Assam's eviction drive continues to spark political controversy, with the BJP alleging a "Congress hangover" and accusing the opposition party of appeasing illegal immigrants for votes. These recent developments underscore the complex interplay of land rights, demographic anxieties, and political maneuvering in the region.

The BJP government in Assam, led by Chief Minister Himanta Biswa Sarma, has been carrying out eviction drives targeting alleged encroachers on forestlands, wetlands, and government land. These drives have intensified since Sarma assumed office in May 2021. The government defends these actions as necessary to protect the rights and identity of indigenous communities, claiming that large swathes of land have been illegally occupied, primarily by Bengali-speaking Muslims. According to Sarma, over 160 sq km of encroached land has been cleared since May 2021. He also stated that individuals evicted from illegally occupied lands will have their names removed from the voter list in those areas.

However, these eviction drives have triggered significant opposition and criticism. Many see them as a targeted campaign against Bengali-speaking Muslims, often pejoratively labeled as "Bangladeshis", "Miyas," or "illegal infiltrators". Critics argue that the evictions disproportionately affect this community, violating Supreme Court guidelines that mandate rehabilitation of the displaced. The Jamiat Ulama-i-Hind (JUH), a prominent Muslim organization, has strongly condemned the eviction drives, claiming that they have rendered over 50,000 families homeless. The JUH has called for Sarma's removal and the initiation of criminal proceedings against him for alleged hate speech.

In response to the criticism, Chief Minister Sarma has lashed out at the JUH and its supporters, dismissing their demands and asserting that the evictions will continue. He has also accused the Congress party of being the "B team" of the Jamiat, alleging that they are siding with "unknown people," in an apparent reference to Bengali-speaking Muslims. Sarma has further claimed that some individuals are trying to project lawful evictions as a "humanitarian crisis" to weaken Assam's fight against infiltrators and illegal encroachers.

Adding another layer to the controversy, Assam Minister Pijush Hazarika has criticized Syeda Hameed, a former member of the Planning Commission during the UPA regime, for allegedly downplaying the issue of Bangladeshi immigrants. Hazarika implied that Congress is using Hameed as a strategist and reminded the party that infiltrators will have to leave Assam, regardless of who supports them.

The political dynamics of the eviction drive are further complicated by the upcoming Assembly elections in Assam, slated for early 2026. Opposition parties accuse the BJP of using the eviction drive to polarize voters and create a "narrative" ahead of the polls. They argue that the BJP is deliberately targeting Bengali-speaking Muslims to consolidate its Hindu support base. Some experts suggest that the BJP is trying to create a Hindu-Muslim narrative to counter a perceived "pro-Gaurav wave" in Upper Assam districts.

Amid the ongoing evictions, the Assam government has also decided to restrict Aadhaar enrollment for adults from October 1, with the aim of preventing "illegal migrants" from using the cards to obtain Indian citizenship. This decision has raised concerns about potential disenfranchisement and further marginalization of vulnerable communities.

Meanwhile, 74 families from Doyang and Nambor reserve forests have moved the Supreme Court challenging a Gauhati High Court order asking them to vacate encroached forest land. The Supreme Court has issued notice to the state government and asked to maintain the status quo.

The Assam eviction row highlights the state's long-standing challenges related to illegal immigration, land rights, and ethnic tensions. The BJP's strong stance on evictions resonates with its core supporters who prioritize the protection of indigenous communities and resources. However, the opposition and civil rights groups view the evictions as discriminatory and politically motivated, raising concerns about human rights and social justice. As the political battle over the evictions intensifies, the future of thousands of residents remains uncertain.