Skip to main content

Irrational Lawmaking - A Threat to the nature of the State

The citizenship Amendment Act (CAA), 2019 that was passed by the Parliament has created so many controversies and even unrest in some parts of the country. I thought of discussing the Act. The CAA, 2019 is an amendment to the Citizenship Act, 1955 that regulated who can acquire Indian citizenship and on what grounds.


It has been a long time after the citizenship act, 1955 was enacted and the country has gone into a lot of things since 1960 that demanded a new law to regulate citizenship. We had illegal migration due to wars, religious and linguistic persecution in our neighbour countries and even people migrated to India illegally for better living conditions.

Provisions of the Act

The act sought to make the illegal migrants belonging to 6 minority communities ( Hindus, Sikhs, Buddhists, Jains, Christians and Parsis ) from 3 countries ( Pakistan, Bangladesh and Afghanistan ) those who faced religious persecution in their respective countries eligible for citizenship and made some changes in registration of Overseas Indian Citizens (OIC) cardholders.

The 6 minority community group people will not be treated as illegal migrants and all the cases against their illegal migration will be nullified if they have entered India before Dec 31, 2014, cut off date. They will be provided citizenship by naturalization. Normally to become a naturalized citizen, a foreigner should be in India for 11 Years or worked for Indian govt for at least 12 months. But this group is entitled to fast track naturalization that they will be given citizenship if they were in India for only 5 years.

Exceptions There are exceptional areas in the bill. The tribal areas under the sixth schedule of the Indian constitution in Assam, Meghalaya, Mizoram and Tripura states were excluded from the bill. Also those areas under Inner line Permit in states like Arunachal Pradesh, Nagaland and Mizoram are excluded.

Do these provisions create panic among the minorities in the country?

We could see much controversial speech and even debate in the parliament against this act siting threat to the rights of the minorities. What is the issue? The act provides citizenship to the 6 communities of illegal migrants excluding Muslims and some other community. This move seems to be discriminatory in the grounds of religion.

Does this Law is against Constitution?

Constitution says the govt can provide citizenship by naturalization with some reasonable exceptions. The home minister is siting those exceptions to prove their law constitutional. The Act violates Article 14 of the constitution as article 14 says There shall be no discrimination on the basis of caste, religion, race, sex and place of birth. But in this bill, the people belonging to certain communities were excluded and the law is not equal for all and discriminatory in the basis of religion ( 6 communities), Place of origin ( 3 countries only), language and others.

The govt says those who were excluded belong to the majority community so they could go back to their own country.

Opinion

The govt should have included the other communities as well in the act. This move seems to be more discriminatory and threatens the secular nature of the state. Whatever be the religion they have come to India seeking asylum from persecution or violence against them and we should prove our integrity and provide them with a peaceful future.

To state the sentence "Others who were excluded belong to the majority community of the neighbour states, they can live there peacefully", India is not a religious state like Pakistan or Afghanistan but a Secular state.

Irrationality in making the Bill

There are many issues ignored while making the law. The group of illegal migrants who were given eligibility for citizenship were suffered religious persecution as minorities in the religious states of Afghanistan, Pakistan and Bangladesh. But we also have illegal migrants those who suffered religious and linguistic persecutions from a majority States like Tamil Eelam people from Sri Lanka, Rohingya Muslims from Myanmar - a Buddhist majority state. Why they were excluded from the bill? What will be their future in the country?

Also, other than these 6 minority groups from the 3 countries we have certain other groups suffered persecution from this same 3 countries like Ahmaddiya Muslims from Pakistan ( who were persecuted considering they were non-Muslims), Atheists from Bangladesh etc.

Now, Illegal migrants those who were in the scheduled tribal areas of Assam, Meghalaya, Mizoram, Tripura [ The purpose behind the enactment of the Sixth Schedule of the Constitution was to aid in the development of tribal areas through autonomous councils while protecting the indigenous population in these areas from exploitation and preserving their distinct social customs from other citizens of the country. ] and Inner line permit areas were excluded in the act. So, they will not acquire citizenship.

If they acquire citizenship they cannot reside in these areas as other citizens of the country. If they don't acquire citizenship they will be residing inside those areas as illegal migrants and exploit the resources and distinct social customs of the indigenous people. Those illegal migrants in those areas were majorly Bangladeshi Hindus - Were they left there for any political reasons?

Violence in Tripura There was violence and unrest in Tripura against the CAA as the indigenous people fear the virginity of the culture of the tribal group might be compromised by the illegal migrants and also their resources and opportunities might be taken by them.

