The Union Ministry of Home Affairs has “requested” another six-month extension to frame the rules under the controversial Citizenship (Amendment) Act (CAA) – making this the seventh similar extension, The Hindu has reported.

The CAA was passed by both Houses of parliament at the end 0f 2019, amidst widespread nationwide protests. For the first time, this law made citizenship directly correlated to a person’s religion. Under the CAA, non-Muslim minorities from Afghanistan, Pakistan and Bangladesh who entered India on or before December 31, 2014 are eligible for fast-track Indian citizenship.

However, while without the rules being framed, the Act cannot be implemented, Citizens for Justice and Peace  had probed and analysed the MHA annual report (2021-2022) that revealed that it has “delegated powers under the CAA to grant citizenship under the controversial 2019 amendment.

In November 2022, Union home minister Amit Shah had said that the rules were being “formulated” and there had been a delay because of the pandemic. That was in Parliament, documents in the MHA Annual Report showed otherwise. Before that, in August, he had said that the law would be implemented once the COVID-19 vaccination drive had been completed.

The CAA 2019 was passed in haste through the Lok Sabha on December 10, 2019 and in the Rajya Sabha two days later after it was introduced in the upper house by Shah. The gazetted notification declaring the amendment to be a law was issued on December 12, 2019. The move drew heavy criticism from politicians and citizens alike for ostensibly singling out Muslims and excluding them from its purview. Protests spontaneously broke out in Delhi and the first violent repressive action by the state was the police action inside the Jamia Milia University in the nation’s capital on December 15. A series of protests followed thereafter, leading to more and more repression. The Delhi police falls under the MHA.

The Act aims to provide citizenship to Hindus, Parsis, Sikhs, Buddhists, Jains and Christians purportedly fleeing persecution from India’s Muslim-majority neighbours; namely, Pakistan, Afghanistan and Bangladesh.

The notable absence of Muslims from the provisions of the legislation, irrespective of whether or not they are being persecuted in their countries, as well as the unconstitutional nature of the legislation when coupled with the National Register of Citizens (NRC) had drawn widespread protests from thousands of citizens across the country. Despite the protests and violence that ensued, the government notified the law in January 2020. Yet, the rules of the law are still to be framed, despite three years having passed.

Contrary to the HM’s recent claims, the CJP reports reveals how the Ministry of Home Affairs in its 2021-22 Annual Report has revealed that it has delegated powers under Citizenship Act to grant citizenship under the controversial 2019 amendment. Delegated powers have been “given” to Collectors of 13 more districts and Home Secretaries of 2 more states. With this, Collectors of 29 districts and Home Secretaries of 9 States have been authorized to grant citizenship in respect of foreigners belonging to Hindu, Sikh, Jain, Buddhist, and Christian or Parsi community from Pakistan, Bangladesh and Afghanistan.

The report states, “The delegation will speed up the process of granting Indian citizenship to aforesaid category of migrants as the decision would be taken at local level.”

The report states that from April 1, 2021 to December 31 2021, a total of 1414 citizenship certificates have been granted by all authorities including this Ministry. Out of this, 1120 were granted by registration under section 5 and 294 were granted by naturalisation under section 6 of the Citizenship Act. These notifications clearly invoke the 2019 amendments.

They clearly direct that “the Central Government hereby directs that powers exercisable by it, for registration as a citizen of India under section 5, or for grant of certificate of naturalisation under section 6, of the Citizenship Act, 1955, in respect of any person belonging to minority community in Afghanistan, Bangladesh and Pakistan, namely, Hindus, Sikhs, Buddhists, Jains, Parsis and Christians (hereinafter referred to as “the applicant”), residing in the districts mentioned.

Despite these claims in the annual report, the Union government’s failure to frame the rules has come under scrutiny in light of certain developments in the intervening years; for instance, the fact that reportedly around 800 Pakistanis Hindus were forced to return to their home country the year before, in 2021, because they were unable to get citizenship.

Facing religious persecution in Pakistan, these Hindu migrants sought Indian citizenship through a fast-tracked route through an online citizenship portal. However, the notifications for this fast-tracked citizenship were made under the Citizenship Act, 1955 and not the CAA because the rules had not been framed.

Further, following the attack on a Gurudwara that also led to a Sikh Pakistani being killed in Kabul, Afhganistan last year, it also became apparent that that around a hundred Sikhs and Hindus in Afghanistan had been awaiting approval for electronic visas to India despite applying for them before the Taliban took over the country.

Following the incident, and the deceased’s widow speaking to the media about his inability to obtain the visa, the Indian government granted what was termed as ‘priority to the hundred-odd Hindus and Sikhs. Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s letter to Afgan Sikhs following the incident made no reference to the CAA; an Act which, ostensibly, sought to avoid just such a situation by bringing back persecuted non-Muslims to India.

At the time of the widespread nationwide protests against the discriminatory provisions of the CAA 2019, amendments, civil rights groups and jurists had pointed out how the religious demarcation (read exclusion) of one section of India’s minorities (Muslims) from fast-tracked citizenship by naturalisation was hit by Articles 14, 15.16 and 21 of the Indian Constitution. Excluding Ahmadiyas or non-believers who also suffer persecution in Pakistan, or minorities like Tamil Hindus from Sri Lanka or Rohingyas from Myaanmaar further cemented discriminatory basis within Indian citizenship law.

Related:

Is CAA 2019 stealthily making its way into our lives?

FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS (FAQS) ABOUT THE CAB/CAA 2019

WHO IS AN INDIAN? (ENGLISH)

CITIZENSHIP LAWS IN INDIA – FAQS

The post Union Home Ministry seeks further six months to frame CAA rules, has implementation however begun? appeared first on SabrangIndia.

On January 7, the Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA) restored the FCRA registration of Missionaries of Charity (MoC), the Catholic congregation founded by Bharat Ratna, Mother Teresa. The restoration comes after global outrage broke out when the Ministry had announced that the FCRA registration of the MoC was not renewed as “some adverse inputs were noticed”. That was on Christmas 2021.

Now the NGO with the registration number-147120001 has been included in the list of 16,908 NGOs whose FCRA registration is active as on January 7, reported The Hindu, and now the MoC is “eligible to receive and utilise foreign funds in its bank accounts.”

The UK Parliament had debated the issue, seeking to know if the British government had raised the issue of blocking of overseas funds of the MoC and other NGOs with India, added the news report.

The move comes after much uncertainty on the issue and a global debate when news of 22,000 inmates in the homes run by Missionaries of Charity (MoC) across India being hit with basic food and medicine shortages was accompanied by reports (officially confirmed) of the accounts of the charity (MOC) being frozen. The Ministry of Home Affairs had claimed that: “State Bank of India informed that Missionaries of Charity itself sent a request to SBI to freeze its accounts” in an official statement! 

The government has claimed that it “did not freeze bank accounts of Missionaries of Charity (MoC)” and added that the renewal under application under Foreign Contribution Regulation Act (FCRA) for renewal of registration was “refused due to adverse inputs”. It added that “no request / revision application has been received from Missionaries of Charity for review of refusal of renewal”. The renewal was refused on Christmas day, December 25 2021, for “not meeting the eligibility conditions under FCRA 2010 and Foreign Contribution Regulation Rules (FCRR) 2011,” stated the government. 

The MHA had stated that the “Missionaries of Charity (MoC) was registered under FCRA vide Registration No 147120001 and its registration was valid up-to October 31, 2021. The validity was subsequently extended up-to December 31, 2021 along with other FCRA Associations whose renewal application was pending renewal. However, while considering the MoC’s renewal application, some adverse inputs were noticed. In consideration of these inputs on record, the renewal application of MoC was not approved.” However, it has not shared what those “adverse inputs” were or if the MoC had been informed. It sounds strange that the Missionaries of Charity “asked” State Bank of India to “freeze its accounts”!

This has been called out by All India Trinamool Congress (AITC) leader and Member of Parliament, Derek O’Brien, as “a filthy hit job on Mother Teresa’s Missionaries of Charity” adding that the official statement by MHA is “spin doctoring” and a “cover up”.

The registration of nearly 6,000 NGOs lapsed from January 1 as the MHA refused to renew their application or the NGOs did not apply for renewal.

According to the news report, an MHA official said on January 1, that the “Ministry declined to renew the FCRA registration of 179 NGOs, while 5,789 associations did not apply for a renewal before the December 31 deadline. The deadline for those NGOs who had applied before December 31 and whose application was not rejected have been given an extension till March 31.” 

According to The Hindu, the 2020-21 annual financial returns filed by the Kolkata registered MoC, on December 13, the total balance in its foreign contribution bank account stood at ₹103.76 crore. It has more than 250 bank accounts across the country to utilise the foreign funds.

Ironically,  shortly after the rejection of the renewal application, Missionaries of Charity (MoC) nuns were evicted from the Shishu Bhawan orphanage in Kanpur Cantonment, Uttar Pradesh on January 3, 2022. This home sheltered orphaned, destitute and abandoned children since its establishment in June 1968. The sisters owned the property for 53 years after buying it from a private entity and helped in the adoption of 1,500 abandoned babies. They also served thousands of other poor and deprived like leprosy patients, unwed mothers and children of construction or migrant labour.

However, the Defence Estates Office (DEO) said that it owns all the land in the 62 cantonments of India and claimed that Shishu Bhawan was built on leased land, and that the 90-year lease expired in 2019, following which the nuns were dubbed as “trespassers”. They were slapped with a penalty fee of ₹ 1 crore per annum, amounting to ₹ 2 crores now.

Related:

Defence Ministry evicts Missionaries of Charity from Kanpur Shishu Bhawan
FCRA licenses cancelled: What happens now to the social work and institutions run by these NGOs?
According to MHA, Missionaries of Charity itself “requested SBI to freeze its own accounts”!

The post Protests work! Missionaries of Charity FCRA restored appeared first on SabrangIndia.

News of 22,000 inmates in the homes run by Missionaries of Charity (MoC) across India being hit with basic food and medicine shortage was accompanied by reports (officially confirmed) of the accounts of the charity (MOC) being frozen. Evening brought a new twist to the tale however through a PIB press release. According to the late evening statement by the Ministry of Home Affairs “State Bank of India informed that Missionaries of Charity itself sent a request to SBI to freeze its accounts”!

The government has claimed that it “did not freeze bank accounts of Missionaries of Charity (MoC)” and added that the renewal application under application under Foreign Contribution Regulation Act (FCRA) for renewal of registration was “refused due to adverse inputs”. It added that “no request / revision application has been received from Missionaries of Charity for review of refusal of renewal”. The renewal was refused on Christmas day, December 25 2021, for “not meeting the eligibility conditions under FCRA 2010 and Foreign Contribution Regulation Rules (FCRR) 2011,” stated the government.

The MHA stated that the “Missionaries of Charity (MoC) was registered under FCRA vide Registration No 147120001 and its registration was valid up-to October 31, 2021. The validity was subsequently extended up-to December 31, 2021 along with other FCRA Associations whose renewal application was pending renewal. However, while considering the MoC’s renewal application, some adverse inputs were noticed. In consideration of these inputs on record, the renewal application of MoC was not approved.” However, it has not shared what those “adverse inputs” were or if the MoC had been informed. It sounds strange that the Missionaries of Charity “asked” State Bank of India to “freeze its accounts”!

This has been called out by Member of Parliament,  All India Trinamool Congress leader Derek O’Brien, as a “”a filthy hit job on Mother Teresa’s Missionaries of Charity” adding that the official statement by MHA is “spin doctoring” and a “cover up”.

After a filthy hit job on Mother Teresa’s Missionaries of Charity on December 25,now MHA doing what it does best: SPIN DOCTORING & a COVER UP.

India has an Opposition that will fight the good fight. And I have a leader who will always stand up for the oppressed @MamataOfficial

— Derek O’Brien | ডেরেক ও’ব্রায়েন (@derekobrienmp) December 27, 2021

According to John Dayal, former president, All India Catholic Union, and member of the now defunct National Integration Council,  the Sisters and Brothers of the Missionaries of Charity, the movement started by Bharat Ratna and now Catholic Saint, Mother Teresa, do not run plush schools or private universities but “run homes for new-born infants abandoned and left on the streets and garbage dumps” and those “for afflicted young that no government or charitable orphanage would willingly care. And they nurse the destitute and dying, lending some dignity to their passage.” While the nuns and brothers get no salary, they do have staff members who need to be paid a salary, and need to buy medicines and foodstuff. “This FCRA ban is tantamount to starving them, and torturing the children and old in their care, to bring them to submission,” he said adding that the MoC is “is a global movement, working in areas where few dare go, bringing hope if no life to those in abject risk.” And the ban has come on Christmas week “putting salt on the wounds of the community.” 

Christmas Day itself saw attacks on churches and congregations.   “I am amazed at the hypocrisy of the Indian establishment. The President of India goes to the Sacred Heart Cathedral Cathedral in Delhi to see the Holy Crib, a photo opportunity, without government making any public statement denouncing the many statements by political leader calling or a genocide of Muslims and Christians. The prime minister sends a late night Christmas greeting in a telecast where he is detailing the new covid vaccination protocol,” he added

According to well known peace activist and writer Fr Cedric Prakash SJ, “a very effective strategy of fascists and dictators from time immemorial is to denigrate, demonize, divide and destroy the other!” He said “Christians of India have always been a ‘soft target’ ; in their ascent to power since the late 1990s the BJP and their ilk in the Sangh Parivar- have systematically targeted the community in different ways and all over the country.

The ‘bogey’ of forced conversion, the desecration of sacred objects, the attacks on Christians and their  places of worship and institutions, the myriad threats, intimidation and harassments, the spreading of canard- are all  part of a wider game plan to polarize the majority community and put Christians in bad light!”

The Missionaries of Charity, said Fr Cerdric, “are high – up  at the receiving end of this viciousness and vilification! Mother Teresa and her legacy which is continued selflessly today – embody the highest of Christian Charity- reaching out to the dying destitute, the poorest of the poor, the orphan and widow, the unloved and rejected , the lost, the lonely, the last and least – irrespective of one’s religious belief! False cases are now  foisted on the Sisters like that of ‘conversion’; besides,latest reports say that the Foreign Accounts of the MCs have also been frozen.”

He also recalled that the MoCs care for “thousands of the rejected of India: day-in and day- out without counting the cost” and asked that the Government “reconsider this terrible decision and restore the good name and work of the MCs; if there are any laxities or shortcomings the MCs must be helped to rectify/ address them; and above all, to ensure that those who are cared for in the MC institutions are not deprived of this basic humanitarian assistance!”

By the end of the working day Missionaries of Charity (MoC) also issued a statement that echoed the government statement. They said that as the renewal of the FCRA renewal application was “not renewed” they have asked their centres not to use FC accounts “till the matter is resolved”.

Related

22,000 inmates hit as Missionaries of Charity’s bank accounts are reportedly ‘frozen’
Had a happy Christmas weekend? Have a look at how communal mobs celebrated
Why does the PM look the other way when BJP leaders give communal speeches?

The post According to MHA, Missionaries of Charity itself “requested SBI to freeze its own accounts”! appeared first on SabrangIndia.

In a written answer provided by the Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA) on custodial deaths, Minister Nityanand Rai has stated that between 2020 to 2021, as many as 1,840 deaths in judicial custody have been recorded across all states and Union Territories, and 100 deaths have been recorded in police custody.

The state with the highest tally of judicial custody deaths is Uttar Pradesh (443), followed by West Bengal (177), Bihar (156) and Madhya Pradesh (155). Gujarat has reported the highest number of police custodial deaths between 2020 and 2021 at 17, followed by Maharashtra (13) and Madhya Pradesh (8).

The number of judicial custodial deaths have been increasing over the years as 1,797 cases were recorded between 2018 and 2019, and 1,584 cases were reported between 2019 and 2020. As per the details provided by the Home Ministry, Ladakh, Lakshadweep, Puducherry, Daman and Diu, Dadra and Nagar Haveli and Andamans have not reported any cases of deaths in judicial custody between 2020 and 2021.

At the same time, Himachal Pradesh, Manipur, Mizoram, Nagaland, Sikkim, Chandigarh, Daman and Diu, Puducherry, Ladakh, Andamans, Dadra and Nagar Haveli have had no cases of police custodial deaths in the last one year.

Rai’s answer also stated that monetary compensation has been provided in only 593 cases since 2018 to 2021 and only 4 public servants have been pulled up for disciplinary action. His answer read, “NHRC has recommended Rs.15,90,74,998/- as monetary compensation in 593 cases of custodial deaths (Police & Judicial) during the period from 01.04.2018 to 30.06.2021. NHRC recommended disciplinary action in four cases of deaths in judicial custody, against the erring public servants. The disciplinary action against the erring public servant is to be taken by the respective state government as per extant rules and procedures.”

On the question of whether the Government is planning to ratify the United Nation’s Convention on Torture any time soon, it provided a half-baked answer with no conclusivity. The answer read, “In a Court case M.A. No. 2560/2018 in W.P. (C) No. 738/2016 filed by Dr. Ashwani Kumar Vs UOI, in the Hon’ble Supreme Court to implement the Prevention of Torture Bill, the Hon’ble Court stated that in order to ensure that India is in a position to efficiently discharge all obligations emanating from treaties/agreements, such ratifications should be undertaken only after relevant domestic clauses have been amended and the enabling legislations enacted when there is absence of domestic law on the subject. Amendment in the criminal law is a continuous process that has to be in line with social needs. The Ministry of Home Affairs has already initiated a comprehensive review of the criminal laws in consultation with all stakeholders.”

The answer may be read here: 

Related:

Why has India still not ratified UN Convention against torture?
Prevention of torture Bill – the forgotten law

The post 1840 deaths in judicial custody, 100 in police custody between 2020-21: Centre appeared first on SabrangIndia.

The Delhi Police led by its Commissioner, comes under the jurisdiction of the Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA). Last week, Delhi Lieutenant Governor Anil Baijal also empowered the Delhi police commissioner under National Security Act (NSA). This empowers the commissioner to order preventive detention of any individual if he feels that the person poses a threat to national security, and law and order.

This order will be in place till October 18, 2021. The order is now active as Independence Day draws close, the Parliament’s Monsoon session at a time farmers protesting against the Centre’s three agriculture laws have been holding ‘Kisan Sansad’ at central Delhi’s Jantar Mantar. 

On Wednesday, July 27, Rakesh Asthana took charge as the new Delhi Police Commissioner. His appointment was announced the evening before, and according to multiple news reports, he has been handpicked for the job. The 1984-batch IPS officer, was due to retire on July 31, however, his service tenure has now been extended for one more year, or till further orders. Prime Minister Narendra Modi-led Appointments Committee of the Cabinet (ACC), had also approved the “inter-cadre deputation from Gujarat to AGMUT cadre”. 

Asthana was serving as the Director General of the Border Security Force (BSF), when he was appointed to lead the Delhi Police. He had also served as the Special Director of the Central Bureau of Investigation. 

What is different about this appointment?

It is rare that an IPS officer from a state cadre, in this case Gujarat, is specially moved to the Arunachal Pradesh-Goa-Mizoram and Union Territory (AGMUT) cadre to facilitate his appointment as police chief of the National Capital Territory of Delhi. Delhi is a Union Territory that also has an elected government led by a Chief Minister. However, on April 27 2021, Government of India had notified the Government of National Capital Territory of Delhi (Amendment) Act, 2021. This Act gives more authority to the Lieutenant Governor (LG) of Delhi over the elected government in the city. Simply put, Delhi’s LG Anil Baijal is THE government in the Union territory now.

According to the legislation, the opinion of the LG “shall be obtained” before taking any executive action on decisions of the Council of Ministers of the Delhi government. And with the Delhi LG granting powers to the commissioner of Delhi Police under the NSA, it is clear that the ‘power centres’ as it were has been re-established. Asthana’s appointment as CP has been done after a “relaxation of Rule 16 (1) of the All India Services (death-cum-retirement benefits) Rules, 1958 as a special case in public interest.”  According to news reports, B G Krishnan, Deputy Secretary,  Home Ministry issued a notification that stated, “The approval of the appointment committee of the Cabinet has been conveyed, dated July 27, 2021, for the Inter Cadre deputation of Rakesh Asthana, from Gujarat cadre to AGMUT Cadre and extending his service initially for a period of one year beyond the date of his superannuation on July 31,2021, or until further orders, whichever is earlier, in relaxation of Rule 16 (1) of the All India Services (death-cum-retirement benefits) rules, 1958 as a special case in public interest. In pursuance of the said approval, Asthana is hereby appointed as Commissioner of Police, Delhi, with effect from the date of taking over charge up to July 31, 2022 or until further orders, whichever is earlier. This issues with the approval of the competent authority.” 

What is happening in Delhi in the next few months?

The Monsoon Session of the Parliament is underway, a few kilometers away around 200 farmers associated with the Samyukta Kisan Morcha (SKM) are conducting a ‘Kisan Sansad’, or farmers Parliament. This is for the first time since they began their protest on Delhi’s borders in November 2020 that they have been allowed to gather in the city centre, so close to Parliament. The Kisan Sansad has been peaceful, and is being conducted under a heavy security cover, at Jantar Mantar.

However, recently Bharatiya Kisan Union (BKU) spokesperson Rakesh Tikait has said that the farmers may hold a tractor rally on Independence Day. According to news reports, Tikait said this in Jind, Haryana where the farmers have reportedly expressed their inets of holding such an event. 

The announcement may have upped the ante in Delhi too, where security is at its most strict around national events such as Independence Day. On January 26, 2021, unprecedented chaos was witnessed in the city, and confrontation between Delhi Police, and volatile groups ensued. In May Delhi Police crime branch named 16 suspects in the charge sheet filed on the Republic Day violence allegedly by a section of anti farm law protesters. According to media reports the Delhi Police has charged that the violence was  “a deep-rooted, well-orchestrated conspiracy.” 

As the new commissioner all eyes will now be on Rakesh Asthana’s handling of the farmers’ protest in the months to come. Law and order in Delhi may also be seen as also crucial and sensitive as the states around the national capital are preparing for Assembly elections in 2022.  

Why is his name familiar in Delhi? 

In October 2018, there was a ‘CBI Vs CBI’ confrontation between Asthana the special director and Alok Verma the director of the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI). Allegations ranging from ‘misusing CBI resources for serving the agenda of powerful political masters to corruption and bribery, to orchestrating a cover-up of investigations’ flew thick. 

In 2019, the Delhi High Court had refused to quash the FIR in the bribery case against Rakesh Asthana, CBI Special Director and Devender Kumar, CBI DySP. The court had directed the CBI to complete the investigation within 10 weeks and file a charge sheet. Verma had registered an FIR against Asthana on October 15, 2018, reported Indian Express. The allegation according to the news report was that “a suspect in the Moin Qureshi case had been forced to pay Rs 2.95 crore to Asthana through two middlemen to water down the case against him”. Asthana was eventually cleared of all charges and the CBI had submitted in the High Court that there was no evidence to support the charges against him. 

