What is CAA and related controversies?

On March 11, 2024, the Central Government issued a notification and implemented the Citizenship (Amendment) Act (CAA) passed in 2019. When this law was made in 2019, there were many controversies over it, and violent demonstrations also took place in many places. Among these demonstrations, the two-month-long protest by women in the Shaheen Bagh, Delhi widely grabbed media attention. Therefore, while implementing this law, the government is also alert to maintain law and order and people are also apprehensive about any violent situation. What is there in this law and why are people opposing it?

What is CAA i.e. Citizenship (Amendment) Act 2019?

Part 2 of the Constitution makes provisions regarding citizenship of India. Article 11 gives the power to Parliament to make laws in this regard. Using this power, Parliament enacted the Indian Citizenship Act in 1955. The Constitution of India and this Act create four grounds for citizenship– (1) birth, (2) descent, (3) registration, and (4) residence. On fulfilment of these conditions, Indian citizenship can be acquired by following a certain procedure. There were five amendments in this Act before 2019 but the grounds of citizenship were not changed.

But by the Sixth Amendment in 2019, another new basis has been added to these. This new basis is that any citizen from three neighbouring countries- Afghanistan, Pakistan and Bangladesh can get Indian citizenship if

1. He/she belongs to six minority religious communities- Hindu, Buddhist, Jain, Sikh, Christian and Parsi; their minority status is given by their own countries;

2. He/she came to India before December 31, 2014, and lived in India at least for six years (Earlier, a foreign person was required to reside in India for at least 11 years before applying for citizenship. Now this time has been reduced to six years for these six communities.)  

3. He/she is facing religious persecution in own country.

Such people can ask for citizenship here and can get Indian citizenship after completing the necessary process.

Why people opposing CAA and what are the government’s contensions?

The main grounds of opposition are:

1. Religious basis

Muslims are not among the six communities who can get Indian Citizenship under this law. Therefore, some people consider it to be discriminatory on religious grounds. By linking this with NRC (National Register of Citizenship) some people are considering it as an excuse to reduce the population of Muslims in India.

Government’s Contentions

1. No one’s rights or citizenship have been taken away by this law. All the already existing criteria of citizenship will still be valid. All the rights of citizens, including Muslims, will remain valid as before.

2. The three neighbouring countries– Afghanistan, Pakistan and Bangladesh– where new provisions have been made for minority communities, are avowedly Muslim nations. These six religious communities– Hindu, Buddhist, Jain, Sikh, Christian and Parsi – have been given minority status by these countries themselves. So, the basis is minority status and not religious status.

3. Muslims are in majority in these declared Muslim nations. Therefore they cannot be persecuted on religious grounds. Their harassment may be due to political or other reasons. In such a situation, they can seek asylum by following the procedure available for refugees. For example, people of Tibet have taken refuge in India due to political persecution. There has also been no change in the criteria for granting asylum. (The difference between refugee and citizenship is that refugees are those people who have to leave their country under some special circumstances. They hope that someday the situation will improve and they will return to their country. Citizenship means to stay in their country forever.)

4. Since it is not possible for any country to have unlimited immigrants. Therefore, illegal immigrants, including both Hindus and Muslims, will be identified and sent back to their country as per the legal procedure. For this purpose, National Citizenship Register (NRC) is being created. This is being done to prevent additional pressure on the country’s security and its resources by stopping illegal immigration. This should not be seen as oppression of any particular community.

5. Any community that comes to a country illegally is a criminal for that country. It is the prerogative of that country how to treat them. After coming illegally, a person cannot claim that he should be allowed to stay there forever and be given all the rights that citizens get. Even before 2019, this was the prerogative of the government. If the Central Government wants, it can stop any person from giving citizenship of its country or coming to its country. His decision cannot be challenged. This is the policy in other countries of the world also. For example, America had banned the then Gujarat Chief Minister Narendra Modi from traveling to America. Mr Modi could not challenge this because it is the prerogative of the government of a country.

6. The six communities that have been considered entitled to citizenship are originally the original inhabitants of the land of undivided/Greater India. The origin place of four of these religions is the land of India. They are oppressed because they are a religious minority. There is no other country in the world that can support them. They have emotional connections with the people of India. Therefore, from a humanitarian point of view they deserve support and not punishment.

2. Threat to indigenous culture

This basis of opposition is becoming more vocal in the North-Eastern states. There are already a lot of problems there due to illegal immigrants from Bangladesh. Due to this, there is a fear that the local communities will become a minority in their own land, there will be more pressure on their opportunity of employment and resources. Their culture will be in danger.

Hindus who have been left out of the NRC list in the north-eastern states of Assam, Meghalaya, Manipur, Mizoram, Tripura, Nagaland and Arunachal Pradesh- will acquire citizenship and settle in these areas, which will spoil their local tribal character.

Government’s Contentions

1. It is true that a large number of illegal Bangladeshi immigrants, including both Hindus and Muslims, have mixed with the local people in the border areas of North-East India. Because of them, local people have started facing employment and land problems. Besides, this situation is also dangerous for the security of the country. National Citizenship Register (NCR) is being made to identify these people and send them back.

2. Certain special areas of Tripura, Arunachal and some other states have been declared reserved areas by the Constitution itself where people from other parts of the country can neither buy land nor settle permanently. This rule will also apply to “new citizens”. Therefore, there is no danger of their population ratio worsening.

3 Those who have actually come to India illegally to escape religious persecution, if they are given a legal path on the basis of legal criteria, they will be able to live freely as normal citizens and can also visit other parts of the country. The government will have all the information related to them. The remaining illegal immigrants will be deported. Therefore, this law will not increase the pressure of immigrants on these areas but will reduce it.

