What is CAA?
The citizenship amendment act 2019 is a bill passed by the Indian parliament that modifies (amends) the citizenship act 1955 the citizenship amendment act 2019 grants a swifter path to acquire Indian citizenship for persecuted minorities from Afghanistan Pakistan and Bangladesh who are Hindu, Sikh, Buddhist, Jain, Parsis or Christian and arrived in India before the end of 31st December 2014.
CAA 2019
The CAA bill proposed to help persecuted religious Minorities from some neighbouring countries of India to acquire citizenship of India easily the controversial bill was passed by the parliament of India soon after the BJP Bhartiya Janata Party-led NDA won the general elections of 2019.
The bill became an act despite vociferous protests in both houses of the parliament because of a majority of NDA in the parliament.
Why is CAA hated?
The bill clearly mentions helping only certain religious groups in particular persecuted minorities that are Hindus, Sikhs, Jains, Buddhists, Christians, and Parsis'. Exclusion of Muslims has led to Wide protests in not only India but at the international level, as well many countries deemed India as Islamophobic (anti-Muslim) the disregard for Jews and atheists is another cause for hate. Indian Constitution Part 3 Article 14 states and guarantees the fundamental right of equality before the law. It is claimed that the bill violates this article because it discriminates on the grounds of religion.
The Kesavananda Bharati judgment of the Supreme Court outlined the basic structure of the Indian constitution and ruled that the parliament cannot change it secularism means the separation of religion from political social cultural and economic aspects of life secularism is a part of basic structure of the constitution and because this act aids only few religion and excludes others it affects the secular nature of Indian state, therefore, is deemed to be ’unconstitutional’ Inclusion of certain groups only limits the scope of welfare (case of under inclusivity) the citizenship amendment act helps only illegal immigrants from 3 countries people from only 6 religions and only persecution as a criteria
Background and context
Politics is decisive in shaping behaviour of any political party to secure popular support every party tries to implement such policies which can secure another term for parties of the left and often right to escalate topics such as rich and poor conservatives bringing up topics that uphold the tradition and nationalist ideas in Hindi such politics is called ''Rashtra Vadi Rajnit'' BJP is one such party. since the independence of India Congress has shaped politics on citizenship but NDA has been adamant on its policies.
- The parliamentary election of 1998
BJP forms a coalition government led by NDA during its term in office certain acts were passed made and amendments were incorporated. '' this land belongs to Hindu people living on the banks of river Singh and not to invaders who destroyed our culture'' an ideology supported by BJP. back then in 1996 stringent actions against illegal immigrants were taken. The passport amendment bill was passed that increased the detention period of an illegal foreigner from 3 months to 5 years. It also defined an illegal migrant. scope of acquiring Indian citizenship for any illegal migrant through naturalization and registration was cut off and any person who helped an illegal foreigner settle in India that person and the illegal foreigner could be punished for 8 years. To sum up, the government wanted to curb illegal migration to India these matters were not deliberated upon in the parliament during the UPAs tenure.
- The election campaign of 2014
Illegal migrants have never been 'vote banks' of the BJP however congress gained a lot from them. In 2014, a general election campaign great show was made by BJP, which promised to get India rid of illegal foreigners (migrants) who were a burden or India's resources.
Illegal migrants have never been vote banks of BJP however Congress gained a lot from them in 2014 general election campaign great show was made by BJP who promised to get India rid of illegal foreigners (migrants) who were a burden on India’s resources. a popular immoral slogan was illegal foreigners would be thrown into the Indian Ocean (as translated into English).
Immigration crisis has been a problem in North-East and north India however several religious minorities migrate to India from different directions. minority communities who have migrated to India were promised citizenship of India. A cause for migration is religious persecution as well. In 2014 BJP consolidated power BJP has the challenge to fulfill its promise to remove illegal foreigners from India and secure citizenship for minority immigrants probably because of the helplessness they had no one to look to but India for help
Why minority communities?
Looking inwards, we find the answer in the question itself. Equality in its positive dimension advocates protective discrimination. Article 29 and 30 cultural and educational rights are incorporated in the constitution for the preservation and protection of minorities. Nehru- Liaquat Pact 1950 also advocates to protect of minorities and history is evident that minorities are subjected to operation political social economic and cultural therefore it would be wrong to consider this act fully and just on grounds that it supports minorities.
