Discuss the significance of enumerating non-citizens separately in the Census. What challenges does this pose for data integrity and the rights of displaced persons?

In October 2026, Mizoram decided to record refugees on a list kept separate from citizens during Census 2027. It had 38,213 registered refugees at the time, from Myanmar, Bangladesh and Manipur [1]. The decision comes ahead of Population Enumeration in February 2027 [2]. A separate count improves accuracy, but only safeguards can stop it from becoming a tool for exclusion.

Significance of separate enumeration

• Accurate resident base: Census figures guide representation and how resources are shared. Counting a temporary population separately keeps it from inflating the citizen count [1].
• Welfare planning: Displaced families become visible when the State plans food, health care and schooling.
• Fiscal federalism: Verified numbers back Mizoram's claim on central funds for hosting its Zo kin [1].
• Border management: A documented count helps the Centre's security approach, which includes scrapping the Free Movement Regime in 2024 [3].

Challenges for data integrity

• Under-coverage: Civil society estimates more than 60,000 refugees, far above the registered 38,213 [1]. Refugees who fear being sent back avoid enumerators. An NHRC survey records past forced returns of Chin refugees and the end of temporary ID cards [4].
• Misclassification: The 6,959 Kuki-Zomi people from Manipur are Indian citizens displaced within the country, not refugees [1]. Placing them on a non-citizen list may leave them out of both Manipur's and Mizoram's totals.
• Digital design: Census 2027 is India's first digital census, with self-enumeration [2]. This design has not been tested with mobile, undocumented populations.

Challenges for rights of displaced persons

• Legal vacuum: India has no refugee law and has not signed the 1951 Refugee Convention. A named list linked to biometrics (98.9% of Chin refugees enrolled [1]) could make deportation easier.
• Privacy: Sharing Aadhaar is voluntary [1], in line with Puttaswamy (2017). However, the State's biometric register falls outside the confidentiality protection of the Census Act, 1948.
• Stigma: A formal non-citizen label can make exclusion permanent.

Way forward

• Publish aggregate figures only, and state publicly that Census Act confidentiality applies to the refugee list.
• Count Manipur IDPs as citizens with a "displaced" tag.
• Set MHA rules on who may use biometric data and for what purpose.

Counted with these safeguards, a separate list makes the data more accurate without exposing displaced people to harm. This supports the goal under SDG 17.18 of data broken down by migratory status, and upholds the Article 21 guarantee of life and dignity to every person, citizen or not.