal protections that even Western democracies uphold. The government argues that stringent measures are necessary for national security, yet these nations manage to secure their borders without undermining due process and civil liberties. By granting sweeping powers to bureaucrats without judicial oversight, India risks creating a system where arbitrary detentions become the norm rather than the exception.
If India truly seeks to align with global best practices, it must ensure that immigration enforcement is transparent, accountable, and subject to legal review. Without these safeguards, the bill appears less like a reform and more like an instrument of unchecked state control.
What Should Be Done? Opposition’s Recommendations
Opposition parties, legal experts, and activists have proposed key amendments to ensure the Immigration and Foreigners Bill, 2025, serves national security without compromising civil liberties. One of the primary recommendations is judicial oversight, ensuring that any detention or deportation requires court approval. Additionally, they advocate for an independent review board to hear grievances of those affected by the law, preventing arbitrary actions by authorities. Transparency and appeal rights are also crucial, as foreigners facing detention should have the legal right to challenge their status.
To safeguard vulnerable groups, clear guidelines should be established to prevent the harassment of migrant workers and foreign students. Moreover, executive power must be limited to prevent bureaucratic overreach in immigration matters.
If these recommendations are ignored, India could face serious consequences, including legal challenges in the Supreme Court, international criticism from human rights organizations, and potential public backlash, similar to the mass protests witnessed during the NRC controversy.
Needs Urgent Reforms
While strong immigration laws are essential for national security, the Immigration and Foreigners Bill, 2025, in its current form, raises serious concerns about civil liberties and the potential for misuse. Without adequate safeguards, the bill could be weaponized to harass marginalized communities, suppress political dissent, and violate fundamental rights. Legal experts and political analysts have criticized the bill for granting unchecked powers to bureaucrats, bypassing judicial oversight, and lacking a proper grievance redressal mechanism. Former Supreme Court judge Justice Madan B. Lokur has warned that “any law that permits detention and deportation without judicial review is bound to be misused.” Senior advocate Prashant Bhushan also stated, “The bill disregards constitutional protections and opens the door for arbitrary action.”
To make the bill fair and effective, it must include judicial review, independent oversight, and clear guidelines to prevent harassment of foreign students, workers, and refugees. A structured appeals process should be introduced to ensure that individuals have the right to challenge wrongful detention. Without these necessary reforms, the bill risks becoming a tool of oppression rather than a genuine effort to strengthen national security. The government must engage in meaningful dialogue with stakeholders to ensure a balanced and just law.
(Author is Managing Editor of The Emerging World)
