10 Criminals in Our Land! Border Movement and Apprehension of Children from Bangladesh Within the Juvenile Justice System in India Chandni Basu

'This is an agreement which would ensure peace and tranquillity on the border ... remove uncertainties ... I hope that when we bring this Bill before Parliament, Parliament would have the wisdom to approve it with acclamation? the hon. prime minister of India exclaimed, in relation to the pending Land Border Agreement between India and Bangladesh, at the Indian Parliament. The protocols of the Indira Gandhi-Mujibur Rehman Agreement pending Parliamentary approval since 1974 come to signify the 'au courant' of international relations between Bangladesh and India perpetually held in a state of suspension. As land remains a contentious issue between Bangladesh and India even after 42 years of Bangladesh's declaration of statehood, its meaning in the everyday lives of people at the territorial border is bound by the perils of legality. The question of dtizenship is central to the issue of legal jurisdiction at the territorial border. It remains a matter to be settled by the state through the constant distinction of people as dtizens and non-citizens.2 The pres­ence of children at the territorial border adds to the dynamics of such jurisdictional distinctions between peoplel by creating inter-actional opportunities in the spatial zone of children--childhoods and borders. The chapter attempts an exploration in this direction by focusing on the border movements of children from Bangladesh to India. More specifi­cally, I explore ideas and practices of juvenile justice and child protection within the juvenile justice system in India with regards to children from Bangladesh, which are influenced by the idealisations of a normative childhood operative in sodety at large and the state narrative of 'illegal'

183

184 ChandniBasu

immigration from Bangladesh to India. I therefore Wish to look at the perception of the children from Bangladesh within the juvenile justice system in India as 'undesirable others' and 'deviant children', as this brings together the notions of 'illegal' immigrants and 'transgressive' children in conversation with each other. The socio-historical connect­edness between Bangladesh and India provides the meta-narrative in which the discussions of this chapter are embedded.

The chapter is mostly a theoretical reflection on the issue of children­childhoods and borders. The anecdotal references in the chapter are intended to provide impetus for further research. The chapter hence draws attention to some complexities that encompass the issue of chil­dren-childhoods and borders rather than providing an empirical account of the subject. The deliberations in the chapter are based on my obser­vations and interactions with state officials, non-governmental organi­sation (NGO) personnel and children during my visits to the juvenile justice boards and state institutional homes in various districts of West Bengal, India.\ 5 All names of individuals mentioned in this chapter have been modified for reasons of confidentiality. The chapter is laid out in three sections. In the first section, I briefly explain the current state of relations between Bangladesh and India in order to pro~de an under­standing of the political context over which the presence of the children from Bangladesh within the juvenile justice system in India is deter­mined. ln the second section, I look into the theoretical deliberations on children-childhoods and borders that would explicate the ideas and practices related to the state narrative on borders and the idealisations of a normative childhood. Finally, in the third section, I present some experiences of justice and protection encountered by the children from Bangladesh within the juvenile justice system in India which brings forth the dynamics of interaction between children-childhoods and borders.

States of existence - Bangladesh and India

Any discussion about South Asia cannot escape a brief reminder, if not intense engagement, with its colonial past and post-colonial presence. The questions of nationalism and statehood feature as ever important even after four decades of the formalisation of Bangladesh, the newest nation-state in the region. Its relation with India continues to be pivotal with regards to the political economy in the region.6 The issues of contention between Bangladesh and India have ranged from territori­ality and the sharing of river water to 'illegal' immigration and traf­ficking of women and children, though not necessarily in this order of

Criminals in Our Land 185

importance or relevance. The cause of concern and dynamics towards each other, however, has varied significantly. India is blamed for its dream of becoming a global power while ignoring and neglecting its relations with its immediate neighbours. The geographical enormity of India seems to have contributed to its image as an intimidating pres­ence in the region. Bangladesh, on the other hand, is accused by India of radical lslarnisation through reviving its ties with Pakistan. This is accompanied by a projection of Bangladesh as a breeding ground of terrorist activities for infiltration into the sanctified 'Hindu heartland' of India Qones, 2009, p. 291). Bangladesh's recent negotiations with China in relation to economic ties and defence have provoked anxiety in India. On the whole, Bangladesh has earned the image of being a disturbing element in the guise of a bad neighbour to India. This puts into perspec­tive India's anxiety over growing rates of 'illegal' immigration from Bangladesh and the concern for identifying its territorial reach/

According to the Ministry of Horne Affairs in India, Bangladesh and India share a continuous land border of more than 4,096 krn Oones, 2009, p. 293), the longest stretch being shared with the state of West Bengal in India. This border has remained porous to a large extent throughout the six decades since decolonisation in the subcontinent (Bandopadhyay 2009, pp. 1-8). The accessibility of the land and sea routes facilitated regular movements of people in the region. Multiple experiences of borderisa­lion, including the historic partition, however, affected the connected histories and ethno-culturallinkages in the region. The resultant prohibi­IOry border mechanisms of the states enhanced the 'risk to the people' as they fell prey to touts, politicians and smugglers (Banerjee, 2001, J . 1506). The massive fendng drive by India at the Bangladesh border in recent times, however, has come as a major blow to the frequent move­ment of people, which deemed a character of 'porosity' to the territorial border in the region irrespective of statutory prohibitions.

