The Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA), 2019

Hello, viewers! Welcome back to our website. In today’s Article, we’re going to dive into a topic that has sparked significant discussions, debates, and even protests across India — the Citizenship Amendment Act, commonly known as the CAA. Passed by the Parliament of India in December 2019, this amendment to the Citizenship Act of 1955 has been a major point of contention in Indian politics and society.

We’ll explore what the CAA is, its key features, the controversies surrounding it, and why it has become such a hotly debated issue. Whether you’re looking to understand the basic facts or seeking a deeper insight into the implications of this act, this video is your go-to guide. So, stay tuned, and let’s unravel the complexities of The Citizenship Amendment Act together.

What is The Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA)?

The Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA), 2019 is an amendment to the Citizenship Act of 1955, passed by the Parliament of India in December 2019. It aims to provide a path to Indian citizenship for illegal migrants from Hindu, Sikh, Buddhist, Jain, Parsi, and Christian communities who fled religious persecution from Pakistan, Bangladesh, and Afghanistan and entered India on or before December 31, 2014.

The act notably excludes Muslim migrants from these provisions, which has been a major point of contention and debate. For these specific migrant groups, the CAA reduces the required period of residency in India from the existing eleven years to five years as a qualification for citizenship.

The act does not apply to the tribal areas of Assam, Meghalaya, Mizoram, or Tripura as included in the Sixth Schedule to the Constitution of India, and the area covered under “The Inner Line” notified under the Bengal Eastern Frontier Regulation, 1873.

Controversies and Criticism:

The CAA has been controversial and has sparked significant protests and legal challenges across India. The main criticisms include:

1. Alleged Violation of Secular Principles: Critics argue that by excluding Muslims, the CAA violates the secular principles enshrined in the Indian Constitution.

2. Discrimination Based on Religion: The act is seen as discriminatory as it links citizenship with religious identity.

3. Concerns over NRC: The CAA, combined with the proposed nationwide National Register of Citizens (NRC), has raised concerns about the potential for creating large-scale statelessness, especially among Muslim communities.

4. Impact on Northeastern States: There are concerns in the northeastern states of India that the influx of migrants through this act could alter the demographic and cultural composition of the region.

Government’s Position on The Citizenship Amendment Act

The Indian government has defended the CAA, stating that it is intended to protect persecuted minorities from the three specified countries and does not affect any Indian citizens, including Muslims. The government has also emphasized that the act is a humanitarian measure and is not discriminatory in nature.

Despite the government’s assurances, the CAA has remained a deeply polarizing issue in India, leading to widespread debates and discussions about citizenship, secularism, and human rights.

Eligibility for Citizenship

The Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA) of 2019 in India amends the Citizenship Act of 1955 to provide a pathway to Indian citizenship for certain persecuted minorities from three neighboring countries. The eligibility criteria under the CAA for obtaining citizenship are as follows:

• The act specifically applies to individuals from three countries — Pakistan, Bangladesh, and Afghanistan.
• It is applicable to individuals belonging to Hindu, Sikh, Buddhist, Jain, Parsi, and Christian communities in these countries.
• The primary criterion is that these individuals must have faced religious persecution or fear of religious persecution in their home countries.
• They must have entered India on or before December 31, 2014. This is to ensure that the act covers those who have been living in India without citizenship for a significant amount of time.
• The CAA reduces the requirement of the period of residency in India for these specific groups from the existing eleven years to five years as a qualification for citizenship.
• The act does not apply to the tribal areas of Assam, Meghalaya, Mizoram, or Tripura as included in the Sixth Schedule to the Constitution of India, and the area covered under “The Inner Line” as per the Bengal Eastern Frontier Regulation, 1873.

International Reactions on The Citizenship Amendment Act

The Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA) in India, passed in December 2019, attracted significant international attention and a range of reactions. Here are some of the key international responses:

1. United Nations: The Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) expressed concern that the CAA is fundamentally discriminatory in nature. The UN stated that the act does not extend the same protection to Muslim communities and called for respect for the right to non-discrimination in all aspects of citizenship legislation.

2. United States: The United States Commission on International Religious Freedom (USCIRF) expressed concerns over the CAA, suggesting that the U.S. government should consider sanctions against Indian officials who are responsible for the implementation of this act. However, the U.S. State Department urged India to protect the rights of its religious minorities in accordance with its Constitution and democratic values.

3. European Union: Members of the European Parliament proposed a resolution against the CAA, stating it marked a dangerous shift in the way citizenship will be determined in India and is set to create the largest statelessness crisis in the world. However, the resolution was not adopted.

