Jonah Patel
The Citizenship Amendment Bill (CAB) was passed in India's upper house of parliament in December 2019, amending the country's 64-year-old citizenship law. The bill has been controversial, with critics arguing that it marginalizes Muslims and violates the secular ethos of the Indian constitution. Protests against the bill took place across India, and a petition opposing it was signed by over 1,000 Indian scientists and scholars. The Indian National Congress opposed the bill, stating that it would create communal tensions. The Chief Ministers of several Indian states also refused to implement the law. The constitutionality of the bill is currently being debated in the Supreme Court of India, with the next hearing scheduled for April 2020.
| Characteristics | Values |
|---|---|
| Purpose | To amend the 64-year-old Indian Citizenship law, which prohibits illegal migrants from becoming Indian citizens |
| Definition of illegal immigrants | Foreigners who enter India without valid documents or stay beyond the permitted time |
| Action against illegal immigrants | Deportation or jail |
| Citizenship application requirements | Must have lived in India or worked for the federal government for at least 11 years |
| Religious minority communities included | Hindu, Sikh, Buddhist, Jain, Parsi, and Christian |
| Countries of origin for religious minorities | Pakistan, Afghanistan, or Bangladesh |
| Opposition | The Indian National Congress, Chief Ministers of six Indian states, and various activists and scholars |
| Reasoning for opposition | The bill marginalizes Muslims, creates communal tensions, and uses religion as a criterion for citizenship |
| Support | BJP leader Ram Madhav and R Jagannathan, editorial director of Swarajya magazine |
| Reasoning for support | The bill protects non-Muslims excluded from the register and addresses illegal migration |
| Legal challenges | Kerala challenged the bill in the Supreme Court of India; the court declined to stay implementation |
Explore related products
What You'll Learn
The Citizenship Amendment Bill's constitutionality
The Citizenship Amendment Bill (CAB) was passed in India's upper house of parliament on December 11, 2019, amending the country's 64-year-old citizenship law. The bill provides a path to citizenship for members of six religious minority communities—Hindu, Sikh, Buddhist, Jain, Parsi, and Christian—if they can prove they are from Pakistan, Afghanistan, or Bangladesh. However, it excludes Muslim migrants and refugees, which has led to protests and debates about its constitutionality.
The Indian National Congress opposed the bill, arguing it would create communal tensions and polarize the country. Several Indian states, including Madhya Pradesh, Chhattisgarh, West Bengal, Punjab, Kerala, and Rajasthan, as well as the union territory of Puducherry, refused to implement the law. They argued that the states lacked the legal power to reject the legislation, as it was enacted under the Union List of the 7th Schedule of the Constitution.
The bill has been challenged in the Supreme Court of India, with Kerala becoming the first state to file a plea under Article 131 of the Constitution. Critics argue that the bill violates the secular ethos of the Indian Constitution and that if it is aimed at protecting minorities, it should include Muslim religious minorities facing persecution, such as Ahmadis in Pakistan and Rohingyas in Myanmar. Delhi-based lawyer Gautam Bhatia stated that the bill "explicitly and blatantly seeks to enshrine religious discrimination into law."
However, supporters of the bill, including former Solicitor General of India Harish Salve, argue that it does not violate the Indian Constitution. They claim that it fulfills the long-standing demand to provide refuge to persecuted religious minorities from the three mentioned countries. R Jagannathan, editorial director of Swarajya magazine, defended the exclusion of Muslims, stating that the three countries are Islamist, either constitutionally or due to the actions of militant Islamists.
The Citizenship Amendment Bill is closely linked to the National Register of Citizens (NRC), which was updated in Assam in 2019, leaving approximately 1.9 million residents at risk of losing their citizenship. The CAB will help protect non-Muslims who are excluded from the NRC, particularly Bengali Hindus. Home Minister Amit Shah has proposed a nationwide rollout of the NRC to identify and expel "infiltrators" by 2024.
Amending the Constitution: Reversing Amendments
You may want to see also
The marginalisation of Muslims
The Citizenship Amendment Bill (CAB), passed in the upper house of India's parliament in 2019, has been criticised for marginalising Muslims and violating India's international legal obligations. The bill amends the country's 64-year-old citizenship law, which previously prohibited illegal migrants from becoming Indian citizens. It defined illegal immigrants as those without valid passports or travel documents or those who had overstayed their permitted time in the country. The new bill provides a path to citizenship for immigrants from Afghanistan, Bangladesh, and Pakistan—but only if they are not Muslim.
The bill has been criticised for using religion as a criterion for citizenship, which is inconsistent with the basic structure of the Constitution. It has also been called a violation of India's international obligations to prevent deprivation of citizenship on the basis of race, colour, descent, or national or ethnic origin as outlined in the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) and other human rights treaties. The United States Commission on International Religious Freedom has also condemned the bill, stating that if it passes, the US government should consider sanctions.
Protests against the bill have been held across India, with demonstrators arguing that the law "marginalises Muslims" and is "prejudicial against Muslims". They demand that Muslim immigrants and refugees should be granted Indian citizenship, too, in keeping with the country's secular foundations. These protests have taken place in metropolitan cities like Kolkata, Delhi, Mumbai, Bengaluru, Hyderabad, and Jaipur, as well as in various Indian states, including West Bengal, Punjab, Uttar Pradesh, Karnataka, Tamil Nadu, Gujarat, Telangana, Bihar, Maharastra, Kerala, and Karnataka.
The bill comes amid the BJP government's push for a nationwide citizenship verification process, the National Register of Citizens (NRC), which critics say is aimed at disenfranchising and stripping Muslims of their citizenship rights. The NRC has already left nearly two million people at risk of arbitrary detention and statelessness in India's Assam state, and there are fears that a nationwide implementation will disproportionately affect Muslims. The BJP has indicated that the Citizenship Amendment Bill will protect non-Muslims excluded from the NRC, but critics argue that the BJP's majoritarian policies are pushing a Hindu nationalist agenda that is eroding the secular and democratic ethos of India.
Streamlining Constitutional Amendments: A Practical Guide
You may want to see also
The exclusion of Muslim refugees
The Citizenship Amendment Act, 2019, has been a subject of intense debate and controversy in India, with critics arguing that it discriminates against Muslim refugees and immigrants. The Act seeks to amend the Citizenship Act, 1955, by providing a path to citizenship for irregular immigrants from Hindu, Christian, Buddhist, Sikh, and Zoroastrian communities from neighbouring countries such as Afghanistan, Bangladesh, and Pakistan. However, the Act notably excludes Muslims, leading to accusations of religious discrimination and marginalization of India's large Muslim community.
The Indian government, led by the Hindu nationalist Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), has defended the Act by stating that it aims to protect religious minorities who face persecution in their home countries. They argue that Muslims are unlikely to face religious persecution in these countries as Islam is the state religion. However, critics refute this claim by highlighting the persecution faced by certain Muslim groups, such as the Hazaras, Ahmadis, and Rohingya. They argue that the exclusion of Muslim refugees contradicts the secular foundations of India and violates international law by discriminating on religious grounds.
The controversial nature of the Act has sparked widespread protests across India, particularly in metropolitan cities and northeastern states. Protesters, including Islamic political and student activists, have demanded that Indian citizenship be granted to Muslim refugees and immigrants as well. They argue that the Act marginalizes Muslims and is prejudicial against them. The protests have resulted in violent clashes with authorities, leading to the deaths of several protesters and injuries on both sides.
The Indian National Congress and other opposition parties have opposed the Act, stating that it will create communal tensions and polarize the country. Additionally, several Chief Ministers from non-BJP governments have refused to implement the law in their respective states. Despite these objections, the Union Home Ministry has asserted that states lack the legal power to stop the implementation of the Act. The constitutionality of the Act has been challenged in the Supreme Court of India, with the state of Kerala filing a plea under Article 131 of the Constitution.
Amendments: The Evolution of US Constitution
You may want to see also
Explore related products
The bill's potential to cause communal tensions
The Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA) has been criticised for its potential to cause communal tensions and divisions within the social fabric of India. The Act has been accused of marginalising and discriminating against Muslims, with critics arguing that it seeks to make Muslims second-class citizens of India while preferentially treating non-Muslims.
The CAA removes barriers for acquiring Indian citizenship for Hindus, Sikhs, Buddhists, Jains, Parsis, and Christians from neighbouring countries such as Afghanistan, Bangladesh, and Pakistan. However, it does not extend the same benefits to Muslim migrants and refugees, leading to protests and debates about the constitutionality of the amendment. Islamic political and student activists, along with others, have demanded that the law should grant Indian citizenship to Muslim immigrants and refugees as well, in line with the country's secular foundations.
The combination of the CAA with the proposed National Register of Citizens (NRC) and Foreigners Tribunals has been criticised for creating risks for the Muslim minority community in India. If left out of the NRC, individuals can be deprived of their citizenship and sent to detention centres. In such cases, only the religious groups mentioned in the CAA would be able to retain their citizenship, while Muslims and other excluded groups would be rendered stateless.
The Indian National Congress and various other bodies have opposed the bill, arguing that it will create communal tensions and polarise India. Protests against the CAA have occurred across India, with violent clashes resulting in casualties, including the deaths of 27 people killed by police firing guns. The Supreme Court of India has heard multiple petitions challenging the Act, but it declined to stay its implementation.
Amending the 1987 Constitution: An Urgent Need for Change
You may want to see also
The bill's consistency with the National Register of Citizens
The Citizenship Amendment Bill (CAB) has been a highly contested topic in India, with critics arguing that it is inconsistent with the National Register of Citizens (NRC) and marginalizes Muslims. The bill amends the Indian Citizenship law, which previously prohibited illegal migrants from obtaining Indian citizenship. Under the new bill, illegal immigrants, defined as foreigners who enter India without valid documents or overstay their permitted time, may be deported or jailed.
The CAB introduces an exception for members of six religious minority communities: Hindu, Sikh, Buddhist, Jain, Parsi, and Christian. If individuals from these communities can prove that they are from Pakistan, Afghanistan, or Bangladesh, they may be eligible for Indian citizenship. This provision was included to protect religious minorities facing persecution in these countries. However, critics argue that the exclusion of Muslims from this list is discriminatory and inconsistent with India's secular constitutional ethos.
The NRC, on the other hand, is a register of citizens implemented in Assam under Supreme Court supervision. Approximately 1.9 million residents, including many Bengali Hindus, were not included on the list and faced the risk of losing their citizenship. The Citizenship Amendment Bill is closely linked to the NRC as it helps protect non-Muslims who are excluded from the register, allowing them to obtain citizenship and remain in Assam state.
The Indian government has defended the CAB, stating that it does not violate Articles 14, 25, and 21 of the Constitution of India. However, the bill has faced strong opposition, with protests occurring in several metropolitan cities and states across India. The Indian National Congress and several Chief Ministers have also opposed the bill, arguing that it will create communal tensions and polarize the country.
The debate surrounding the consistency of the CAB with the NRC highlights the complex nature of citizenship and constitutional rights in India. While the government maintains that the bill is necessary to protect persecuted religious minorities, critics argue that it undermines the secular foundations of the country and targets the Muslim community.
Constitutional Amendments: Authors of Two Amendments
You may want to see also
Frequently asked questions
The Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA) is an amendment to the 64-year-old Indian Citizenship law, which previously prohibited illegal migrants from becoming Indian citizens. The CAA now allows members of six religious minority communities (Hindu, Sikh, Buddhist, Jain, Parsi, and Christian) to gain citizenship if they can prove they are from Pakistan, Afghanistan, or Bangladesh.
The CAA has been controversial, with protests held across India. Critics argue that the law "marginalizes Muslims" and "seeks to enshrine religious discrimination into law". A petition opposing the bill was signed by over 1,000 Indian scientists and scholars, who argued that "the use of religion as a criterion for citizenship" is "inconsistent with the basic structure of the Constitution". However, supporters of the CAA claim that it offers protection to religious minorities who have faced persecution in their own countries.
The constitutionality of the CAA is still being debated. The Indian National Congress opposed the bill, stating it would create communal tensions and polarize India. The Chief Ministers of several Indian states said they would not implement the law, but the Union Home Ministry asserted that states lack the legal power to stop its implementation. Kerala became the first state to challenge the CAA by filing a plea in the Supreme Court of India. As of April 2020, the court had declined to stay implementation of the CAA.
![Constitutional Law: [Connected eBook with Study Center] (Aspen Casebook)](https://m.media-amazon.com/images/I/61R-n2y0Q8L._AC_UL320_.jpg)
![Constitutional Law [Connected eBook with Study Center] (Aspen Casebook)](https://m.media-amazon.com/images/I/61qrQ6YZVOL._AC_UL320_.jpg)
![Constitutional Law: [Connected eBook with Study Center] (Aspen Casebook)](https://m.media-amazon.com/images/I/711lR4w+ZNL._AC_UL320_.jpg)