- The relief policy
To provide relief to these minority communities it was essential for BJP government to relax certain acts previously enforced it makes amendments in Passport Amendment Act 2000 and the Foreigners Act 2004 these acts extended the punishment of illegal foreigners.
- The provisions
The relief policy aimed to reduce the punishment as prescribed under Passport Act 2000 and Foreigners Act 2004 to zero i.e., that these acts would not apply to certain people who were persecuted religious minorities from Afghanistan, Pakistan, and Bangladesh who are Hindus, Sikhs, Buddhists, Jains, Parsis, and Christians and immigrated to India on or before December 31st,2014. It was able to get these 2 acts amended.
Clauses of punishment were no longer applicable to these people only citizenship was to be given a bill proposing the same was introduced in Lok Sabha in 2016. A recent trend in parliament is that before voting on a bill it is recommended to a committee so that the house functions in a more productive way. After long discussions and debate CAA 2016 which was recommended to the joint parliamentary committee JPC, it was approved by it along with certain recommendations. in 2019 in Rajya Sabha however the bill was not voted upon. several members of parliament were against the bill. As general elections were approaching it was found that if on the name of discussions the voting on the bill could be delayed, it would lapse as soon as Lok Sabha dissolves. So happened and the bill lapsed before being voted upon in Rajya Sabha (due to general elections the Lok Sabha being dissolved).
Questions on its constitutional morality:
The legal attack against the CAA is not that it benefits the undeserving, but that it does not benefit groups supposedly deserving similar benefits. The CAA's statement of objective says that transborder migration of population has been happening continuously from these countries owing to the fact that they have a state religion.
Bangladesh, Pakistan, and Afghanistan are not secular, (their state religion, Islam), which makes it obvious that minorities in these states have little to say and stay. Countries that guarantee a long charter of fundamental rights to minorities for their protection and preservation have not been able to secure their identity completely," observed BR Ambedkar. "Why did Nehru have to sign a pact only with Pakistan's Liaquat Ali and not the entire world, seeking assurance that minorities throughout its territory should have the rights confirmed? If there was no speciality in the relationship between India and these religious minorities, the answer to these events lies in a tumultuous past, India's partition that happened on religious lines.
''The people inhabiting this vast land profess different religions and speak different languages. Despite the diversity of religion and language, there runs through the fabric of the nation the golden thread of a basic innate unity. The closing years of the British rule were marked by communal riots and dissensions. There was also a feeling of a distrust and demand was made by a section of Muslims for a separate homeland. This ultimately resulted in the partition of the country. Special safeguards were guaranteed for the minorities and they were made a part of fundamental rights with a view to instil a spirit of confidence and security in the minorities.
Those provisions were like a kind of charter of rights for minorities so that none might have a feeling that any section of the population consisted of first-class citizens and the others second class"
The Supreme Court has explained the article that discriminates in Favor of minorities in the words given above. According to BR Ambedkar, the best way to solve the minority problem is a formal exchange of minorities. Nehru's official policy for Punjab in 1947 was a formal exchange of populations across borders. Several members in the Constituent Assembly made demands for special citizenship rights to Hindus and Sikhs wanting to come back to India from Pakistan. Pandit Thakur Das Bhargav moved the special amendment in the draft article on citizenship in favour of persons who returned to India from Pakistan due to civil disturbances or fear of such disturbances.
Reservation was first introduced for SCs and STs, later for OBCs, then women, and very recently for economically weaker sections. When first introduced, it was not questioned why only Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes were included. They formed a reasonable classification group, keeping in mind the government's policy, and through progressive inclusion, other classification groups were added later. But surely, another argument that justifies the actions of the government in India as an obvious choice and only choice for these minorities. India is the place of origin of several religions, including Hinduism, Sikhism, Jainism, and Buddhism. These religious minorities are subjected to religious persecution, and culturally, politically, economically, and socially speaking, India becomes an obvious choice to migrate. Hindus, Jains, and Sikhs, despite a large population, are not homogeneously distributed in the world. Buddhism, although widely spread in Asia, particularly Southeast Asia, persecuted Buddhists from Pakistan, Bangladesh, and Afghanistan would prefer India over other countries because of the nature of the Indian state. Other minorities like Parsis and Christians are also included because there have been considerable but few cases of religious persecution of these minorities. My personal opinion is also that this policy is neither arbitrary nor illegitimate."
