She is pursuing her MPhil in International Relations from the National Defence University (NDU), Islamabad. Her areas of interest include Asia, with a special focus on China and South Asian politics.
Just a few weeks before the elections, the Indian Government announced the implementation of the Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA)—the law was passed by the Indian Parliament in 2019. The law largely questions the secular foundations of the world’s largest democracy and its impact has been astronomical. Its passing is considered controversial, considering Article 14 of the Indian Constitution. The article states, “The State shall not deny to any person equality before the law or the equal protection of the laws within the territory of India.”
This law was a part of the political manifesto of the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) during the 2019 elections. As the 2024 elections loom nearer, it is important to understand the implications of this amendment for religious minorities within India, especially Muslims, which account for 15% of India’s total population.
The foundation of the CAA can be traced back to the Citizenship Act of 1955, which lays down the criteria for attaining Indian citizenship. This act distinguishes the five ways an individual becomes eligible for citizenship in India.
-
- Birth within Indian territory
-
- Through descent
-
- Citizenship by registration
-
- Naturalization
-
- Through the incorporation of the territory into India.
While this act provides generic criteria for attaining Indian citizenship, CAA alters this framework by introducing certain provisions for minority groups from neighboring countries, namely Pakistan, Bangladesh, and Afghanistan.
Implications of the Indian Citizenship Amendment Act
To understand the broader implications of this law, first, there is a need to understand its basic provisions:
-
- As per the Citizenship Act of 1955, illegal migrants from neighboring countries were barred from attaining Indian citizenship. The CAA however, expedites Indian citizenship applications of Hindus, Parsis, Sikhs, Buddhists, Jains, and Christians to protect them from religious persecution in the countries mentioned above.
-
- As per the Foreigners Act 1946 and Passport Act 1920, any illegal migrant within India must be imprisoned or deported. This law provides an exemption for illegal migrants belonging to the groups above.
-
- This law also reduces the naturalization period from eleven years to five years.
-
- It excludes some areas from these provisions like tribal areas of Assam, Meghalaya, Mizoram, or Tripura.
This bill was introduced in 2016 in Lok Sabha and passed on January 8, 2019. As recently as March 29, 2024, its rules have been notified ahead of general elections in India. BJP’s government wants to emphasize its message of “Jo kaha, wo kiya” (delivered what we promised). This bill is contentious at many levels, but the most pressing issue is the exclusion of Muslims from its provisions. By mentioning certain groups eligible for Indian citizenship, the BJP government has largely violated the secular principles enshrined in the Indian constitution.
Conditions To Be Fulfilled by Illegal Migrants
Four main conditions are outlined in the bill to be fulfilled by the illegal migrants to be treated as legal under the law. These include their religious affiliation—must be Hindus, Sikhs, Jains, Parsis, or Christians. Secondly, they must be from Afghanistan, Pakistan, and Bangladesh, their date of entry into India must not exceed December 31, 2014, and lastly, they must not belong to the tribal areas of Assam, Meghalaya, Mizoram, or Tripura.
As mentioned earlier, Article 14 of the Indian constitution liberates its citizens and foreigners from discrimination by treating them equally. The CAA provides differential treatment to illegal migrants based on their country of origin, religion, date of entry, and place of residence within the Indian territory. It is interesting to note whether such differential treatment for certain segments serves any purpose.
The first argument emanates from the clause of CAA which includes only Afghanistan, Pakistan, and Bangladesh within the qualified list for citizenship within India. Delving deeper into this bill’s “Statements of Objects and Reasons” (SoR) suggests various reasons for such discrimination.
First is the historic migration from these three countries to India. Secondly, these countries have a state religion, leading to persecution of minority groups. One puzzling question is why countries like Myanmar (Primarily Buddhist) and Sri Lanka (Buddhist state religion) are excluded from this law. Over time, many Rohingya Muslims from Myanmar and Tamil Eelams from Sri Lanka fled their native land due to religious and linguistic persecution. Although the controversial citizenship law provides shelter to those fleeing religious persecution from neighboring countries, there is a big question mark on why religious minorities from other neighboring countries are omitted from this law.
The second point of contention arises from the classification that is based on religious affiliation, as this law mainly protects six religious minorities within three neighboring countries. There are other religious minorities apart from the aforementioned ones in Afghanistan, Bangladesh, and Pakistan. There is a certain prominency of these in Muslim minorities such as Hazaras in Afghanistan and atheists in Bangladesh. The CAA hasn’t clearly stated why only certain religious minorities are safeguarded from religious persecution and not others.
Thirdly, this law also discriminates against illegal migrants based on their entry date into India.
This law discriminates some regions from others. Prominent from these regions are the tribal areas of Assam, Meghalaya, Mizoram, and Tripura. This issue stands out, particularly in the northeastern state of Assam.
The Threat to Assam
Three districts of Assam are included in this law: Karbi Anglong, Dima Hasao, and Bodoland Territorial Council. All three districts have a Hindu majority, which consolidates the overall Hindu majoritarianism agenda of the BJP by leaving Hindu majority areas untouched and diverting heterogeneity away from the said areas.
Another intriguing issue in Asaam, which triggered massive protests across the region, is the threat that CAA poses to the cultural, linguistic, and demographic setup of the indigenous population. The implementation of CAA will dilute the Assam Accord of 1985, which fixed March 24, 1971, as the cut-off date for termination of citizenship. With the CAA in effect, this date was extended up to 2014, which allows the legal settlement of thousands of Bangladeshi illegal migrants. However, the Ministry of Home Affairs issued various statements to reassure Muslims residing in India that their status will remain unaltered after implementing CAA. But massive protests broke out in Assam over implementing CAA while burning many of its copies.
Implementing India’s new citizenship amendment act weeks ahead of general elections indicates that the BJP is reaping electoral benefits. Although the act uses emphatic terms such as “refugee” and “sanctuary,” it violates international law due to discriminatory practices on religious grounds.
CAA has also drawn international attention as there is a big question on whether implementing this law complies with international human rights law. A spokesperson for the office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights (UNHCHR) stated that this law is “discriminatory” in nature and violates the obligations of international human rights laws. Even the United States has reservations over India’s new citizenship law and is calling for “equal treatment” for all communities under the law regardless of their religious affiliation. In response to statements from the US, a spokesperson from India’s Ministry of External Affairs said that this law is an “internal matter” and the US response is “misplaced, misinformed and unwarranted.”
The projection of Hindu majoritarianism by the Modi Government at the expense of the Muslim population undermines the secular democratic principles of the country. When Prime Minister Narendra Modi assumed power in 2019, he promised three things:
-
- Overturning the autonomous status of Kashmir
-
- Building the Ram Mandir in the Holy site of Ayodhya
-
- Implementing a uniform law for all citizens
The first two promises were delivered during his first tenure, but the implementation of a uniform civil code has not yet materialized. The discriminatory trends followed by BJP’s Government are concerning minorities in India, particularly Muslims. Since its inception, India has rejected any projections of it as a country with crumbled democracy as it accommodated various religions and ethnicities. But steps like implementing the CAA raise major questions about the future of democracy and secularism in India.
If you want to submit your articles and/or research papers, please check the Submissions page.
The views and opinions expressed in this article/paper are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect the editorial position of Paradigm Shift.