Fences in this regard are idealised as barriers that control the move­ment of people. Fencing as the 'securitisation of the home' drive at a place which had been relatively open and unguarded in the last six decades challenges the linguistic and cultural heritage of the region, lbereby also affecting trans-border trade and communication prac­tised by people for generations. As a physical marker of the territorial border, the fence symbolises the rnaterialisation of state power in the Deleuzian sense of 'control'; it promotes the maintenance of the terri­torial integrity of the state through the segregation of people (Walters, 2006, p. 189). The physicality of the fence and its adamant presence in this regard represent a strong reminder of its identification and

186 ChandniBasu

demarcation of the internal/insider from the external/outsider on the basis of citizenship criteria. It brings along with it an impression of a 'closed and bounded container of an orderly population' which effec­tively puts away the chaos of the excluded other Oanes, 2009, p. 290). Jones estimates the cost of the fence constructed by India to be up to 4 billion USD and argues that the construction indicates India's adoption of the rhetoric of 'threat and security' to justify and expand its exclu­sionary practices in relation to neighbouring states (2009, p. 291). In this way, India has become an active player in the 'global war on terror' following the footsteps of the United States of America as an ally.8

This creates and feeds into the popular imagination of Bangladesh as a breeding ground of terrorist activity and India as a popular destination for 'illegal' immigrants from Bangladesh especially as cheap labour. Such projections finalise in overt acts of state-supported violence as in the case of the Indian Border Security Force, which is known for its relentless 'push back' and 'shoot at sight policy' resulting, at times, in deaths of unarmed villagers (Adams, 23 January 2011).

Persistent movements of people, however, continue at the Bangladesh­India border despite the fencing, suggesting that borders act as filters rather than as iron curtains (Walters, 2006, p. 197). This confirms Radu's point that narratives of borders have come to signify narratives of mobility (2010, p. 155). Regular everyday interactions for trade, social visits, journeys to avail oneself of basic facilities like health from the nearby village on the 'other side' or seasonal and permanent movement of labour keep alive the porosity of the border. Such processes reflect Rumford's call of the borderland as a zone of exchange and connec­tivity rather than as a line or barrier. The relation of state and society in this zone continues in between co-existence and distinction exempli­fying that state and society do not inhabit the same space in this zone (Rumford, 2006, pp. 161- 163). Exchanges of goods and movement of people in the light of the day and in the darkness of the night endow the territorial border and the life surrounding it with a liminal character, as seen at the Bangladesh border with West Bengal, lndia.9 The pres­ence of children from Bangladesh at the territorial border reinforces the futility of physical barriers, which people manage to relentlessly over­step, thereby putting state initiatives at jeopardy.

Children-childhoods and borders

Though the term 'border' has transcended the connotations of the physical, its significance in terms of territoriality remains overarching.

Criminals In Our Land 187

Disputes in South Asia like the ones involving India and neighbouring states like China, Bangladesh, Pakistan and Sri Lanka or the recent recognition of Palestine as a non-member observer state at the United Nations General Assembly confirm this. Bauman's metaphor of the 'fluid' in terms of liquid modernity, life and love (d. Rumford, 2006, p. 156) remains complicated in South Asia, especially in the wake of its connected histories, as in other parts of the postcolonial, postapartheid and postsocialist world. Van Schendal (2005, p. !)argues that the percep­tion of dissipating international borders resulting in a global village is a myth. This could hold true only for a limited group of people, as more and more borders are getting policed, leading to increased restrictions and stringent rules of movement. As borders operate differently for different groups of people, they also generate multiple meanings and experiences that confirm Balibar's assertion about the simultaneous thinning and doubling of borders (d. Rumford, 2006, p. 156). Strict surveillance mechanisms point to the tension between the 'trascend­ability of borders as a feature of increased globalisation' and 'the process of securitised borders in a world of global threats' (Rumford, 2006, p. 15 7). The double function of the same territorial border as permissive and restrictive foregrounds the idea of distinguishing people as desirable and undesirable for territorial movements. The territorial border in this regard may be conceived as a tool of exclusion to protect a community and society against the 'phantasmic threat of otherness' appropriated in \he abject figure of a migrant, refugee [and the terrorist] (Rajaram and Grundy-Warr, 2007, p. x).10 Incidents like the August 2008 dismissal of a petition submitted to the Delhi High Court in India by a Bangladeshi national against her deportation confirms the 'threatening other' formu­lation in the state narrative on borders in India. The High Court ruled that 'illegal' Bangladeshi immigrants 'pose a danger to India's internal security'. Restricting movements of 'illegal' immigrants therefore is necessary for Indian security regimes to actualise fencing drives at the Bangladesh border as practised in recent years.

