This is the sequel to my earlier published article, ‘The Confusion And Politics Of CAA-NPR-NRC: Part-1 CAA 2019’ published in this platform where I took on the Citizenship Amendment Act 2019. In this article, I will take on NRC (National Registration of Citizens) and NPR (National Population Register)
Let me put bluntly that CAA 2019, NRC and NPR are all three different provisions technically not related to each other. However, if you closely scrutinize then you will find that all the three (that is CAA 2019, NRC and NPR) are rooted to the ‘107th report on Citizenship Amendment Bill 2003’ by Joint Parliamentary Committee under chairmanship of Pranab Mukherjee and scores of UPA members which was laid on 12th December 2003 in the both the House of the Parliament.
The standing committee had various recommendation including coining the term of ‘illegal migrants’ as well as restricting citizenship through some strict provision through amending all the provisions of citizenship such as ‘Citizen by Birth, Citizenship by Descent, citizenship by registration or citizenship by naturalisation’. Frankly, the recommendations were there that no illegal migrants can be qualified for citizenship. But there was some proposal under clause 3.2 which were the basis of the Citizenship Amendment Act 2019. One such proposal is 3.2.9 ‘Citizenship should be granted only to Bangladeshi minority refugees and not to refugees belonging to the majority community. This required to amend the clause-5 of citizenship Act. The committee held a discussion to give citizenship to the religiously persecuted people of neighbouring countries. The discussion shows that the committee is apparently wanted to provide citizenship to persecuted minorities of the neighbouring countries but there appeared some technicality issue such as reference of ‘Foreigner’s (Tribunal) Order, 1964. The then secretary of Home opined that this citizenship (to religious minorities from the neighbouring countries) are coming under ‘Foreigner (Tribunal) Order, 1964 and thus couldn’t be part of Citizenship Amendment Act 2003. That’s why the standing committee accepted clause five without any amendment. This discussion in fact later helped Narendra Modi government go for ‘Citizen Amendment Bill 2019.
National Registration of Citizen and National Population Register
Those who think NRC is the next step of CAA 2019, then they should know that NRC is already a part of Citizenship Amendment Bill 2003. Refer to amendment in Clause-15 of the CAA 2003, which reads, ‘ ia ) the procedure to be followed in compulsory enrolment of a citizen of India, the form and manner for making applications, the documents and other evidence by which such application shall be accompanied and the fees payable in respect of such application, the form of national citizenship identity card and other details, under sub-section (2) of section 14A ‘
That means the NRC is already there in the Citizenship Amendment Act 2003. Similarly, the amendment above says mandatory national identity card to the citizens for which NPR (National Population Register) is formulated.
Let me clarify a bit between Acts and rules. An act always enforced after a bill is passed by both Houses of the parliament and got the assent of the President of India. However, without a rule or say mechanism no Act can be implemented. The CAA 2019 is already enforced but can’t be implemented without related rules. The rules to implement the Citizen Amendment Act 2019 is being formulated and after that, the same will be sent to the state-governments for implementation. Many state governments are opposing or claiming not to implement the rule of CAA 2019. But as citizenship is a central subject, thus state governments are bound to implement the Act else they will be guilty of breach of Constitutional provisions.
Anyway, Coming back to NRC. As I said the Act is there but the ‘rule to implement’ is not yet formulated. That’s why NRC is not yet implemented. The BJP’s claim that ‘NRC is coming’ means the rules for implementation are to be framed or formulated’. To understand the difference between an act and the rules of implementation, let me give example of NPR (National Population Register).
National Population Register.
As discussed above, the Citizenship Amendment Act 2003 mandates registration and identity cards for all the citizen. Thus, there’s a ‘Citizenship (Registration of Citizens and Issue of National Identity Cards) Rules, 2003’ which was framed as per section 18 of Citizenship Act 1955 on 10th December 2010 by UPA government. This clearly makes how the NPR is to be prepared.
The National Population Register is implemented in 2010 by the UPA government and updated in 2015 during NDA government. Yes, the NPR is the first step to NRC (National Registration of Citizen). At present NPR 2020 is being prepared as a precursor to census 2021 and maybe the basis for Pan_India NRC.
Not to forget that when NPR is implemented during the UPA government in 2010, most of the heavyweights of UPA government advocated strongly on behalf of NPR. I don’t want to make this article a political one and thus, won’t refer anybody except P. Chidambaram who had praised NPR 2010 but now opposed same NPR 2020. Politics will always be there as every political party has their vested interest and can make a lot of U-turns to suit the narrative. My intention in this article is to present facts to clear many doubts.
Thus it’s clear now that NRC and NPR acts are already there since 2003, NPR is already implemented in 2010 through the Citizenship (Registration of Citizens and Issue of National Identity Cards) Rules, 2003 and is being implemented again in this year 2020 for which already the NPR trial form got the central government nod.
Now there would be a serious question that if I am saying that the rules to implement NRC not yet formed then what’s the case of NRC in Assam? Is it different? If yes, then what would be the possible rules?
I will discuss those in the concluding part-3 of this series. Till then I would be happy to clear doubts of anyone as feel an informed society is key to a successful democracy.