3. Pressure on the country’s resources

India has still not been able to provide the basic amenities of life to all its citizens. These ‘new citizens’ will put more pressure on its resources. India should learn from the Israel-Palestine problem and not put unnecessary pressure on its resources.

Government’s Contentions

1. According to current figures, around 30,000 people will get Indian citizenship as per this law. These people definitely need employment, land to live and educational institutions for their children. This will increase pressure on resources. But considering the current population of India, this number is not very high.

2. There are a large number of illegal immigrants in the country right now. Many have come to the interior parts of the country after making false necessary documents. Their number is much greater than these ‘new citizens’. They are also a threat to the security of the country because the government does not have any information about them. If they are identified and thrown out of the country, then unnecessary pressure on the country’s resources will be reduced and it will also be good for national security.

4. Discrimination against other Hindus

One reason for protest is that Hindus are discriminated against on religious grounds in other countries too. Most of our neighboring countries are politically and economically unstable. For example Sri Lanka. There the minority Tamil people are oppressed by the majority Sinhalese people. They should also get the protection of this law.

Government’s Contentions

1. Out of these three countries, two countries, Pakistan and Bangladesh, have been parts of undivided India. Afghanistan may not have been a part of undivided India but it has been a part of Greater India (this area has been the region of Ashoka’s Empire and the Harappan Civilization and the early Vedic Civilization. The border of undivided India met with it). These people still have an emotional connection with India. Therefore, the minorities in these three countries were basically Indians who remained there after the partition of the country.

2. Apart from these three, other neighbouring countries have never been a part of India, not even Sri Lanka. Therefore, it is logical to adopt a different policy towards them. For example, when Tamils were suffering from atrocities by the majority in Sri Lanka, started taking refuge in the coastal region of Tamil Nadu. The Indian government had to intervene in Sri Lanka due to their increasing numbers and sympathy for them among the Indian Tamil people. This became possible only when the government there accepted India’s cooperation because India could not interfere in the internal affairs of any other sovereign country.

3. In other countries which share border with India, there is not as much discrimination against minorities on religious grounds as in these three countries. Illegal immigrants coming to India are mostly from these three countries.

4. Minorities or majorities of other countries can take Indian citizenship under the current laws if they wish. No changes have been made in them.

5. It discriminates against immigrants based on their religion and country of origin

Due to this discrimination, some people consider it a violation of the fundamental right to equality given in Article 14 of the Constitution. On this basis, about 65 petitions were filed in the Supreme Court against this law.

Government’s Contentions

It is not so because:

1. Article 14 of the Constitution allows reasonable classification and this is a reasonable classification.

2. It does not infringe on the rights of anyone living in the country but only makes a difference in the policy towards people who come into the country illegally. But this difference is declared on the basis of their being minority and majority in their own country and not on the basis of religion.

3. The presented law does not talk about any kind of discrimination against any person living in India, but discriminates in the basis of obtaining citizenship and its process. Therefore it applies to those who are not yet citizens of India.

6. This will increase the number of illegal immigrants in India

All the three given countries are facing political and economic crisis. It is possible that people from there may want to take Indian citizenship on the false pretext of religious persecution, indeed he desire so for a better life.

Government’s Contentions

Yes, there could be a possibility because there is political unrest, religious persecution and economic distress in these three countries. Still, no one wants to leave their native land voluntarily. But in the situation of helplessness, they will definitely have hope from India.

7. BJP has brought this law for political gains and to make its permanent voters

Government’s Contentions

Yes, it is possible that the “new citizens” may become permanent voters of the BJP but considering their small numbers (30,000), this will not be very transformative.

Analysis

It is true that not all foreign infiltrators who come illegally are terrorists or come with the intention of causing harm to the country. They may have come to another country illegally in search of a better life due to economic distress or troubled conditions in their home country. But every country has limited resources with which it has to meet the needs of its countrymen. Therefore, everyone coming from outside is not allowed to come and stay in the country.

On the other hand, it is also true that Hindus living in any part of the world are basically Indians because there is no tradition among Hindus of going to any other country and converting the natives there and making them Hindus. On the contrary, in India (or many other countries too), the people of Muslim or Christian community living there are basically from this land.

Here the word Hindu includes all those religions which originated in India, like Buddhism, Jainism, Sikhism. They do not have any other country like Muslims or Christians. What if there is injustice done to them? Who will he look to for support? When Tamils ​​suffered from the atrocities of Sinhalese majority in Sri Lanka, they took refuge in Tamil Nadu, India and India had to intervene in Sri Lanka.

The minority communities of Pakistan, Bangladesh and Afghanistan which are made eligible for Indian citizenship under CAA includes Parsi and Christian, apart from Hindus, Buddhists, Jains and Sikhs. They are declared as minority by their country.

All of them are actually natives of Greater India (Undivided India). The mistake of their ancestors was that when India was divided, instead of going to the land of divided India, they stayed on their original land, just like the ancestors of the present Muslims living in India did not leave their land. People of both the communities living on their native land probably believed that these riots, tragedies and oppression were temporary and after independence and partition of the country there would be no more disputes and everything would be fine.

It was not that all the people living in these places were haters of India. Abdul Ghaffar Khan, known as Frontier Gandhi, is the most tragic example of this. He fought for the independence of India but when independence was achieved, he spent almost his entire life in the jail of Pakistan for the ‘crime’ of supporting India.

But practically it is not possible for India to make all the religiously oppressed people of the world its citizens. If the limit of religion or country is removed then it means that whoever wants to take Indian citizenship will be given. But this may not be possible for any country.  Therefore, the country will have to create some criteria for those applying for his citizenship. CAA trying to do so.