Challenges
The passage of the Citizenship (Amendment) Bill (CAB) in India has been a subject of controversy and debate. In 2014, the government failed to pass the bill, which necessitated updated provisions. The bill faced international condemnation and negatively impacted India's image, with accusations of Islamophobia and concerns about cross-border terrorism and religious intolerance. The Assam protests against illegal migration and the fear of cultural erosion led to widespread protests in the Northeast and Shaheen Bagh, Delhi.
In 2019, the BJP received popular support, and the CAB was passed as CAB 2019 with certain changes. The definition of illegal migrants remained unchanged, but people belonging to six religions from three countries who entered India before the end of 2014 were excluded. A new clause was introduced, granting citizenship to migrants based on their date of entry. The period of naturalization was reduced from 12 to 6 years. However, the CAB 2019 does not apply to areas under the 6th schedule and regions requiring an Inner Line Permit (ILP). These changes aimed to simplify the citizenship process and address concerns surrounding migrants' children born during their stay in India.
Overall, the passage of the CAB has sparked intense discussions about citizenship, migration, cultural identity, and the impact on international relations. It remains a contentious issue with varying perspectives and implications for different regions and communities within India.
The 6th schedule of the Indian constitution provides for the administration of tribal areas to safeguard the rights of tribal population. Mizoram and Meghalaya are almost entirely governed on the basis of the 6th schedule. 70% of Tripura and almost 90% of the area of Assam falls under the 6th schedule. Inner Line Permit (ILP) is a government-issued travel document to allow inward travel of an Indian citizen into a protected area for a limited period of time. It is also implemented to secure tribal regions. It is required in Arunachal Pradesh, Mizoram, and Nagaland. Soon after the CAB was passed, the ILP system was implemented in Manipur. Areas not covered under the 6th schedule and ILP system were 70% of Assam and 30% of Tripura. These areas have been protesting against the CAB 2019. That's how the resentment of most northeastern states was resolved. Another challenge is that it is challenged in the Supreme Court as a violation of Article 14 (equality before the law), against secularism, and its under-inclusive nature.
Will the CAB qualify for judicial scrutiny?
In my personal opinion, the CAB will pass judicial scrutiny, but with certain changes. The reasons are that judicial presumption is that the government knows its function. Therefore, it will be replaced only if the opposition proves it unconstitutional, which is unlikely to happen. The judiciary will check if the people in the act form a reasonable classification group, if the criteria of classification are intelligible, and if the purpose and differential are connected. Immigrants who fled and became stateless on grounds of religious persecution form a reasonable classification group. Such people can only be minorities, and the purpose is to grant citizenship to these minorities. Is the classification intelligible and linked with purpose? does the act qualify secularism in its positive aspect and advocate the preservation of minorities, the basis of the 6th schedule? Does the act have a secular nature as well? Questions on under-inclusivity can be asked, why only 6 religions? The reason is that Islam is the state religion of the 3 countries, making persecution of minorities obvious. The reason for not including Islam is obvious because every Islamic community enjoys certain rights in Islamic nations. But Jews and atheists? so on grounds of progressive inclusion, the act can pass. Also, because Jews are hardly populated in Southeast Asia, considering cultural contact, Afghanistan is closest to Jews and only a single Jew resides there. The obvious choice for any Jew is to reside in Israel, which is sacred to Jews, a Jewish nation. Even if the Supreme Court rules that Jews and atheists should be included, the government should have no inconvenience in admitting them due to very few cases. The question of including religious persecution can be answered on similar grounds of progressive inclusion. The number of cases of migration due to religious persecution is the major of all causes of migration. The reason for choosing 3 countries only is that they are the neighbours of India with a state religion, and progressive inclusion can be the answer.
NRC and NPR:
Census of India is an official survey conducted by the Government of India every 10 years to understand development patterns in every region of the country and plan policies accordingly. Every sovereign state has the right to know about its population, after all, population is an element of the state. To know this, NPR (National Population Register) was devised. Population is different from citizens.