The formal criterion of citizenship is momentary here with the resultant categorisation of people as citizens and non-citizens. Such categorisation necessitates the formulation of the internal/external­insider/outsider demarcation of people. Citizenship with its intrinsic sense of 'belonging' therefore remains foundational to the practice and structures of the modem democratic state that regulate people's claim to justice and protection. It brings forth the resultant and inherent limita­tions of identification and the consequent alienation of non-citizens. According to Morley (2001), the notion of citizenship postulates the

188 Chandni Basu

identification of the 'undesirable', thereby proposing a direct propor­tionality between belonging and desirability so that only the desirable can belong. The limited scope of the liberal ideals of freedom, equality and rights becomes apparent at this point. The territorial border as a line of distinction between states comes to signify and distinguish the sovereign and demarcate the physical space by reference to legality and the juridical reach of the sovereign over the identified dtizens who belong and reside within the physical limits of the state. What allows the justification of the distinction between insider and outsider, dtizen and non-citizen at all remains to be explored. Such formal criteria and categorisation at a time when the meaning of borders has transcended into 'post-territoriality' continues to be significant (Rumford, 2006 p. 159). In this the border as a line of demarcation encounters a spatial shift to become a 'zone' meted out in the scale of belonging and non­belonging, as explicated by Rajaram and Grundy-Wan (2007, p. x). It corresponds to Rumford's call of the borderland as a zone, mentioned earlier. The significance of the zone is.momentous as a space of conten­tion and probabilities. While movements for everyday purposes high­light the possibilities of newer modes of interaction and dynamics at the territorial border (Radu, 2010, p. 410), the risk of illegalisation also looms large. In this the border space remains active through strategies of disctpline-punishment-<ontrol of the unexpected, as in the instances of the apprehension of children from Bangladesh in India, along with the maintenance and propagation of the expected through the identifica­tion and segregation of territorial and jurisdictional spaces by construc­tion of physical barriers, like the one at the Bangladesh-India territorial border.

Movements in the modem state narrative on borders are evidently deviant acts. The phenomenon of border movements by children intro­duces the problematic of the idea and practice of juvenile justice and child protection in such border narratives. It also brings to the fore­ground the issue of deviance or transgression in childhood, as noted by jenks (1996, 2005). The involvement of children in such deviant or transgressive acts, deemed to be uncharacteristic for and by children within the domain of a normative childhood, adds to the problem­atic. Children constitute a large part of the people whose movements are noted at the Bangladesh-India territorial border. Many of them are apprehended while moving across the territorial border either individu­ally or along with their families by Indian state forces. They are charged under the Indian Foreigner's Act, 1946 by the juvenile justice system in India for 'illegal' immigration. They comprise the largest group of

Criminals in Our Land 189

dtildren to be found within the purview of the juvenile justice system, 115pecially in West Bengal, India.

Deviance or transgressions in childhood remain the central concern of lhe juvenile justice system in India, premised on a normative model of childhood that is founded upon, and promotes the ideal of innocence. The invocation seems significant here as childhood itself becomes 'a metaphorical, narrative or discursive marker for understanding move­ment and stasis' (Stryker and Yngvesson, 2013). Acts of deviance or llansgression by children, espedally of criminal nature, are deemed 10 threaten the ideals of childhood, thereby calling upon restorative measures within the legal domain. The apprehensions of children from Bangladesh Within the juvenile justice system in India in this regard become a moment where transgressions at the territorial border seem 10 merge and intersect with deviance in childhood. This adds to the spatial character of the legal mechanism, as the boundary of the terri­torial border interacts with the boundaries of childhood. It causes the figure of the 'undesirable other' of the state narrative of \'illegal' immi­sration from Bangladesh in India to merge with 'deviant children' of the normative model of childhood. The ideas and figures of 'undesirable others' of border narratives and 'deviant children' of normative child­hoods therefore become overlapping categorisations. The presence of children from Bangladesh within the juvenile justice system in India ensures such absorption of categories, thereby laying forth an interac­tion between children-childhoods and borders. The moment of the lbsorption of categories however remains difficult to be determined as .t is influenced by and also results in the presence of the children from Bangladesh within the juvenile justice system in India.

