The Citizenship Amendment Act, passed by Parliament in 2019 and notified by the government on Monday night, will come into effect weeks ahead of the general election, sparking controversy among the opposition, which accuses the ruling Bharatiya Janata Party of polarizing voters, and the government, Fight back.
Amid resistance from the opposition, the Union Home Ministry issued a statement clarifying various views within the CAA and answering questions raised by critics.
What did the government say?
The first point in the government’s rebuttal was to emphasize that the civil rights of Indian Muslims would not be revoked or abrogated. The Indian government clarified in a statement that India’s estimated 180 million Muslim population “enjoy equal rights with any other Indian citizen.”
The government said the Citizenship Amendment Act only covers persecuted Hindus, Sikhs, Christians, Parsis, Buddhists or Muslims from three Muslim-majority countries – Bangladesh, Afghanistan and Pakistan. Jains, who fled India before December 31, 2014 due to religious persecution.
Read | Does CAA restrict Muslim immigration?What does the government say?
The CAA only reduces the waiting period for eligible individuals to apply for citizenship from 11 years to 5 years. In an earlier clarification, the home ministry also maintained that the CAA “will not prevent any Muslim who is persecuted in these countries for practicing Islam from applying for Indian citizenship under existing laws”.
Crucially, the CAA also does not provide for the deportation of individuals from the above three countries who are illegally residing in India, the government said. The government said this was because “India does not have an agreement with any of the three countries to repatriate migrants”.
It clarified that there was therefore no issue of repatriation.
Read | 4 years after the bill was passed, the Citizenship Act CAA becomes a reality
The government has also since refuted rumors that Indian citizens, referring to Muslims, will be required to retain and produce citizenship documents. “No Indian citizen will be asked to produce any document proving citizenship,” the ministry said.
Finally, the government also ended the argument that Muslims from other countries could not apply for citizenship. “The CAA will not abolish the naturalization law. Therefore, anyone seeking to become an Indian citizen, including Muslim immigrants from foreign countries, can apply…”
All will be granted citizenship if found eligible under current laws, the interior ministry said.
What did the opposition say?
Congress president Mallikarjun Kharge slammed the Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA) notification, calling it a “desperate attempt to create divisive politics” by the BJP. Haq’s party also accused the BJP of trying to divide voters, especially in Bengal and Assam.
The Congress party also pointed out that the four-year delay in notifying the CAA, which was one of the biggest campaign promises of the BJP before the 2019 elections, was finally fulfilled before the 2024 polls, when the saffron party can list it for a major achievement.
Read | ‘Aimed to polarize elections’: Opposition attack on CAA
“After seeking nine extensions to the rule notification period, the timing ahead of the elections is clearly designed to polarize…especially in West Bengal and Assam,” Jairam Ramesh said.
Bengal Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee, one of the most outspoken opponents of the CAA, has claimed it is a conspiracy to “disenfranchise citizens” and expressed doubts about the legality of the law. Trinamool leaders dismissed the new laws as “just lollipops and show-offs”.
Read | ‘Think before you apply’, Mamata Banerjee’s CAA warns
“The BJP says the CAA gives you rights, but when you apply for citizenship, you become an ‘illegal immigrant’ and will lose your rights. You will be taken to detention camps,” she said.
Read | Tamil superstar Vijay calls citizenship law CAA ‘unacceptable’
Other senior opposition figures, including Tamil Nadu Chief Minister Stalin, also slammed the CAA and insisted, as was the case with Mr Stalin, that the bill would not be implemented in their respective states.
Read | ‘No benefit’: Stalin says ‘no’ to CAA in Tamil Nadu
Notably, in Tamil Nadu, the AIADMK – a former ally with which the BJP is trying to reconnect ahead of the Lok Sabha elections – has also criticized the new laws.
Read | ‘Big historical mistake’: AIADMK opposes CAA rules notification
Edappadi K Palaniswami, general secretary of the party, said: “The government has made a huge historic mistake. The AIADMK will never allow this to happen… I want to tell you, The AIADMK will join hands with people across the country to democratically oppose this act.”
The Aam Aadmi Party also reacted, with Delhi Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal calling the decision “very dangerous” and demanding to know how the new citizens would find jobs.
“The BJP government has not provided employment opportunities to the youth. Many people do not have houses but the BJP wants to bring people from Pakistan and provide them with houses,” he said.
“There are about 30 million minorities in these three countries. Once our doors open, huge crowds will come here. Even if 150 million people come here, who will employ them? Where will they settle? People of India Why is the party doing this?” he asked.
What is CAA?
The Citizenship Amendment Act provides fast-track citizenship to members of the six communities mentioned above, who fled to India to avoid persecution in the three Muslim-majority countries.
When the bill was introduced in 2019, the CAA sparked massive protests and sectarian violence across the country, killing dozens of people, including in New Delhi. Critics say the CAA discriminates against Muslims and may target minority communities based on the NPR (National Population Register) and NRC (National Register of Citizens).
The government said the delay was due to the COVID-19 outbreak in December 2020.
The protests include resolutions in several non-BJP states including Tamil Nadu, Kerala and Punjab, some of which have now said they will not implement the resolutions in their territories.