Population; it may have citizens but also the usual residents of a country. Therefore, there is a distinction between Census of India and NPR. NPR is a database under the MHA (Ministry of Home Affairs) of regular residents of India. The apex authority is Registrar General of India. Also, the Census of India NPR requires biometric details. A local registrar verifies the documents and collects details.
Question to think about - Why, in identifying usual residents, biometric details are required, although not deemed necessary?
A local registrar is an authority at the village level; therefore, it may not be very difficult for him to identify any resident as an illegal migrant or non-citizen of India. Even land records, phone number, if not the voter ID, the person can tell his constituency so that his voter ID or name in the electoral roll can be obtained. The person is eligible to be a citizen of India.
The legality of NPR cannot be questioned; the need for it is to prepare a credible register of every family and individual living in the country. Apart from strengthening security and improving the targeting of beneficiaries under central government schemes, the benefits of NPR are wide if intentions are not wrong. NRC (National Register of Citizens) is a database of citizens of India. Citizens include residents and non-residents. To obtain such a database, another survey like Census of India needs to be conducted. In NPR, details are sufficient to obtain NRC. A local registrar at the grassroots level can distinguish between a citizen and illegal migrant based on documents. Official NPR is conducted simultaneously when the census is conducted. During the census house listing phase, local registrars collect necessary information, documents, etc., which are used for NPR. NRC requires every effort, traveller, usual resident, or any other document that validates citizenship to be a citizen of India. So, NPR is prepared during the Census of India house listing phase. A suspected non-resident has several occasions to prove his/her legal citizenship. The need for NRC is the identification of citizens of India and of illegal migrants. Regular updating of birth of new citizens, grant of citizenship, deaths, and termination or giving up of citizenship can prove helpful for better government policies, expulsion of illegal immigrants engaged in unlawful activities, and their deportation as well.
Agitation against NRC:
NRC at a pan-India level will identify citizens and foreigners residing in India. If a foreigner is legally a part of the population of India, the government has no problem. However, NRC will also identify illegal migrants. Since illegal migrants are clearly related to CAA, NRC has come under criticism. Assam is the only state where NRC has been conducted. The apex authority responsible for conducting it made several concerted efforts to make it successful, but administrative difficulties and corruption at the ground level worsened the result. Therefore, errors in conclusion, declared foreigners, came under NRC. Doubtful voters identified by the Election Commission without investigation came under NRC, and people with pending cases in foreign tribunals were included in NRC. Even dissidents of some of the mentioned were recorded in the register.
Appreciable measures:
The government came up with refined clauses in CAB 2019 that solve the problem of citizenship of children beneficiaries covered in the bill. Although, after huge demonstrations and protests, the CAA was finally not applicable to northeastern states. Period of democracy was re-installed and a message was made clear that tribal identities will always be protected. Nationwide NPR NRC is also a must because every sovereign nation-state must know about the population living in its territory. It serves the purpose of not only CAA but also in the deportation of illegal immigrants and better reach of government-sponsored schemes. The scope of better future policies also becomes wider.
Authorities that conducted NRC in Assam used technology in an efficient way. Productive utilization was done with dedicated centres made for the purpose with learned and trained staff. Organizing such a controversial programme in a sensitive region for the first time ever in the country was a big task. It was done and implemented with utmost dedication. Awareness about NRC was also made.
Also, problems in conducting NRC and implementing CAA. Some problems faced by the government, like challenges in Supreme Court, waiver opposition, unbenefited groups, and international criticism, have been discussed earlier. Another problem is the cost parameter.
Nationwide NRC is too expensive to conduct, and implementing CAA is also a big task. Addressing individual queries and cases to settle disputes on citizenship will be a burden on concerned authorities at every level, from registrar's offices to courts and tribunals. And any unsettled case can go to higher authorities or courts. Spirit of cooperative federalism is essential for accurate results. Without state governments, the results of NPR would be unfruitful. Tribal areas need a softer approach.