Justice and protection

The juvenile justice system in India has been structured following the legislation of the Juvenile justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2000 (Govt. of India 2000). This legislation replaced the Juvenile justice ~~ 1986, it has been formulated in accordance With the 1989 United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child (UNCRC). It is founded on the prindples of restorative justice and advances the role of the state as parens patriae (parent of the nation). The structure of the juvenile ustice system in India is comprised of two parts based on the distinction between children as children-in-conflict with the law and children-in­need of care and protection. The former are apprehended on charges of deviant acts ranging from murder or rape to pick pocketing while the

190 Chandni Basu

latter include abandoned, missing or destitute children who are deemed to be victims of their drcumstances. While the district-level juvenile justice boards under the jurisdiction of the High Courts form the institu­tions to apprehend children-in-conflict with the law, the child welfare committees have been set up under the Directorate of Social Welfare to look into the concerns of children-in-need of care and protection.11

The legitimacy of the juvenile justice system in India as a legal mecha­nism is perpetuated through the assumption that children can be either victims or perpetrators. It resonates the raison d'etre of any legal mecha­nism founded on 'illegal' acts of people. Furthermore, it is often the case that boys are designated as perpetrators and girls as victims within the institutional practices of the legal mechanism. This gendered distinc­tion of children within the juvenile justice system almost matches with the legislative distinction of children into two categories as mentioned earlier. It implies that in most instances boys are deemed to be chil­dren-in-conflict with the law while girls are children-in-need of care and protection. This segregation has implications for the children from Bangladesh at the territorial border as well. It leads in most cases to the apprehension of boys who are sent to juvenile justice boards on charges of 'illegal' movement and transfer of goods, while the girls are 'rescued' and offered protection as victims of human trafficking. 1, however, do not wish to minimise the persistence and violence of human trafficking that continues in many parts of the subcontinent. The concerns at this stage though seem to be more pronounced for the apprehended chil­dren deemed to be children-in-conflict with the law at the territorial border as it brings up the issue of transgression of borders and the agen­tial role of children in such acts close to each other. The instances of the apprehended children from Bangladesh within the juvenile justice system in India, therefore, provide an opportunity to understand how formulations of the 'undesirable other' and the 'deviant children' merge together through their acts of perpetration. ln this the act of perpetration of border movement proves to be an instance of collapsing or mergence of formulations and categorisations. It creates a unique moment for the legal mechanism as it endeavours to come to terms with this mergence and collapsing of categories. The legal structures and practices in this regard remain ill-equipped to address such occurrences. Juvenile justice and child protection in this scenario remain evasive within the larger paradigm of the 'best interest of children', as laid forth by the UNCRC. It creates a situation where the presence of multiple categories of identity among the children comes to interact with each other and hence remains to be judged upon. In this sense the juvenile justice system becomes a

Criminals in Our Land 191

playground of identities for children who find themselves in interac­tion with the system. The presence of the children from Bangladesh broadens the scope of the legal mechanism that until then remained confined in the familiarity of children only as victims and perpetrators. Citizen-non-citizen, desirable-undesirable, insider-outsider, innocent­deviant, child-adult provide a continuum in which the children from Bangladesh exist within the purview of the juvenile justice system in India. Their presence attributes a character of liminality to the legal mechanism as reflected in the evasive ideas and practices of justice and protection towards them.

The legislative enactment on juvenile justice in India endeavours to be child friendly. What determines the best interests of the children from Bangladesh caught between the cosmetic distinction of juvenile justice and child protection within the juvenile justice system in India however remains a provocative query. Maltreatment by officials and fellow inmates exists as an open secret at the state institutional homes where the children from Bangladesh continue to stay in most cases for many years. Indrani Sinha of Sanlaap (NGO), Kolkata, noted that the children were being 'dumped' by the juvenile justice boards at the state institu­tional homes for long stays. A repatriation facilitator added that the atti­tude of the police has not improved and that children from Bangladesh continue to be treated as criminals. At the state institutional homes chil­dren in most cases stage various episodes in their attempts to either run away or cause self-harm. One of the boys at a state institutional home had attempted to escape during a game of football, only to be caught and brought back to the institution a few days later. Another one had attempted to harm himself. As the bridges to return to Bangladesh remain largely burnt due to bureaucratic formalities, attempts of running away or harming oneself appear as the only paths to 'free' themselves from the endless daily drudgery of institutional life, interspersed with limited opportunities for social interaction, play or learning. The situation of the rescued children (mostly girls) does not seem to be much different, as they continue their long stays at various children's homes meant for rescued children. The relief of justice or protection envisaged by the legal mechanism largely in the form of repatriation comes sparingly. The significance of repatriation, however, goes beyond the domain of justice in the cases of the children from Bangladesh. In this, it is envis­aged in instances of the children-in-need of care and protection as well. Their perpetual 'victimised' status evidently deems them non-agential, thus making it easier for interventionist strategies to readily conceptu­alise rehabilitation for this group of children.