4. Islamic Countries: There were mixed reactions from Islamic countries. While some countries like Pakistan and Iran criticized the act, others like Bangladesh and the United Arab Emirates downplayed the concerns, viewing it as an internal matter of India.

5. United Kingdom: Debates occurred in the British Parliament over the CAA, with some MPs expressing concern over the potential impact on minority groups. The UK government, however, regarded the CAA as an internal matter of India.

6. Canada: Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau expressed concern about the situation in India regarding the CAA and the subsequent protests, emphasizing the importance of dialogue and peaceful resolution.

The act sparked protests and criticism from various international human rights organizations, academics, and activists who raised concerns about its potential to create large-scale statelessness and its exclusion of Muslims.

It is important to note that while there was significant international criticism, the Indian government defended the CAA as a humanitarian measure aimed at helping persecuted minorities from neighboring countries and stated that it does not affect the citizenship rights of Indian nationals, including Muslims.

Protests for The Citizenship Amendment Act

The Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA), passed in December 2019, sparked widespread protests across India. These protests were notable for their intensity, scale, and the broad coalition of people who participated in them. Key aspects of these protests include:

1. Nationwide Spread: Protests erupted in various parts of the country, including major cities like New Delhi, Mumbai, Kolkata, Bengaluru, and Hyderabad. They also spread to universities, with students playing a significant role.

2. Diverse Participation: Participants included students, activists, political parties, civil society groups, and ordinary citizens. The protests drew people from various religious, social, and economic backgrounds.

3. Shaheen Bagh: A notable protest site was Shaheen Bagh in New Delhi, where primarily women protesters staged a continuous sit-in. This protest became symbolic of the wider anti-CAA movement, drawing national and international attention.

4. Issues Raised: The protesters raised concerns that the CAA, combined with the proposed National Register of Citizens (NRC), could be discriminatory, particularly against Muslims, and could lead to large-scale disenfranchisement.

5. Violent Clashes and Police Response: Some protests turned violent, leading to clashes with the police. There were allegations of excessive use of force by the police, especially in universities like Jamia Millia Islamia and Aligarh Muslim University.

6. Internet Shutdowns and Curfews: The government responded with internet shutdowns, imposition of curfew, and restrictions on gatherings in certain areas to control the situation.

7. Support for the CAA: Parallel to the protests, there were also rallies and gatherings in support of the CAA, with participants arguing that the law provides much-needed refuge to persecuted minorities from neighboring countries.

8. International Attention: The protests and the government’s response received significant international attention, with concerns raised about the implications for human rights and India’s democratic fabric.

9. Legal Challenges: The CAA faced numerous legal challenges, with petitions filed in the Supreme Court of India questioning its constitutional validity.

These protests were among the most significant in recent Indian history in terms of their scope and the issues they raised regarding citizenship, secularism, and democratic rights.

CAA — NRC Relationship

The Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA) and the National Register of Citizens (NRC) are two distinct but related entities in Indian law and policy, and their relationship has been a subject of significant debate and concern.

The NRC is a register of all Indian citizens. Its purpose is to document all legal citizens of India so that illegal migrants can be identified and deported. It was first implemented in the state of Assam, which has faced issues of illegal immigration from neighboring Bangladesh. The NRC process in Assam involved residents having to provide documentary evidence to prove their citizenship.

The concern among critics is about the potential use of the CAA in conjunction with an all-India NRC. They argue that if an NRC were to be implemented nationwide (as indicated by some government statements), the CAA could protect non-Muslims who are unable to prove their citizenship, while potentially leaving Muslims in a vulnerable position. Essentially, non-Muslims failing to meet NRC criteria could still claim citizenship under the CAA, a pathway not available to Muslims.

The Indian government has stated that the CAA is a separate law from the NRC and is not intended to take away anyone’s citizenship but to grant citizenship to persecuted minorities from neighboring countries. The government has also said that the rules and criteria for a nationwide NRC have not been formulated yet.

The linkage between the CAA and a potential nationwide NRC sparked widespread protests and unrest across India. Many feared that this combination could be used to disenfranchise Muslims in the country.

The NRC process in Assam, which was a Supreme Court-directed exercise, led to over 1.9 million people being left out of the final list. This included Hindus, Muslims, and other communities, highlighting the complexities and challenges in implementing such a documentation-based citizenship verification process.

Both the CAA and the NRC have faced legal challenges in India’s Supreme Court. Petitioners argue that the CAA is discriminatory and violates the Indian Constitution, particularly its provisions on secularism and equality before the law.

In summary, while the CAA and NRC are technically separate, their potential intersection raises significant concerns regarding citizenship determination and the treatment of religious minorities in India.