MODI-SHAH’S CITIZENSHIP LAW HAS ALL THE FOUR FUNDAMENTAL ERRORS
By Gyan Pathak
Despite stiff opposition to CAA-NPR-NRC all over the country, the Modi government’s adamant attitude on their implementation is not only surprising but also alarming. PM Modi is still saying that people are being misled about CAA, deliberately ignoring the fact that it contains all the four fundamental errors – the error of principle, the error of omission, the error of commission, and the error of compensation. With all these errors, it is bound to create numerous known and unknown troubles during its implementation. Additionally, it forms a deadly cocktail along with NPR and NRC.
Error of principle is the most dangerous error that a piece of legislation may contain, because all other errors have roots in this fundamental error. Before examining CAA for the error of principle, a few things need to be considered first. A principle is the fundamental doctrine that serves as the foundation of certain system – of governance, belief, behaviour, chain of reasoning or anything else, and is either a fundamental truth or proposition derived from fundamental truth. A principle is said to be valid when it does not either contain self-contradiction. When two or more principles are implemented in a complex situation, they must not create a situation of antinomy, ie a contradiction between two principles arising out of their implementation beyond understanding and experience due to which they transcend their sphere of applicability and we land at a paradox and suffer on account of this misapplication of principles, even if the principles are individually valid.
One of the most important fundamental principles of humanity is that a man must not be subjected to any prejudice. Another principle in governance, especially the democratic principle enshrined in the Constitution of India, is the principle of equality before law. These two principles do not allow prejudice and inequality before law even for non-citizens of India, in the present case ‘illegal immigrants’ as it is termed in the CAA. While amending the Citizenship Act of India, these two fundamental principles are violated. Such a violation has cropped up due to BJP’s biased categorization of ‘illegal immigrants’ in the country. They have been in the habit of biased categorization of ‘refugees’ and ‘infiltrators’ which is based on religion. Illegal Muslim migrants are labelled by them as ‘infiltrators’ and all others of different faiths are labelled ‘refugees’ by them. They do not consider any other merit in the cases of ‘illegal immigration’ while categorizing.
Refugee is a term for a person who flees a country in a bid to save his life from ‘persecution’ in his own country and land into another. Freeing from ‘prosecution’ is a different matter. People of many faiths – such as Hindus, Sikhs, Parsis, Buddhists, Christians, and Muslims – have come in India to take refuge here. Additionally, many Tamilians have also taken refuge in India for fear of persecution in their own countries. The CAA, while seeking amendment to the Citizenship Act, carried prejudice against those illegal immigrants taking refuge in this country who happened to be Muslims. A wrong principle is applied in their case – ‘if you are a Muslim, you cannot be a ‘refugee’, but an ‘infiltrator’. They don’t have time to consider merit in a case if illegal immigrant is a Muslim. It is a fact that India is also suffering from the menace of ‘infiltrators’, but then a state must decide on who is a refugee and who is an infiltrator on the merit of the case, and not according to any prejudice against a particular religion. A Muslim, such as Ahmadia or Shia may have come into India for fear of persecutions in their own countries. How can we categorize them ‘infiltrators’. India must not be open for citizenship for all persons coming to India, but decision should not be taken on the basis of prejudice, but on the basis of sound principles.
On such a prejudice, government committed error of omission and omitted not only the word ‘Muslim’, but also several other words such as China and Sri Lanka from where we have immigrants. The legislation only mentions Pakistan, Afghanistan, and Bangladesh as countries, as if we have illegal immigrant refugees only from those countries. Everybody knows that a large number of Tibetan Buddhists have come into India for fear of persecution by China, Tamilians for fear of persecution in the hands of Sri Lankan officials, Rohingyas for fear of persecution in Myanmar, etc. However, the present legislation under consideration does not even mention those people and their countries which makes the CAA incomprehensive. Even Hindus came from Pakistan occupied Kashmir were not mentioned who had entered in this country for fear of persecution in the hands of Pakistani people and officials at the time of Independence of India. They are yet to be given full citizenship rights in Jammu and Kashmir, on the government’s logic that they are already Indian citizens and when PoK will be under India, they will be rehabilitated in PoK where they will avail all the facilities available of Indian Citizens. Selective omissions and commissions have made this legislation full of errors of omissions and the errors of commission.
The CAA also granted fast track Indian citizenship for those mentioned in the act and living in India for six years. Twelve years of residence had been the standard eligibility for naturalization as an Indian citizenship so far. The cut-off date for citizenship is December 31, 2014, which means the first year of Modi’s rule. It is arbitrary. The amendment also proposes provisions for cancelation of citizenship for Overseas Citizens of India that is views with apprehension among overseas Indians.
Now come to the last category of error, it the error of compensation. An error of compensation is an error that tries to neutralize an error done earlier. What happened in Assam for making list of illegal immigrants and afterwards may give numerous examples of error of omission, commission, and compensation. The final list contains not only Muslims but lakhs of Hindus as illegal immigrants. To save only Hindus, this Act came into existence which is being opposed by Assamese on the ground that it would destroy their identity and culture. It proves that Hindus are to be adversely affected by this legislation. This act is also not applicable in certain areas in the North East. The CAA with several errors has thus been introduced to compensate for the error done in governance earlier. Both are errors, and we must aim for error free legislation. With NPR and NRC, it may create numerous trouble in the course of its implementation in the present form. The loopholes will additionally empower officials to exploit people, both citizens and non-citizens ie the people who are termed ‘illegal immigrants’.
India had already powers to give or deny citizenship to anyone, therefore, this piece of legislation full of errors was unwarranted and unnecessary. (IPA Service)