192 ChandniBasu

Take the instance of Fatema, a 12-year-old girl, who had been allowed the opportunity to return to Bangladesh. Even though the promise c returning home became real for Fatema unlike most others, its 'success remained a far outcry for the bureaucratic regimes. Despite the fact tru.t the repatriation process was initiated, it could not finally take Fatema to her home - her return remained unfinished. She was diagnosed witb tuberculosis during her stay in an institutional home for girls in Wes Bengal, India. Fatema, however, resisted medical treatment vehement:IJ Her resistance put forth her resilience and protest against the delay in the bureaucratic proceedings that restricted her return to Bangladesh. Fatema finally succumbed to her disease and died in Bangladesh on the way to her village from the institutional home in India. The incompl~ ness of Fatema's return and its ensuing finality establishes the redun­dancy of state interventionist strategies like repatriation towards the children from Bangladesh, irrespective of their formal categorisatioa within the juvenile justice system in India.

Repatriation efforts that culminate as the common ground for juve­nile justice and child protection within the legal mechanism establish its banality as justice and protection remain at a state of nullificatioa In this, repatriation efforts only connote the exit of the 'undesirable other', deeming the principle of 'best interest of children' to be largely ornamental. The issue of acceptance especially of girls within the family and village on their return, for example, remains beyond the scope ot repatriation bureaucracy. I echo Uehling's (2008) argument that the foundational impetus of repatriation is only a strategy to put 'in place' and thereby restore/confirm boundaries that have been overstepped by people's movement. It forwards the perception of people's movement as 'dis'placement- a 'dis' order which necessitates safe return (Rajaram and Grundy-Warr's, 2007, p. xxvii). The idea of movement in terms of circu­lation is important here. In this, I forward the understanding of move-­ment in terms of circulation as a non-fix flexible form, which is not bounded in the circular flow of movement in the conception of origin­destination-return (Stryker and Yngvesson, 2013, p. 2).12 Initiatives like repatriation, however, envisage circulation as a fixed pattern of movement from one source to destination and return. In this, move-­mentis defined as an experience fixed in 'space and time' (Stryker and Yngvesson, 2013, p. 2).

The overdetermination of the state narrative of 'illegal' immigration in reference to the presence of the children from Bangladesh within the juvenile justice system in India remains noteworthy. The counsellor at one of the district juvenile justice boards narrated the incident of

Criminals in Our Land 193

\llthu, a 12-year-old boy who was apprehended by state forces along fith his sibling and parents at Ranaghat, West Bengal, India. During

his howling cries, remembered the counsellor, he had verbally abused the presiding judidal magistrate at the district juvenile justice board, tmnra shob hindu, tomra shoitan, ekbar charan dao, shob kotar gala katti mkbo' - 'you are all Hindus, you are devils, I'll kill all of you once you set me free!' The counsellor recounted Mithu's self-awareness regarding his presence in the 'other land'. His appearance at the district juvenile ustice board that cold winter evening had caused discomfort. Mithu's angry exclamation of desperation on his separation from the family had brought reminder of the 'undesirable other' among the officials at the district juvenile justice board, as one could perceive in the counsellor's reflections. In this, he represented the 'blood thirsty' Muslim waiting to wage war in the 'Hindu heartland' of India. Mithu, therefore, became more of an 'undesirable outsider' than a 'deviant child' calling upon uvenile justice or child protection for the best interest of children on that cold winter evening.

Evidently, however, Mithu was transformed within a short while of his stay at the state institutional home. His 'mind had changed' and be became mild. By then he had realised the goodness of the Hindus. He had mentioned, 'tomra bhalo, tomader mota manush hoe na' - 'you all are good, there is no one like you', recollected the counsellor. She took much pride in her abilities to transform and padfy Mithu from an angry young Muslim to a docile child. Mithu's appearance at the district juve­nile justice board comes forth as a moment where the anxiety towards the 'deviant child' is overpowered by the imagination of the 'undesir­able outsider' soon to wage attacks in the 'Hindu heartland of India'. It also confirms the dominant social imagination of the modem child as the future dtizen. The restoration of Mithu into a 'docile child' is deemed necessary for the preservation of the juvenile justice system and society at large. His immediate transformation was significant within the legal mechanism as it promised to nullify the image of the dangerous outsider' and replace it with that of the 'child', only to be restored and rehabilitated by the legal mechanism to become future industrious dti­zens. In the case of the children from Bangladesh however, this brings forth yet another point of contention. What would be the citizenship of the children from Bangladesh as they continue to stay at state institu­tional homes in India, in most cases beyond their age of legal minority and terms of apprehension?

