Perhaps for the first time since 1950, there is a movement across the country to protect the idea of India as visualized by our founding fathers. The idea of India with the diversity and inclusiveness came about, despite a bloodiest holocaust during the partition of the country. The world saw migration of millions of people like never before. Despite Pakistan becoming a Islamic republic our founding fathers gave us a country which encompassed all faiths. That idea certainly deserves to be protected. The opposition to the Citizenship Amendment Act is precisely that view.
The CAA move is to protect those persecuted religiously in three neighbouring Islamic countries of Bangladesh, Pakistan and Afghanistan. There can be no opposition to our country providing shelter to the persecuted. In fact the UN convention on refugees 1951 and the 1967 protocol precisely attempts to protect those who are persecuted and are forced to flee their country because of persecution, war or violence and those who have well founded fear of persecution for reason of race, religion, nationality, political opinion or membership of a particular social group
Our country did not sign the UN convention on refugees. Neither does our country have a law on refugees or a policy on refugees. But our country has provided an asylum to various sections at various times. We welcomed the Tibetans who even run a government in exile at Dharmashala. Our handling of post partition migrations has been exemplary. The Kenyan and Ugandan refugees of Indian origin were provided shelter. The Tamil refugees from Sri Lanka made India their home. Three thousand Rohingyas were provided shelter when they faced a genocide in 1989, though now we threaten to deport them
Thousands of Pakistani illegal immigrants stay in India. Lakhs of Bangladeshis have already made Assam and Bengal their home. They are all also over the country for lowly paid jobs. Bangladeshis are here for social and economic reasons. They are not refugees. In Assam the illegal immigrants who entered before 1/1/1966 are to be granted citizenship and those who entered after 1966 but before 31/6/1971 are to be granted citizenship after 10 years of their detection.
The BJP entertained a belief that the Hindus are under some sort of the siege by the Muslims. They came out with 3Ds formula – detect, delete and deport – in their manifesto, due to which the NRC threw up a strange challenge when 19 lakhs mostly Bangladeshi illegal immigrants found themselves out of the NRC. Thirteen lakh belong to the 6 communities (Hindus, Sikh, Jains, Christians and Parsis) but mostly Hindus and remaining six lakh were mostly Muslims.
With the passage of the citizenship amendment Act, 13 lakhs Hindu illegal immigrants would get Indian citizenship while the 6 lakhs would have to go to detention centres. The home minister who piloted the CAB (citizenship amendment bill) told the country that they are providing citizenship to the persecuted minorities of neighbouring Islamic countries.
Humanism and humanitarian principles demand that illegal immigrants who have nowhere to go deserve asylum and shelter. It is precisely to deal with such situations that the UN convention on refugees 1961 and the 1967 protocol were brought to give succour to the persecuted. What is required in our country is a refugee law and a refugee policy without any discrimination, not a change in citizenship law.
CAA wishes to confer citizenship to 6 communities (mainly Hindus) and deny citizenship to the south Asian Muslims. The grant of citizenship to the persecuted needs to be celebrated. It is in terms and tune with humanism of extremely high level but humanism has to be inclusive. Humanism cannot be selective and certainly not based on religion, race or caste. Nowhere in the world citizenship is based on religious lines. Even countries like Pakistan, Afghanistan and Bangladesh do not deny citizenship rights on religious basis!
Since 2015 when the change is brought in the Foreigners Act the 6 communities are granted long term visas and the illegal immigrants based upon religion are getting driving licences, mobile phones, excess to education, health care and even right to buy residential houses while others are huddled in miserable camps with no connectivity to the world. The government threatens to deport them to countries they are not wanted. Is it humanism that illegal immigrants similarly situated are hounded just because they belong to non privileged religion?
The Uhirgur Muslims of China face death, the Ahmadiyyas of Pakistan are declared non Muslims and face discrimination of worse kind. The Rohingyas face genocide in Myanmar. It is these sections that deserve extreme sympathy and humanism requires that they get shelter. The idea of India is based upon Sarvra Dharma Sambhava – all religions are equal in the eyes of law and the state shall not endorse any one particular religion. That is the foundational principle of our constitution, which is put on test by the CAA.
Equality, life and liberty run through the entire constitution and available to all including non citizens. All immigrants who have made this country their home must get the same treatment. Protection based on religion will also not pass the fraternity test. What sort of a law that similarly situated sections get citizenship only because they belong to a particular religion on a ‘claim’ of persecution and others go to the detention centres only because of their religion. The law seeks to protect those who claim persecution without any proof of persecution. An affidavit by the one who claims persecution suffices. All that CAA has done is to elevate Hindu illegal immigrants to citizens and the Muslim illegal immigrants dumped as foreign infiltrators deserving deportation or detention centers. This is not the India we attempted to build.
(The writer is practising advocate and political analyst).
