By Keith Nongsteng
Considering the ramifications that the proposed amendment to the Citizenship Act, 1955 would have upon the socio-cultural fabric of our state of Meghalaya and the North East as a whole, I feel obligated as a citizen of this country to pen down my opinion on such a crucial and controversial piece of proposed legislation that was introduced by the current dispensation at the Centre. For the readers’ knowledge, the Citizenship (Amendment) Bill, 2016 (hereafter to be referred to as CAB 2016) as passed by the Lok Sabha on the January 8, 2018, seeks to insert a controversial clause in the principal Citizenship Act, 1955, which grants an easy one-way ticket to Indian Citizenship for persons belonging to five minority communities namely, Hindus, Sikhs, Buddhists, Jains and Christians who are from three neighbouring countries, namely, Pakistan, Bangladesh and Afghanistan. Further, they shall not be treated as illegal immigrants for the purpose of the Principal Act. This will open the floodgates of unwanted demographic change.
The Father of the Indian Constitution, Dr. B.R Ambedkar had expressed in the Constituent Assembly that citizenship of India was indeed a complicated topic of discussion. At Partition, we must recall that though the idea of a Two Nation Theory materialized into the creation of Pakistan as the natural home for all Muslims, it did not extend to the concept of India as the natural home for Hindus, for we have remained unhindered as a secular state since 1947. Here lies the crux of the problem – religious identity politics. The peculiarity of the CAB 2016 is that it seeks to grant citizenship status to illegal immigrants solely on the credentials of their religious background, and this to many of us defeats the very purpose upon which the idea of India was conceived by our Founding Fathers in the first place.
The concept of India as a natural home for Hindus can be traced back to Hindutva stalwarts such as VD Sarvarkar and KB Hedgewar. It is not surprising here to note that in the BJP’s manifesto for the 2014 General Elections, it had been categorically stated unambiguously that “India shall remain a natural home for persecuted Hindus and they shall be welcomed to seek refuge here”. It is not surprising therefore that they would resort to this move once they took control of Lutyen’s Delhi. A question may be raised by friends from the other side that the Bill is not only for Hindus, but for adherents of four other religious groups. Originally, the Constitution of India stated that any reference to Hindus in law is to be construed as containing a reference to the followers of Sikhism, Jainism, and Buddhism, meaning they are subject to Hindu laws. Here I also bring in a view expressed by an RSS meet in Bhopal in 2014 that Jains, Sikhs and Buddhists belong to the greater Hindu society. This view has therefore been carried forward in this Bill. The other two communities are the Parsis and Christians, who I believe were included as a political appeasement tactic to sound more inclusive across the secular spectrum. Persecuted Muslims have not been included in the CAB 2016, and for this, no explanation is required as everything can be read from one statement made by Assam’s Finance Minister when he said that “without the Bill, we are surrendering ourselves to the philosophy of Jinnah. This is a fight between Jinnah’s legacy and India’s legacy.” But what is India’s legacy? It is a legacy of double standards where on the one hand we deport illegal Rohingya Muslims back to Myanmar and on the other, we accept with open arms illegal, undocumented non-Muslims Bangladeshis! Is it a legacy of communalization of our Constitution in favour of particular religious groups?
It must be noted here that we as a country already have a burden of more than 1.25 billion people on our strained economy. It is interesting too that India has signed neither the 1951 United Nations Refugee Convention nor its 1967 Protocol. If persecution is the magical word for this entire Bill, then we urge the NDA government to deal with religious persecution within our own country first. Recent reports released by Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch do not speak in a positive, promising tone for the state of minorities in India.