Opposition cries that NRC in Assam is done on similar lines in the whole of India, and the budget will dry out. Certainly not true. Assam, being a sensitive area, required more funds for an NRC. However, there is no denying that NRC is not an inexpensive process. CAA will cause a burden on the judiciary because of trials and proceedings. An identified illegal immigrant will be sheltered in detention camps. Camps currently operating are insufficient to shelter the expected illegal immigrants. Constructing them requires money and time. Their needs would be catered to by the government with money collected from taxpayers. Illegal migrants who used to earn for themselves would now get everything in hand from government. Burden on government and economy will increase. Process of deportation is overcomplicated as well. India's neighbouring countries will not accept these illegal migrants easily. Long court proceedings done on the Indian government's part to prove these people are citizens of a country other than India is a tough job. Unsolved cases will most probably be resolved by granting citizenship to the Indian government. Reasons for concern on the individual's part are rules of NRC are not explicitly available. The government reiterates to conduct an NRC, but its rules and information regarding documents are unclear. Women are also a cause of concern because the society is mostly patrilocal. Changing the name is a common practice after marriage. Most underdeveloped areas are characterized by low-quality of education and women are also deprived of it. Obtaining biometric details will therefore be challenging. Deprived sections of the society orphans, beggars differently able people will have a lack of documents, and inaccessibility issues.
Rules of CAA are yet to be framed, the reason being workload due to the pandemic. However, it cannot be denied that rules on CAA should be without loopholes and difficulty in their construct is a cause for delay as well. Despite problems, an NRC and CAA are deemed necessary and with mutual co-operation and special care on government’s part can reduce and resolve these problems. The illegal Migrants may also face problems during deportation. Only mutual cooperation can resolve.
CAA aims to grant citizenship of India with ease to people who have migrated to India illegally because of being victims of religious persecution, belonging originally to either Pakistan, Bangladesh, and Afghanistan, and belonging to either of the 6 religions - Hinduism, Sikhism, Buddhism, Jainism, Zoroastrianism, and Christianity and entered India before 1st January 2015. Some arguments against it say that it is against equality before the law, secularism, and under-inclusive, but it does form a reasonable classification group, and the differentia or the classification is very much related to its purpose, that is religious minorities and citizenship respectively.
Secularism in its true sense advocates the preservation of minorities, progressive inclusion can answer under inclusivity. These 3 countries are chosen owing to their state religion that feels operation to minorities. India is the obvious choice for any persecuted who is a Jain, Buddhist, Sikh, or Hindu because these religions originated in India. Parsi community is respected in India and their cultural intermingling is inseparable, including Christians is an example of being inclusive. However, persecution from Tibet could also be included. Sri Lankans also migrate to South India, therefore they should also be considered. This would forestall any thought of paying less heed to smaller countries in Sout-East Asia. It would also display India's importance in South-East Asian affairs and her democratic spirit. Every immoral statement that is used as a vote-gaining tool deserves strict action against it. Peaceful protests and demonstrations following the law of the land are the only methods to show a public reaction. Every violent act against the law of the land is no less than any draconian legislation. A challenge was that CAA posed a threat to tribal identities. In any case, the government has done some special arrangements by excluding areas under the 6th schedule and areas requiring inner-line permits. Only 70% of Assam and 30% of Tripura are yet to be benefited. Identifying illegal immigrants is the base of CAA, and a database of all the population and citizens could be the only resolve. A nationwide register of the population and citizens would be cost-effective in the long run. It would help in targeting policies, their formulation and implementation, and help government departments like police, intelligence agencies, and EC ensure clean fair elections. Some foresighted benefits include boosting digitalization, promoting bank culture, revolutionizing the system using Aadhaar cards, EC cost parameter needs to be taken care of. Use of existing data should be made. Aadhaar card and bank data could be integrated to find at least some of the true citizens, and they are the group not in the data that could be addressed to reduce overload. Since its success is dependent on a grassroots level and local registrars could easily detect any illegal resident under their authority. Throughout the process, the active support of NGOs is required to assist the illegal immigrants to be deported. Ministerial-level talks with countries neighbouring India before any action could invite more cooperation. Assistance again becomes necessary in detention centres. Small-scale worker works like handlooms, weaving, etc., could be done to counter the expenditure and would help them develop a skill as well. All the controversy could be easily avoided by simply mentioning minorities in the proposed bill and directly mentioning the proposed beneficiaries in the rule section. Although the provisions would have been the same, still it would have been a more ethical way. Instead of giving provoking statements, the government should increase the level of transparency so that the actual intentions become clear.
. . .
BIBLIOGRAPHY: