At the midnight hour the Lok Sabha passed the Citizenship (Amendment) Bill, following a short but raucous debate. The bill is controversial because it proposes to grant Indian citizenship to non-Muslims who came to India from Bangladesh, Pakistan and Afghanistan before 2015. This will be the first law that will allow the grant of Indian nationality based on religion. Whatever the defence of the provisions of the bill, and whatever the explanations for discriminating on religious lines, such a possibility the writers of the Indian Constitution would never have envisaged. And it is this division on religious lines that has evoked such strong feelings across the nation.
The bill has polarised the nation like no other has in the past. Not even when Article 370 was repealed, was there such a clear divide visible. There has even been a group of – not few – but 600 writers, artistes, former judge and bureaucrats that has called upon the government to withdraw the bill because it is divisive, discriminatory and unconstitutional. But is the government listening to this voice? It is not, but it definitely needs to, as this opposition is not arising from any political motivation, but a genuine concern about the future of the idea of an inclusive India, where equality defines the citizens, who are not divided by religion, class, caste, language. This intellectual group has also raised fears that the CAB along with the National Register of Citizens, will ‘damage, fundamentally and irreparably, the nature of the Indian republic’.
That the NDA government brought forth this bill is not a surprise. It was part of their manifesto, and since they have the numbers, it was but a matter of time before it would be introduced in Parliament. But, what is the hurry that the government – as it did with the Jammu and Kashmir issue in August – had to get the bill introduced and passed on the same day in the Lok Sabha? And then also do the same in the Rajya Sabha? Why not give Parliament a chance to discuss the bill thoroughly and then vote on it? The opposition, reduced in numbers though it may be, has strong objections to the bill. Shouldn’t they be allowed the opportunity to put forth all their views on the subject, so that the debate can hear all opinions?
But, the opposition in the country also failed the people. If in the Lok Sabha it was the majority that the government has, that allowed the bill to be passed, what happened to opposition unity in the Rajya Sabha, where the National Democratic Alliance is short of the halfway mark? Why wasn’t the oppostion that has been so vocal on the bill, not able to muster the strength to stop the bill from getting through? Clearly, the efforts to stall the bill were not strong enough to stop its passage. The government adroitly managed, as it did earlier in August when it repealed Article 370, to have it way in the Upper House. Even before the Bill was introduced, the NDA was confident of its passage in the Rajya Sabha.
The northeast has erupted with protests that turned violent. There was curfew imposed and the army was on standby. Reports from Assam compared the chaos in the State to the kind seen in the 1980s of the student movement. A bill that causes such passion and such dissent cannot be pushed through only because the government has the numbers in Parliament. It has, however, been so done. But there is already indication that this bill will be challanged before the judiciary, which means that we have not heard the last of this contentious issue.
