Afghan crisis: Hardeep Singh Puri's justification of CAA invalid

Justify CAA Image Courtesy:timesofindia.indiatimes.com

The union minister for Housing and Urban Affairs, Hardeep Singh Puri has used the crisis in Afghanistan as an opportunity to justify the 2019 amendment to the Citizenship law. On August 22, he said that the recent developments in the volatile neighbourhood of Afghanistan and the way “Sikhs and Hindus” are going through a harrowing time are precisely why it was necessary to enact the Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA). But the honourable minister’s justification is flawed at a few levels.

Recent developments in our volatile neighbourhood & the way Sikhs & Hindus are going through a harrowing time are precisely why it was necessary to enact the Citizenship Amendment Act.#CAA #Sikhs
https://t.co/5Lyrst3nqc via @IndianExpress
— Hardeep Singh Puri (@HardeepSPuri) August 22, 2021

December 31, 2014 criteria

The Citizenship Amendment Act, 2019 enacted by the Narendra Modi Government has a December 31, 2014 criteria (amendment to section 2). According to this provision, the protection of CAA shall not apply to anyone who entered India after December 2014, i.e., in 2015 and later. Hence, the 2021 evacuation of Afghan ‘Hindus and Sikhs’ is irrelevant to the Citizenship Amendment Act because it is explicitly for people who have been residing in India before 2014.

CAA rules not implemented yet

Another reason why the CAA is of no help in the current scenario is because the rules of the Act have not been framed yet. The issue of framing the rules of the Citizenship Amendment Act was raised in the Monsoon session which ended 10 days ago. The Centre has sought time till January 2022 to complete the process.

CAA had come into force on January 10, 2020 but the Government of India has reportedly asked for at least 5 extensions citing no concrete reason. According to a SabrangIndia report, on July 27, Nityanand Rai, the Minister of State (Home Affairs) informed the Lok Sabha, “The Citizenship (Amendment) Act, 2019 (CAA) has been notified on 12.12.2019 and has come into force w.e.f. 10.01.2020. The Committees on Subordinate Legislation, Lok Sabha and Rajya Sabha have been requested to grant further extension of time upto 09.01.2022 to frame the rules under the Citizenship (Amendment) Act, 2019.”

This extension contravenes the Parliamentary Procedure Manual Rule 11.3.1, which states that Statutory rules, regulations and bye-laws should be framed within a “period of six months” from the date on which the relevant statute came into force.

Afghanistan evacuees are not undocumented migrants

Another fallacy in minister Hardeep Singh’s tweet is that people flying in from Afghanistan are not undocumented migrants, the category that has been offered protection by the 2019 amendment act. The enactment of CAA has no implications on the present evacuation!

India announced a new category of electronic visa called “e-Emergency X-Misc Visa” for Afghan citizens to enter India. However, the six-month visas which will now be given irrespective of religion, will be scrutinised and decided in Delhi after a “security review of the applicant will be done to check credentials”. However, the process after the expiry of 6 months has not been clarified by the government yet.

The government, which is now allowing Muslims from Afghanistan to enter the country, must take note that Muslims can face imminent threat of persecution in an Islamic country. Ironically, this was their justification to exclude Muslims from Afghanistan, Bangladesh and Pakistan to apply for citizenship since they cannot face persecution in an Islamic country.

Flashback to CAA, 2019

The controversial 2019 amendment seeks to grant citizenship to immigrants from Pakistan, Bangladesh and Afghanistan, belonging to Hindu, Buddhist, Jain, Parsi, Christian, and Sikh communities, and only excludes Muslims.

2. “In the Citizenship Act, 1955 (hereinafter referred to as the principal Act), in section 2, in sub-section (1), in clause (b), the following proviso shall be inserted, namely: —

Provided that any person belonging to Hindu, Sikh, Buddhist, Jain, Parsi or Christian community from Afghanistan, Bangladesh or Pakistan, who entered into India on or before the 31st day of December, 2014 and who has been exempted by the Central Government by or under clause (c) of sub-section (2) of section 3 of the Passport (Entry into India) Act, 1920 or from the application of the provisions of the Foreigners Act, 1946 or any rule or order made thereunder, shall not be treated as illegal migrant for the purposes of this Act;”

There is no concrete ground for bringing about such a legislation, except highlighting the partisan approach of the government. The Report of the Joint Committee on the Citizenship Amendment Bill, 2016 recorded the response of the Intelligence Bureau that revealed the act would merely benefit 31,000 migrants. Their response read, “As per our records, there are 31,313 persons belonging to minority communities (Hindus – 25447, Sikhs – 5807, Christians – 55, Buddhists – 2 and Parsis – 2) who have been given Long Term Visa on the basis of their claim of religious persecution in their respective countries and want Indian Citizenship. Hence, these persons will be immediate beneficiaries.” The entire report may be read here:

The Act has been deemed unconstitutional and discriminatory for many reasons. For instance- The impugned act reduces the residence requirement to grant citizenship from 11 to 5 years. So, people who fall under the ambit of CAA, are only required to reside in India for 5 years to apply for citizenship, whereas people who want to apply for citizenship naturally have to wait for 11 years.

Another perplexing aspect of the legislation is the cut off date of December 31, 2014. If the primary objective of the law is to protect people from religious persecution, why decide one’s citizenship status on the basis of their religion and the December 31, 2014 mark? The Constitution of India (Article 14) provides for equal protection of the laws to people but this act creates more problems than it solves! Over 100 petitions have been filed challenging the Act, and several activists who have been the voice of the anti-CAA movement have been jailed under the anti-terror law.