India is a far liberated country and should be liberated much but staying conservative in the 21st century is not good for the Democratic Republic like India. India is not a Hindu nation but a Secular country. Every citizen must come out of all the conservatism inside us. Competing with the neighbouring religious States like Pakistan, Afghanistan etc. is very retrogressive and barbarous.

India has nothing to do with Nationalism but we should have Patriotism. Whatever may be the origin of a person but his work for the nation should be appreciated!

Ramachandra Guha says Those who were excluded from CAA were the expelled brainpower of India (Brain drain). Many Scientists called to scrap the bill.

Get liberated from all the obstructions that stop the progress of India. Conservatism and nationalism can never make India a superpower.

And those who support the conservatism in case of religion, caste, sex etc. remember a thing those who discriminate other religion will discriminate other castes inside the religion, those who discriminate other castes will discriminate poor inside the caste. Discrimination will be there in some kind always and for everyone so get rid of all these conservatism and get liberated!

Comments

Popular Posts

சமூக நீதி - அரசியல் பிரதிநிதித்துவம்

சுயமரியாதை இயக்க பிரச்சாரமே சமூக மாற்றத்தை ஏற்படுத்த போதுமானது என்று பெரியார் நம்பிக்கொண்டிருந்தபோது ஆட்சி அதிகாரம் மூலமாகத்தான் சமூக மாற்றத்தை உண்டாக்க முடியும் என்று அண்ணா அரசியலில் இறங்கினார். சமூக மாற்றமே (social change) சமூக நீதியை (social equity/ justice) அடைய உதவும். நீதி கட்சி முதல் திராவிட கட்சிகள் வரையிலான சமூக நீதிக்கான பயணத்தில், கல்வி வேலை வாய்ப்புகளில் இட ஒதுக்கீடு, வாழ்வாதார மேம்பாடு என பல திட்டங்கள் பிற்படுத்தப்பட்ட மக்களுக்கு வெகுவாக சென்றடைந்தது. ஆனால் இவை ஒடுக்கப்பட்ட மக்களுக்கும் சென்றடைந்ததா, அவர்களின் வாழ்க்கை தரம் உயர்ந்ததா என்று பார்த்தால் பிற்படுத்தபட்ட மக்களுக்கு கிடைத்த நன்மைகள் ஒடுக்கப்பட்டோருக்கு கடத்தப்படவில்லை என்பது தெளிவாக தெரியும். இதற்கு நிலவுடைமை, சமூக மூலதனம் (social capital, term introduced by CJI D Y Chandrachud) ஆகியவை முக்கிய காரணம். இதை பற்றி S நாராயன் IAS, வாஜ்பாய் ஆட்சியில் Finance  Secretary ஆக இருந்தவர் அவரின் புத்தகத்தில் (The Dravidian Years) குறிப்பிட்டுள்ளார். இதன் மூலமாக கல்வி மற்றும் வேலை வாய்ப்புகளில் கிடைக்கும் இட ஒதுக்கீடு மட்டும்

Protectionism

In a major setback for the Haryana government, the Punjab and Haryana High Court on Nov 17, 2023 struck down a state law mandating 75 per cent reservation for locals in private sector jobs, calling it "unconstitutional". While stating that private employers cannot be forced to employ persons from a particular state, the court, in its order, underlined that discriminating against individuals based on their state would be negative treatment against other citizens of the country. I have discussed the Haryana State Employment of Local Candidates Act, 2020 in the perspective of problems due to protectionism in the article dated July 10, 2020. I have advocated that these kind of protectionist laws are irrational as it infringes fundamental rights of the citizens and rights and liberty of the corporates and private companies too. Im glad that the High court pronounced a judgement striking down the law as it is unconstitutional. Excerpts from Protectionism and Reverse migration, July

Liquor shops in India – Celebrated Glory or Shameful Dishonor?

Due to the nationwide lock-down from March 25, all the economic activities are shut down except for the essential services. Since liquor doesn’t come under essential needs liquor shops have also been closed. Though the pandemic situation is still in persistence, the government has allowed the shops to sell liquor. From then there are so many controversies and debates happening for and against the liquor ban. And the people are also agitating against the opening of liquor shops. So, here we will discuss, whether the country really needs a liquor ban or not, along with other associated aspects. Rights come first Though opening liquor shops during this severe pandemic situation is totally irrational and highly condemnable, I differ in the idea of a complete ban on liquor.  The state cannot interfere or coerce its ideologies to the citizens.  It is the right of people to choose their food or drink . People who don’t eat beef would raise voice to ban cow slaughter and who don’t drink would