Abstract
The Citizenship Amendment Act of 2019 has emerged as a pivotal legislative development in India’s contemporary socio-political landscape. This research paper undertakes a comprehensive examination of the multifaceted aspects surrounding this contentious law. The Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA) was enacted to amend India’s citizenship provisions and has ignited intense debates and protests since its inception. This paper embarks on a journey through its legal intricacies, practical challenges in implementation, and the plethora of perspectives it has evoked within a diverse and multicultural society.
The core of the CAA centres on its religion-based approach to granting citizenship, a decision that has stirred substantial controversy. It seeks to provide refuge to religious minorities facing persecution in neighbouring countries, introducing a selective mechanism based on religion and the date of entry into India. This approach has led to constitutional challenges, with critics arguing that it violates India’s foundational principles of secularism and equality under Article 14.
Beyond the legal framework, this research paper delves into the societal repercussions of the CAA. It sheds light on the widespread protests and social unrest that erupted across the nation, resulting in loss of lives and arrests of activists. These events underscore the deep divisions within Indian society and raise essential questions about the nation’s identity as a secular democracy.
Keywords:
Citizenship, CAA, Equality, Secularism, Constitution, Protests, Religion, Minorities.
Introduction:
The Citizenship Amendment Act of 2019, one of the important amendments made in the legislative history of India, stimulated debates and discussions since its enactment. The act aimed to amend the provisions related to the Indian citizenship, received both praise and criticism. It elevated the discussion about its legality and implementation. In India, a home to multiple religious and cultural communities, questions of citizenship become imperative and comprehensively examining the intricacies of this legislative act gets more important. The Citizenship Amendment Act. 2019 (hereafter ‘CAA’) amends the Citizenship Act, 1955 which would lead certain sections of immigrants to the pathway of Indian citizenship.
The CAA, shall make illegal migrants eligible for citizenship if they belong to the communities of Hindu, Sikh, Buddhist, Jain, Parsi, or Christian and have migrated from Afghanistan, Bangladesh or Pakistan.
It is applicable to migrants who entered India on or before 31st December, 2014. This act aims to provide refuge to religious minorities from neighboring countries and the minorities who have faced discrimination in predominantly Muslim countries such as Pakistan, Bangladesh, and Afghanistan.
This Act prohibits any person being treated as an illegal immigrant if:
- The person belongs to any of the communities mentioned above, i.e., Sikh, Buddhist, Jain, Parsi or Christian
- The person has migrated from Afghanistan, Bangladesh, or Pakistan
- The person shall have entered India on or before 31st December, 2014.
- The person who has been exempted by the Central Government by the Passport (Entry into India) Act, 1920 or from the application of the provisions of the Foreigners Act, 1946.[1]
The Act faced a lot of drawbacks for excluding the Muslim community, and was called ‘Anti-Muslim.’ The critics argued that it violates the fundamental rights of the citizens and questioned its legality.
This research paper strives to explore the Citizenship Amendment Act, 2019, its legal aspects, implementation, perspectives and challenges it shall face in this multicultural society. The main aim is to analyze the implications of the act on different sections of society, including religious minorities and refugees. It further describes the after effects of the amendment act, and the challenges to implement the act in the country.
Research Methodology
This paper is of descriptive nature and the research is based on secondary sources for the analytics of the Citizenship Amendment Act. 2019. Secondary sources of information like journals, articles, and websites are used for the research.
Review of Literature
The act mainly aims to provide help to the people being prosecuted from India’s neighboring countries to become citizens of India. The Act applies to those who were forced or compelled to seek shelter in India due to prosecution on the grounds of religion. It strives to protect such people from proceedings of illegal migration. The Act says that on acquiring citizenship:
- Such persons shall be deemed to be citizens of India from the date of their entry into India, and
- All legal proceedings against them in respect of their illegal migration or citizenship will be closed.[2]
The Act states that the provisions on citizenship for illegal migrants, will not apply to the tribal areas of Assam, Meghalaya, Mizoram, and Tripura, as included in the Sixth Schedule of the Constitution. It will also not apply to the areas under the Inner Line Permit under the Bengal Eastern Frontier Regulation, 1873.
Overview of Citizenship in India
The Citizenship Act, 1955 states the various ways of acquiring citizenship in India. It specifies the grounds on which citizenship can be terminated and renunciate. The Act stated these four ways, namely birth, descent, registration, naturalization, and incorporation of territory.
- Birth: as the name suggests, any person born in India shall automatically acquire the citizenship of the country.
- Descent: any person born to Indian parents outside the nation’s territory, shall be granted citizenship.
- Naturalization/ Registration: Under this category, citizenship shall be granted by the Ministry of Home Affairs.
- By acquisition/ incorporation of territory: any state or territory that becomes a part of India shall be declared as a part of the Union of India through an official gazette published by the Central government.
The Act clarifies by providing specified circumstances for acquiring citizenship that no dual citizenship can be granted. The Act also lays down certain provisions pertaining to overseas citizens regarding the registration of the overseas citizen card, right of overseas citizens and cancellation of the overseas citizen card.
Article 5-11 of the Indian Constitution state the provisions governing citizenship in India. Article 5 provides for citizenship at the time of commencement of the Indian Constitution, and Article 11 gives the power to the Indian Parliament to legally regulate the citizenship rights, which empowered the enactment of the Indian Citizenship Act, 1955 as well its amendment made over the years in 1986, 1992, 2003, 2005, 2015, and 2019 respectively.
Features of Citizenship (Amendment) Act, 2019
- Indian Citizenship Act, 1955 prohibited illegal migrants from getting citizenship of the country. The core idea behind the enactment of this Act was to amend the previous Act and grant citizenship to those illegal migrants who were prosecuted in the neighboring countries on the basis of their religion. The legislation states that ‘those who fled due to religious prosecution or had a fear of being prosecuted’ from the neighboring states of Afghanistan, Pakistan and Bangladesh shall be included in this bill.
- The amendment act included the mention of a particular cut off date for citizenship which was 31st December, 2014, i.e., one could apply for the citizenship only if they entered India before or on the cutoff date.
- It also relaxed the naturalization duration from 11 years to 5 years for people belonging to the mentioned minorities religious groups.
- Amendments regarding OCI (Overseas Citizen of India) holders were also introduced under Section 7D of the Act. A foreigner can register for OCI either their spouse is of Indian origin or they themselves are of Indian origin, and they shall be entitled to certain benefits such as right to work and study in the country.
- Section 6B, Clause 2 and 3 of the act states that such person shall be deemed to be citizen of India from the date of entry into the country, and all legal proceedings against them regarding their illegal migration/citizenship shall be closed.
Exceptions to the Citizenship (Amendment) Act, 2019
There are 2 major exceptions corporated in the Act:
- The Act will not be applicable to tribal area, namely Meghalaya, Tripura, Mizoram, and Assam. The main reason for this exception is the inclusion of these states in the 6th Schedule of the Indian Constitution.
- The Act shall not apply to the areas that are notified under the Inner Limit of the Bengal Eastern Frontier Regulation Act, 1873.
Constitutionality of CAA
The essence of the preamble of the Indian Constitution lies within the values of sovereignty, socialism, democracy and republicanism, which are the foundational elements of our country. It provides social economic and political justice, liberty of thought expression, belief, faith and worship and equality of status and opportunity. There are some specific provisions of the constitution which dictates these special obligations towards the citizens. The right to Liberty provided under Article 19 is only for the citizens of India. Articles 15 and 16 secure equalities relevant for socio-economic and political justice to its citizens. Through these articles, the constitution recognizes special obligations arising between states and citizens.[3]
On the other side, articles 14, 17, 21-25, 27, and 32 recognize universal rights of people. They provide equality before law, untouchability, life and liberty, preventive detention, self-incrimination, education, child labor, and the right to constitutional remedies. These words are logically placed in the preamble to assure the citizens dignity of every individual and unity and integrity of the nation. Unity and Integration of the nation are not merely references to the territory in the preamble. The words ‘Union’ or ‘territory of India’ are chosen for the usage of geographical references. Contrarily, the term ‘nation’ is tied to the idea of integrity, which projects the morality of a country. When the government promises and guarantees rights to people, it chooses the path of principle. It must act parallel to the guarantees by putting individual rights at the center and not policy goals. Constitutional challenges to the CAA question the integrity of the government’s decisions as laws cannot triumph over the rights and principles.[4]
An Act that solely enacted for the benefits of illegal migrants based on religion was against secularism as well as Article 14 of the Indian Constitution. The term ‘secularism’ was incorporated in the Preamble of the Indian Constitution by 42nd Amendment, 1976, which lays down a provision that the State shall not extend patronage to any particular religion. The State shall not establish any State religion, not the State shall provide or accord any preferential treatment or discriminate against any citizen based on their religion. Whereas, in CAA, except from the six religious minorities, other religious minorities weren’t even considered. In a nation with a plural society, such an act is deemed to retaliate against the people, and disturb the social balance of the nation. The Act was believed to be violating Article 14 of the Constitution, which guarantees the right of equality before the law. The government had answered that the act was specifically curated for the protection of non-Muslim minorities who face discrimination and prosecution on the basis of religion in the neighboring countries. They further justified the exclusion of Muslim minorities by stating that the neighboring countries are of Muslim majority, so the Muslims wouldn’t be facing any prosecution, and hence they don’t need to be protected.
Limitation of CAA, 2019
One of the major drawbacks of the Act is the basis of its implementation depends on the religion of a person. To enact and implement such an Act in a country like India is really challenging. The critics argued that the Act discriminated against citizenship on the basis of religion. It is quite distressing to know that approximately 144 petitions were filed against the CAA Act, 2019 before the Apec Court. Furthermore, the Act was called ‘fundamentally discriminatory’ by the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR). Another alarming issue was that many believed that the Muslim citizens were at the risk of losing their legal status as citizens of a particular state or country and that they would be rendered stateless because of the rigid criteria and provisions.
The exclusion of other religious minorities belonging to other regions, namely Myanmar, Tibet, and Sri Lanka, was believed to be discriminatory as well. Therefore, it was argued that the prime aim of the Citizenship Act should be to provide citizenship and if the legislation is providing the same to the religious minorities of three neighboring countries, then the same should be done for all the minorities who have been prosecuted or have the fear of prosecution. For example, sects like Shia and Ahmedis also faced religious prosecution in countries like Pakistan (muslim majority) but are nowhere to be mentioned in the new Bill.[5]
The Joint Parliamentary Committee (JPC) produced a report in 2019, which assessed the Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA) of 2019. The JPC report also found certain technical and legal issues with the CAA. It raised the argument that the Act did not use the term ‘minority’ to define the groups it intended to benefit instead; it specifically identified the six non-Muslim minorities. The report contended that categorizing beneficiaries solely based on their religion contradicted the fundamental principles of the India Constitution. The Constitution lays down the principle of secularism, which means that the state shall not favor or discriminate against any particular religion. By explicitly naming religious groups in the Act, it can be viewed against the principle of the Constitution. Former judge of the Supreme Court, Justice V. Gopala Gowda also expressed this view on the enactment of this Act. He stated that the Supreme Court Constitution Bench Judgement in S.R. Bommai’s case laid down the law that neither the Parliament not the state legislature can enact any law on the basis of religion. According to him, as the CAA distinguishes between the persons on the basis of religion, as per the precedent set in the Bommai case, it is unconstitutional.[6]
The critics also argued that the Act did not consider Atheists and Jews. Countries sharing land borders with India, namely Nepal, Bhutan, and Myanmar were also excluded. The reason stated for this exclusion under the ‘Statement of Objects and Reasons’ is that the said countries specifically provide for a state religion as constitutionally valid.
Socio-Political Consequences
The enactment of the Act led to widespread protests in various parts of the country. From rallies to protests, the country was in a state of unrest after the Bill was passed. The Bill was condemned not only in India but globally as well. Protests took place even in countries like Washington and North America, where Indian protestors stormed the roads to express their concerns regarding the Bill. Students were also a part of these protests and rallies. The government’s response to these protests were utterly shocking and discomforting. The use of tear gas and batons by the police force on the protestors seemed insensitive and brutal. On 23rd and 24th February, 2020, seven lives were lost and more than 200 people were injured during the violent riots in North East Delhi.[7] Furthermore, at least 27 people were believed to be killed in Uttar Pradesh and Kanpur as a result of the ongoing violent protests and riots.[8] The protests in the infamous Shaheen Bagh, a Muslim neighborhood, turned out to be the epicenter of the anti CAA movement.[9] Riots and protests also broke out in Assam, and almost 5 people lost their lives during the protests.[10] Guwahati remained the epicenter for the North East protests and it was feared that the Bill could disrupt the landscape of the North-Eastern states.[11]
The protests came to the halt due to the COVID-19 pandemic. However, the protestors and students were arrested and detained by the police authorities under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967, which is famous for its bail provisions. The UNHCR has explicitly showcased its criticism of the arrests and blatantly asserted that the Indian government is taking away the most basic right of a democratic nation; the right to raise their voice against the discriminatory bill by arresting activists and students.[12]
Nobel laureate economist Amartya Sen, stated that the nation is being divided for ‘political opportunism’. He also pointed out that the colonial practice of imprisoning people because of political reasons and differences still continued in our country, even after decades of independence.[13] The comment was regarding the arrest of an activist Umar Khalid in September 2020, for the violence that broke out in North-East Delhi, in February 2020, which resulted in the death of 53 people. He expressed his concern about how politically brave people have to suffer at the hands of the government. Such people are not even a fair trial. He also urged the citizens to stay united.
In mid-2020, the Chief Judicial Magistrate (CJM) Court denied the final report of the Assam Police on the death of a 17-year-old boy during these protests. The father of the boy stated that his child was shot by the police point blank. The police defended themselves by stating that the authorities were forced to use tear gas and rubber bullets to control the situation, and when it got out of control, they had to resort to blank firing, which was the cause of the boy’s death. The courts finally took the governments’ and police authorities’ brutality into account.[14]
The Union Minister of State for Home, Nityanand Rai, stated that the government is not considering any further amendments to the CAA Bill. He further asked the eligible beneficiaries to apply for citizenship only after the rules are notified by the Central Government.
Conclusion
The Citizenship (Amendment) Act, 2019 created havoc in the country as it was unexpected and sudden. Some sections of the society appreciated the move, while some criticized it openly. The country was once again divided due to religious differences, the division between Muslim and non-Muslim communities was triggered by this Act. The government tried really hard to justify the Act in the name of protection of minorities, but it was met with various protestors, activists, and even students openly criticizing and protesting against the Act. The response of the government has raised so many significant and imperative questions: Is India truly a secular state? Is India really a democratic country? Can the citizens of the country actually exercise their rights? The response and the actions of the government has lowered the trust of the youth in the government, as it showcased the disregard it has for people’s lives. More than 100 lives were lost during the violence that erupted due to the Act, making us question the intention and integrity of the government.[15] Is the government really ready to pay such a cost for the enactment of a bill which is majorly criticized and condemned not only globally but also by its own citizens, due to its discriminatory nature? The fact that the government did not even consider to alter the Act, has made people curious about our country being a true democracy. The only way for the people to survive at such times is through unity. The government should have picked out those who are actually responsible for stimulating violence and it should own up and compensate for all the lives lost. The citizens must be united as well as pressurize the government to prioritize the basic rights of all the citizens. The people should also identify a government which shall be truly secular and democratic in its nature.
Name: Khushi Sadhwani
University: The Maharaja Sayajirao University of Baroda.
[1] Foreigners Division Ministry of Home Affairs Government of India, https://indiancitizenshiponline.nic.in/UserGuide/E-gazette_2019_20122019.pdf (last visited Sept. 19, 2023)
[2] Byju’s , https://byjus.com/free-ias-prep/citizenship-amendment-bill-2019/#:~:text=It%20is%20against%20Muslims,liberalism%2C%20equality%2C%20and%20justice (last visited Sept. 19, 2023)
[3] The Wire, https://thewire.in/rights/caa-constitution-equality (last visited September 19, 2023)
[4] The Wire, https://thewire.in/rights/caa-constitution-equality (last visited September 19, 2023)
[5] iPleaders, https://blog.ipleaders.in/citizenship-amendment-act-2019/ (last visited September 19, 2023)
[6] LiveLaw, https://www.livelaw.in/top-stories/supreme-court-justice-v-gopala-gowda-national-register-of-citizensnrc-citizenship-amendment-actcaa-171500 (last visited September 19, 2023)
[7] Business Standard, https://www.business-standard.com/about/what-is-delhi-riots-2020 (last visited Sept 19, 2023)
[8] The Economic Times, https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/politics-and-nation/anti-caa-stir-death-toll-in-up-violence-rises-to-11/articleshow/72911914.cms?from=mdr (last visited Sept 19, 2023)
[9] The Outlook, https://www.outlookindia.com/national/shaheen-bagh-demolition-row-how-it-became-hub-of-anti-caa-protests-in-2019-news-195713 (last visited September 19, 2023)
[10] The Wire, https://thewire.in/rights/assam-anti-citizenship-amendment-act-protest-deaths (last visited September 19, 2023)
[11] The Hindu, https://www.thehindu.com/news/national/anti-citizenship-bill-protests-people-defy-curfew-in-guwahati-army-conducts-flag-march/article30283600.ece (last visited September 19, 2023)
[12] The National Herald, https://www.nationalheraldindia.com/india/breaking-unhcr-moves-supreme-court-against-caa-india-says-it-is-internal-matter (last visited September 19, 2023)
[13] The Deccan Herald, https://www.deccanherald.com/india/people-being-divided-for-political-opportunism-amartya-sen-1125197.html (last visited September 19, 2023)
[14] The Times of India, https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/guwahati/court-rejects-police-report-on-youths-death-in-caa-stir/articleshow/92760733.cms (last visited September 19, 2023)
[15] The Hindu, https://www.thehindu.com/data/data-how-many-people-died-during-anti-caa-protests/article30494183.ece (last visited September 19, 2023)