As per 2011 Census the total population of Meghalaya was 29.7 lakhs, a 2.76 percent annual growth rate since Census 2001, as opposed to the national annual growth rate of 1.76 percent. This trend clearly indicates that there is an abnormal influx of immigrants into the state, a substantial portion of whom are undocumented, who come from neighbouring countries such as Nepal and Bangladesh. A given law of migration states that people will usually migrate to regions which are closer to their own neighborhood, where they expect to find similarities of culture to an extent. Thus we cannot expect illegal Bangladeshis to go settle in Kerala or in Maharashtra. They will target their nearest vicinities. If the CAB 2016 becomes an Act, it is guaranteed that there will be a huge influx of foreigners into our state. On the pretext of religious persecution, they shall enter Meghalaya as we already share a highly porous border with Bangladesh. Want of a better life will push these illegal immigrants into Meghalaya and other North Eastern states. The states of Assam and Tripura have reached their inflexion point when it comes to providing economic opportunities for them. This becomes a dangerous situation for the genuine residents of Meghalaya, particularly the indigenous population. As it is, at present, there is no dedicated legislation apart from related provisions of 6th Schedule to check the influx of illegal immigrants into our state and this is a matter of concern that should be taken up by the state government forthwith.
In a research conducted by AMAN Public Charitable Trust about the coal mine workers of the Jaintia Hills, the numerical composition of the surveyed mines revealed a 60 percent domination of suspected Bangladeshi workers. In the Khasi Hills, the same report says that 10 percent of the mine workers are Bangladeshi immigrants, for some don’t even hesitate to tell the investigators about their country of origin!
Let me now present some legal lacunae when it comes to the constitutional validity of the CAB 2016. For a layman’s understanding, Article 13 of the Constitution of India states that any law which is in contravention of the Fundamental Rights will be considered null and void. Status of this important Article has been laid down in subsequent Supreme Court rulings, most notably the Minerva Mills case, a landmark decision of the Apex Court which has expanded our understanding of the concept of the basic structure of the Constitution. The primary ground for any challenge questioning the constitutionality of the Bill would rest on the basis of its violation of Article 14 (Equality before Law) of the Constitution. Article 14 guarantees to any person, irrespective of their citizenship status, equality before the law within the territory of India. It further prohibits discrimination on grounds of religion, race, caste, sex or place of birth. Differential treatment to immigrants on the basis of religion violates this tenet. Furthermore, there is a gross violation of Article 21 (Right to Life and Personal Liberty). As the object of the Bill is explicitly to make illegal immigrants eligible to apply for Indian citizenship, it serves as an implicit encouragement for foreigners who are eligible under the said exemption to migrate to India for any number of reasons, on the pretext of persecution.
It is important to point out here that this is not the same as granting asylum to refugees, but rather a promise of citizenship to all foreign nationals belonging to the prescribed religious communities. There will most likely be a negative effect on the cultural identity and inclusive growth of the genuine citizens of this country, and the state of Meghalaya in particular. The biggest and most controversial lacuna of this entire Bill is how it totally defeats the purpose of the National Registration of Citizens (NRC) in Assam. The NRC is not designed to classify migrants on the basis of their religion. Through Passport (Entry into India) Amendment Rules, 2015 and Foreigners (Amendment) Order, 2015, cut-off date for the illegal immigrants has been set on or before 31st December 2014. Hence, any non-Muslims found to have entered Assam after March 24, 1971 need not go through the deportation process, thereby nullifying the NRC process.
Another point of discussion is Secularism, a word enshrined in the Preamble to the Constitution of India by the 42nd Constitutional Amendment. The biased CAB creates a tension with this basic tenet of the Constitution. The Amendment pushes the idea of an India which gives preferential treatment to mostly non-Muslim communities.
Despite dissatisfaction being expressed by many in the opposition bench of Lok Sabha and the people of North East, they still went ahead with this constitutional amendment. To some extent, we must congratulate the Government of Meghalaya for having passed a Cabinet resolution to oppose the Bill, but is it enough? Is not the will of the people of Meghalaya greater than their legislative posts? I urge the Government of Meghalaya to take a firm, realistic step and challenge this preposterous Bill head on. “Suri Kup Snieh Langbrot” (Wolf in Sheep’s Clothing) goes the famous Khasi saying. In the mask of a humanitarian Bill- can we not see that there are forces trying to build a Hindu Rashtra for no other benefit than their own and that the ramifications will have to be faced by us in the region? Yes, love your neighbor, but not at the expense of your own family!
(The author briefly studied in the Faculty of Law, University of Delhi and .
categorically states that he does not belong to or speak for any political party. His views are solely his).