In this regard, the legal system remains ambiguous on the question of belonging of the children from Bangladesh. The question remains

194 ChandniBasu

unresolved and (un)addressed to a large extent in relation to ideas of non-citizenship, non-criminality and non-legal minority. lt creates a paradox about the functioning of the legal mechanism premised on the principles of justice-protection and the best interest of children. Who holds the right to belong to a sovereign space and be eligible for justice and protection, therefore, seems to be perpetually on suspension in the cases of the children from Bangladesh. The vagueness of their status and identity is complemented by the blurredness of the legal provision that fails to clarify the plight of immigrant children from Bangladesh beyond detention and repatriation. What does justice and protection entail in the cases of these children, therefore, constitutes an open-ended ques­tion. The indecision is all-encompassing as the legal mechanism grap­ples with the situation, reflected in the vague responses of the state officials.

The lack of consensus among the officials of the juvenile justice system in India, with regard to the legal status of the apprehended children from Bangladesh as perpetrators of border movements or as victims of their circumstances, foregrounds yet again the dichotomy of justice and protection within the legal mechanism. An NGO personnel observed that the legal regulations were 'vague' especially in the context of the immigrant children from Bangladesh: 'what will happen to these children, what is the definition of care and protection, the legislation does not specify on these ... there are still some gaps'. The operationalisa­tion and meaning of justice and protection also remain opaque. lndrani Sinha of Sanlaap, Kolkata, voices this concern: 'Does justice then only connote legal aid?' Incidents like those of Paterna and Mithu further this concern. What still needs to be explored with reference to the children from Bangladesh within the juvenile justice system in India and remains beyond the scope of the present chapter are notions of ethnicity, iden­tity, home, belonging and history in relation to the children, especially in the context of the socio-historical connectedness in the region and their experiences of border movements leading to apprehension-res­cue-repatriation or otherwise. One-dimensional state interventionist strategies, like repatriation, fail to take these aspects and their transfor­mations in the process of movements into consideration as it continues to 're'place people where they 'belong'.

Conclusion

The situation of the children from Bangladesh within the juve­nile justice system in India resonates with the Agambenian 'state of

Criminals in Our Land 195

aception' though the contextual and ideological intonations remain largely different. It forwards a possibility of paradox where the same system that apprehends and rescues the children takes them further into a state of exception as they continue their stay at the state insti­bltional homes and various children's homes due to unsuccessful repa­triation efforts. With the passage of time the children only fall beyond lhe boundary of 'criminality' as the time period for their 'punishment' lapses and as they grow beyond legal minority into adulthood. The completion of the legal age of minority, which in most cases comes later than the completion of the terms of apprehension, makes it evident that they cease to be in conflict-with-the law and also cease 10 be children. The inside/outside-ness of the law in the Agambenian state of exception resonates with the insider/outsider dilemma of the children from Bangladesh within the juvenile justice system in India, m relation to notions of identity-citizenship, apprehension and legal minority. It also brings forth the wider picture of temporality that remains an overdetermining factor of childhood. Conrad (2012) in this regard argues for a 'non-determinative sense of becoming' of children. t calls for the liberation of the unidirectional sense of becoming of

children [into future citizens] that fixes the subjectivity of a child to a specific time, and, to the protected space of childhood (d. Stryker and Yngvesson, 2013).

Do the children from Bangladesh then cease to be outsiders/unde­sirables with their end of term in the juvenile justice system in India as they cease to be legal minors? The absence of a desirable answer is complemented by the ambiguity that circumscribes the issue of the legal status of the children from Bangladesh in between 'being at risk' and 'being a threat'. The unsureness of their status in the in-between(ness) of risk/threat, inside/outside or as victim/perpetrator in the hinter­land of justice and protection within the juvenile justice system in India largely reflects the anxiety of the state towards non-citizens and children, with an ensuing anxiety about non-citizen-children, here the children from Bangladesh at the territorial border. The ambiguity also represents the indecision that borders have come to signify along with the contingent foundations of justice in contemporary times. The call for a judicial review of legal legislation is suggested as a first step in dealing with such ambiguity, according to NGO personnel. The mandatory regulation of following international standards of justice without a corresponding resonance at the operational sphere however remains an overarching issue. It brings forth a situation where the principles laid down in the international standards do not necessarily

196 ChandniBasu

get transmitted or even seem purposeful at the operational sphere What 'finality' is deemed necessary in relation to the presence of the children from Bangladesh within the purview of the legal mechanism in India however remains to be explored, as it currently gets lost in the unclear responses of the state officials.

The presence of the children from Bangladesh within the juvenill!l justice system in India brings forth issues of citizenship, nationalit)l criminality, legal minority and belonging that remain overarching in the operationalisation of justice and protection within the legal system. The significance of the juvenile justice system as a border zone and pla}'­ground of identity is momentous in this respect. The inter-relations ot deviance or transgression and childhood that constitute the founda­tional basis of the juvenile justice system promise to open a new dimen­sion in the discussion and relation to children-childhoods and borders The children moving across territorial boundaries from Bangladesh to India thus provide a glimpse into the conceptualisation of deviance and its relation to the constant drama of construction and reconstruction of childhood, meted out in the operations of justice and protection within the juvenile justice system in India. The existence of the children at tbe territorial border between states also creates an opportunity to relook at the problematic of childhood. It foregrounds the centrality of borders in the construction of childhood, which evidently affects relations with children in contemporary times.

Acknowledgements

I am sincerely thankful to the children, state officials and NGO personnel who voluntarily interacted with and informed me. I am thankful to the organisers and participants at the 2nd Conference on Bengal Related Studies for Students and Young Scholars, 2012, at the Martin Luther University of Halle-Wittenberg, Germany, and at the 'Borders in South Asia: territories, identities, mobilizations'- Young Researchers Workshops of AJEI, 15th edition, held at the Centre for Studies in Social Sciences, Kolkata, India, 2013, where 1 presented some initial thoughts on this. The feedback provided at the events helped me to organise the materials for the chapter. I also thank Smaran Dayal, Surma Das and the editors for reading and commenting on initial drafts of the chapter.

Notes

1. Comments from Dr. Manmohan Singh, Hon. Prime Minister of India (The Hindu, 20 July 2013).

Criminals in Our Land 197

2. State initiatives like the pending finalisation of the Land Border Agreement between Bangladesh and India offer examples of Initiatives towards the identification and segregation of people as dtizens and non-dtizens which remain a continuous process in the subcontinent. The Agreement is meant to redistribute patches of land (known as chhitmahal) which currently exist as oases among each other's dominion by negotiating a new line on the map as the border would supposedly lower 'illegal' Immigration to India. (For an understanding of the complexity of connectedness and belonglng(s) in the region, see Jason Cons, 2012.) India recognises this as a perpetual problem though Bangladesh denies it. For Bangladesh on the other hand the new border would provide trade benefits by regularislng Informal trade which accounts for three-fourths of the trade interaction with India. This Is being negotiated by Bangladesh in exchange for the handing over of Anup Chetia who was the leader of the banned militant group United Liberation Front of Asom from India, which had formed their camps in Bangladesh. Bangladesh took Initiatives to curb the activities of such groups under India's pressure (for a detailed discussion see Gupta, 2013).

3. I adhere to the legal definition of children as persons between 0 and 18 years of age, as specified in the Indian Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2000, following the guidelines of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child, 1989. I would, however, like to clarify that the problematic of this age-wise demarcation of children as legal minors and thereby of childhood as an age-bound space has been adequately addressed in the Sodology of Children and Childhood.

4. The visits were primarily carried out for my doctoral research project. It is a separate project which looks at the construction of childhood within the juve­nile justice system in India, with respect to reported cases of sexual offense Involving children as victims and perpetrators. The instances of the chil­dren from Bangladesh within the juvenile justice system in India, however, remain beyond the scope of my doctoral research project. References to children from Bangladesh within the purview of the legal mechanism came to the foreground during my interactions with state and non-state offidals who commented upon the gravity of the situation, espedally with regards to the International relations between Bangladesh and India. I also had some opportunity to interact with the children from Bangladesh during my visits. The scope of my Interactions with the children was limited due to strict insti­tutional protocols. The large number of children from Bangladesh at the state Institutional homes in different districts of West Bengal, India, encouraged me to look more closely at their presence within the Institutional horizons. They constitute the biggest group of children staying at any state institu­tional home all across West Bengal, at a given point of time. This Is, however, not to say that the presence of the children from Bangladesh within the juvenile justice system in India Is significant only In quantitative terms.

5. The juvenile justice boards are framed as functional courts. Reported cases of offence by children are brought In front of the boards by the police for legal Intervention. State-run institutional homes house apprehended chil­dren whose cases are still ongoing at the boards. In some cases children are also sent to these homes after the case proceedings are over. In this, the state Institutional homes function as Observation cum Spedal homes. Long

198 ChandniBasu

stays at the institutional homes characterise the presence of children from Bangladesh within the juvenile justice system in India as their chance of returning 'home' remain bleak.

6. Partha Chatterjee (1999) provides a comprehensive account of the rise of linguistic and religious nationalisms in the region over the major part of the twentieth century, which has significant bearings on the present sodo­political situation in the region.

