Site icon Youth Ki Awaaz

The Citizenship Amendment Bill: The Questions It Raises

The Citizenship (Amendment) Bill 2019 that seeks to give Indian nationality to non-Muslim refugees from Pakistan, Bangladesh and Afghanistan was passed by the Parliament earlier this week. The Bill seeks to amend the definition of an illegal immigrant for Hindu, Sikh, Parsi, Buddhist and Christian immigrants from Pakistan, Afghanistan and Bangladesh, who have lived in India without documentation. They will be granted fast-track Indian citizenship in six years. So far, 12 years of residence has been the standard eligibility requirement for naturalization.

What Is The Need For This Bill?

This bill is actually a pro-humanity bill. It wants to save millions of people who have been religiously persecuted in Afghanistan, Pakistan and Bangladesh and have fled to India. The new cut-off date will be December 31, 2014, which means people who have fled to India from these three countries due to religious persecution will be given a fast-tracked citizenship.

Many people, ever since the Partition, have fled to India due to religious persecution and have settled in India. They have owned lands, shops, etc., which in legal terms is illegal as they don’t carry valid documents, and hence, can’t own properties. This further elevates their problems. So, the introduction of such a bill would free them of the above problems and help them settle in our country once and for all.

But Why Only These Three Countries?

There are Rohingyas from Myanmar, Tibetans and Tamil Hindus from Sri Lanka as well.

The reason behind choosing these three countries is because Pakistan, Afghanistan and Bangladesh have a state religion. Their state (country) follows Islam. This means that the constitution of these countries is discriminatory against people who follow religions other than Islam. Hence, such persecutions are state-sponsored. But other persecutions, like the Rohingyas in Myanmar, are not state-sponsored. That is the reason why the cases of Rohingyas have been taken up by various international courts. Lakhs of Tibetans had fled to India when China “annexed” Tibet, and as these weren’t religious persecutions even they haven’t been added, and the same is the reason for Tamil Hindus.

What About Ahmediyas? Even They Are Persecuted.

This is another contentious issue; the main reason why this bill is getting a communal color. It is a fact that Ahmediyas are also persecuted in Pakistan. Many in Pakistan believe that Ahmediyas are not even true Islam followers. But, as Ahmediyas are part of Islam, these persecutions cannot be compared to other religion because the constitution of the above-mentioned countries will protect Ahmediyas, but won’t protect other non-Islamic religions. For a better understanding, this can be linked with India’s caste problem where the upper caste have been found to persecute lower caste people. But at the end of the day, our constitution will protect them as it does not make any discrimination on the basis of caste.

Is The Bill Communal?

A million-dollar question. The bill is not communal, although religion is the basis of citizenship. It is not anti-Islam but pro-Hindu. Although this would seem communal, the selection of only these three countries makes it non-communal. This is positive discrimination being attempted, and communalism has a negative connotation associated with it, so personally, for me, this is not communal. It is being made communal by the supporters of BJP and the typical staunch right-wing population. The opposition is right in airing their concerns, which I would clarify in the subsequent paragraphs.

Another reason I must highlight is that the Tamil Hindus who have fled from Sri Lanka due to LTTE and other Sinhalese-related hate crimes have not been given protection in this Bill. And here, too, the same logic prevails. Sri Lanka’s constitution does not discriminate on the basis of religion, and hence, it is the responsibility of Sri Lanka’s government to provide justice.

Is It Being Done To Build The Vote Bank?

There is, of course, the political incentive associated with this Bill. All those Hindus who would get naturalized (citizenship) would forever be indebted to BJP and would always vote for BJP.

Is The Bill Going Against The Idea Of The Constitution?

In India, the Constitution is supreme. Article 14 states there is a right to equality with reasonable classification allowed. That means similar people are to be treated equally. This is the reason behind the reservation of SC and ST because of centuries of oppression being done to them, they can’t be treated equally, and hence, should be given more incentives.
So, the government is using this religious persecution from these countries as a reasonable classification. So, the people who have fled are not treated equally but given more incentive (in this case, citizenship) as there was no other choice for them.
This would now depend on the perspective of the judges, whether it qualifies as a reasonable classification or not.

My Personal Views

For, me the Bill goes against the Constitution. Our constitution makers have debated over the idea of citizenship (debates are available online) that the basis of our citizenship cannot be religion. My deepest sympathies with the victims, but we must find better ways to assimilate them into our society. I do not like the timing of the Bill too. We are constantly testing our society and increasing the tension between Hindus and Muslims. It’s only been a few weeks since the verdict of Ayodhya Land Dispute Case came. Another legislation that could be associated with communalism even remotely should have been avoided.
My other issues are: are we ready to take the extra population in our country? We already are unable to direct our social sector schemes to our existing citizens, and we are not faring well on many of the human development indices. So, won’t the addition hurt our country?
Lastly, the newly-added citizens will change the culture and politics of that region, which can lead to more tensions in the region. Also, how does one prove he was religiously persecuted? How does one prove he only fled from the above-mentioned countries and not others. There are some unanswered questions that no one seems to be asking.
But, I will conclude by saying that this Bill seems communal, but on closer scrutiny, you will only find that this has been designed only to help people who have been religiously persecuted, and these persecuted people are Hindus, Christian, Jains, Sikhs, Buddhists and Parsis.
Finally, I would urge citizens of every community to understand that we all are one. Let’s stand the test of the tide. “Yeh Waqt Bhi Guzar Jaayega”.
Exit mobile version