Immigration Bill 2025 Raises Concerns for Citizens and Foreign Journalists

Grants Sweeping Powers to Immigration Officers, Central Government

March 12, 2025

The Immigration and Foreigners Bill, 2025, which was introduced in Lok Sabha on March 11, proposes a major overhaul of India’s immigration laws. While its stated intent is national security and efficient immigration control, several of its provisions have significant potential for misuse, particularly against citizens and foreign journalists and human rights researchers.

A notable shift under this bill places the responsibility of proving legal status squarely on the individual, rather than on the State. Under the new bill, any foreign national deemed to pose a threat to India’s national security, sovereignty or territorial integrity can be denied entry or permission to remain in the country. It also makes registration mandatory for all foreigners upon their arrival in India, significantly restricting their movements and limiting access to designated protected or restricted areas.

Further, institutions such as educational establishments, hospitals and nursing homes would be obligated to report the presence of foreign nationals to immigration authorities.

The bill significantly expands the powers of immigration officers. These officers would have the authority to arrest individuals without warrants, a sweeping provision that enhances their discretionary powers. The central government would also gain expansive authority to regulate the movement of foreigners, including restricting their entry, controlling departures and barring access to specific geographic areas.

The penalties would be severe on foreigners who breach entry and residency rules.

Violations such as overstaying, breaching visa conditions or entering restricted areas carry penalties of up to three years of imprisonment, fines up to 300,000 (3 lakh) rupees, or both.

If enacted, the bill will repeal and consolidate several existing laws from the colonial era, including the Foreigners Act of 1946, the Passport (Entry into India) Act of 1920, the Registration of Foreigners Act of 1939 and the Immigration (Carriers’ Liability) Act of 2000. The government argues that these older laws, drafted during the World War era, have become outdated and that a single, modern legal framework is necessary to avoid overlapping or contradictory regulations.

The bill could have several potential outcomes, including the following.

When a large number of people in the country lack passports and many do not even have voter IDs, the burden of proving legal status raises serious concerns about citizenship rights. Without official identification, individuals may struggle to prove their nationality, leading to widespread disenfranchisement and a situation similar to the National Register of Citizens (NRC) in Assam.

This shift allows the government to disproportionately scrutinise certain communities based on nationality, religion or ethnicity, effectively making legal status a tool for discrimination. The only difference between the NRC and this provision is that while the NRC mandates the scrutiny of citizenship documents for everyone, the burden of proving legal status under this provision can be enforced at the government's discretion.

As regards the mandatory registration requirement for foreign visitors, it considerably increases the government’s surveillance capabilities.

Under existing laws, foreigners staying for more than 180 days or holding specific visa types, such as employment, student, or research visas, are generally required to report their presence to the Foreigners Regional Registration Office (FRRO) or Foreigners Registration Office (FRO). It’s not clear if even tourists and short-term visitors would be required to formally report their arrival, and whether this would involve a physical visit to an office or just an online process. The question is why ongoing monitoring is required for all foreign visitors after arrival.

Further, the vague language used to define threats to national security, sovereignty and integrity allows authorities significant discretionary power to classify critical journalism or human rights research as threats. This could become a convenient legal rationale to deny entry, revoke visas or remove individuals whose work might expose uncomfortable truths or embarrass government officials.

Restrictions on movement and access to protected or restricted areas pose another significant threat to free journalism and research by foreigners. These powers enable the government to effectively seal off sensitive regions.

Furthermore, the power granted to immigration officers to arrest individuals without warrants increases the risk of misuse. Foreign nationals critical of the Indian government could face arbitrary arrests, intimidation and detention under vague or unspecified charges, severely undermining their ability to conduct independent research or reporting.