7. See World Bank report 'India-Bangladesh Bilateral Trade and Potential Free Trade Agreement', Bangladesh Development Series, Paper no. 13, 2006. Also see the Aspen Institute India report 'India-Bangladesh Relations, towards increased partnership' (Date not available).

8. Reece Jones (2009, p. 292) argues that the exclusionary narrative followed by India has led to the refrarning of communalism into terrorism in the entire region.

9. Ranajit Samaddar (1999) provides a comprehensive description of everyday movements and interactions at the West Bengal border between Bangladesh and India. The patterns of movements and interactions among the people continue almost in negation to the restrictive state narrative on borders.

10. The perception of the 'terrorist outsider' remains a problematic formulation. The declaration of the Indian state against internal rebel groups like the United Uberation Front of Asom only brings forth the power and arbitrari­ness of the state towards any form of expression which challenges its poweL l would like to clarify that the examples provided here do not reflect my political affiliation.

11. This administrative segregation of justice and protection within the juvenile justice system in India points to the larger problematic of conceptualisations of childhood that determine the relationship between children-<:hildhood and the state.

12. For details see the spedal issue of Childhood: Fixity and Fluidity-Circulations, Children, and Childhood, August 2013.

References

Adams, B. (23 January 2011) 'India's Shoot-to-kill Policy on the Bangladesh Border: Security Offidals Openly Admit that Unarmed Civilians Trying to Enter India Illegally are Being Killed. Will the Government Act?' The Guardian, http:/ www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/libertycentral/2011/jan/23/india-bangla­desh-border-shoot-to-kill-policy, date accessed 26 July 2013.

Aspen Institute India (no date) 'India-Bangladesh Relations, Towards Increased Partnership', A Report, http:/ /www.aspenindia.org/pdf/lndia_BangladeslL Report. pdf, date accessed 29 July 2013.

Bandopadhyay, S. (2009) Decolonisation in South Asia: Meanings of Freedom in Post­independence West Bengal, 1947- 1952 (Oxon: Routledge).

Banerjee, S. (2001) 'Indo-Bangladesh Border: Radcliffe's Ghost', Economic and Political Weekly, 36 (18), 1505-1506.

Chatterjee, P. (1999) 'On Religious and Unguistic Nationalisms: The Second Partition of Bengal' in P. VanDer Veer and H. Lehmann (eds) Nation and Religion. Perspectives on Europe and Asia (Princeton: Princeton University Press).

Criminals in OUr Land 199

Conrad R (2012) 'My Future Doesn't Know ME': Time and Subjectivity in Poetry by Young People', Childhood, 19 (2), 204-219.

Cons, J. (2012) 'Histories of Belonging(s): Narrating Territory, Possession, and Dispossession at the India-Bangladesh Border', Modem Asian Studies, 46 (3), 527-558.

Government of India (2000) The Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2000, http://wcd.nlc.in/childprot/jjact2000.pdf, date accessed 24 July 2013.

Gupta, S . (26 March 2013) 'Consensus Emerging on Statute Change Bill', The Hindu, http://www.thehindu.com/news/national/consensus-emerging-on-stat­ute-change-bill/article, date accessed 20 July 2013.

jenks, C. (1996, 2005) Childhood (New York: Routledge). jones, R. (2009) 'Geopolitical Boundary Narratives, the Global War on Terror and

Border Fencing In India', Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers, 34, 290--304.

Morley, D. (2001) 'Place, Space and Identity In a Mediated World', European journal of Cultural Studies, 4 (4), 425-448.

Radu, C. (2010) 'Beyond Border -'Dwelling': Temporallzlng the Border Space through Events', Anthropological Theory, 10 (4), 409-433.

Rajaram, P. K. and Grundy-Warr C. (eds) (2007) Borderscapes: Hidden Geographies and Politics at Territory's Edge (Minnesota: University of Minnesota Press).

Rumford, C. (2006) 'Theorizing Borders', European journal of Social Theory, 9 (2), 155-169.

Samaddar, R. (1999) The Marginal Nation: Transborder Migration from Bangladesh to West Bengal (New Delhi: Sage Publications).

Stryker, R. and Yngvesson, B. (2013) 'Introduction-"Fixity and Fluidity­circulations, Children, and Childhood'", Childhood, 20 (3), 1-10.

Uehling, G. L. (2008) 'The Internatinal Smuggiing of Children: Coyotes, Snakehead and the Politics of Compassion', Anthropological Q;ulrterly, 81 (4), 833--871.

Van Schendel, W. (2005) The Bengal Borderland: Beyond State and Nation in South Asia (London: Anthem Press).

Walters, W. (2006) 'Border/Control', European journal of Social Theroy, 9 (2), 187-203.