Most recently, his name has featured in the list of names revealed by the Pegasus Project investigations. The Wire had reported that, hours after their termination from CBO, “both Asthana’s and Verma’s phone numbers had come under the scanner of the client of the Israeli NSO Group, the creator of the Pegasus spyware”. According to the report another phone number, belonging to senior CBI official A.K. Sharma, was also on the list.

Other career milestones? 

Asthana was  appointed to the post of Director General Bureau of Civil Aviation Security and Narcotics Control Bureau (NCB) in 2019. He led the NCB when it probed the highly publicised drugs trafficking case that was investigating following  actor Sushant Singh Rajput’s death. According to a report in Hindustan Times Asthana had himself  visited Mumbai to “review investigations”. The NCB had made many arrests in the case including actor Rhea Chakraborty.

Asthana was also the CBI officer who investigated the fodder scam, in which former Bihar chief minister Lalu Yadav was convicted. He was also the head of the Special Investigation Team (SIT) probing the Godhra train arson.  Although a junior IG, Asthana was appointed to the post of IGP of the important Vadodara Range in April 2003. 

After Asthana’s elevation as interim director Central Bureau of Investigation by the PMO (prime minister’s office), on December 6, 2016, a Public-Interest Litigation (PIL) was filed in the Supreme Court on seeking quashing of the same.  

Related:

Delhi Government now means Lieutenant Governor
CBI vs CBI: No relief for Rakesh Asthana as Delhi HC refuses to quash FIR in bribery case
Alok Verma Resigns saying “Natural Justice was Scuttled”
Actor Rhea Chakraborty arrested by NCB, but the TV media trail continues to bay for 

The post All eyes on Rakesh Asthana, the new Delhi Police Commissioner appeared first on SabrangIndia.

The Indian Union Muslim League (IUML) has moved the Supreme Court seeking a stay on the May 28 order of Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA) which empowered 13 districts across three states to grant citizenship to non-Muslim minorities from Afghanistan, Pakistan and Bangladesh, reported Bar and Bench.

When the IUML had sought a stay on the operation of the Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA), being the first body to challenge it, the Centre had submitted that it was not necessary to stay it since the rules under the Act had not been framed. It has filed an IA stating that the Centre “in a roundabout way, and in an attempt to circumvent the assurance given to this Hon’ble Court, have sought to implement their mala fide designs envisaged under the Amendment Act through the recently issued order dated 28.5.2021,” reported LiveLaw.

In its application, the IUML has averred that during the pendency of the petition challenging the validity of CAA has gone ahead and issued the impugned order which is manifestly illegal and runs counter to the provisions of the Act. 

The plea states that Section 5 (1)(a)-(g) and section 6 of the Citizenship Act read together do not permit the classification of applicants on the ground of religion and therefore the order goes beyond what is permitted by the provision itself. While Section 5 (1)(a)-(g) lays down terms for persons eligible to apply for citizenship by registration, section 6 permits any person (not being an illegal migrant) to apply for citizenship by naturalisation.

The plea further states that if this order is implemented and citizenship is given to persons based on their religion, and further ahead if the court strikes down CAA and the order, then it will be a “herculean task” to take back the citizenship thus granted.

In its May 28 order the Ministry of Home Affairs extended its powers under section 5 of Citizenship Act of registering as a citizen and under section 6 of granting certificate of naturalisation to the District Collector of :

1. Morbi, Rajkot, Patan and Vadodara in the State of Gujarat ;
2. Durg and Balodabazar in the State of Chhattisgarh ;
3. Jalore, Udaipur, Pali, Barmer and Sirohi in the State of Rajasthan ;
4. Faridabad in the State of Haryana ; and
5. Jalandhar in the State of Punjab

The order also sets out procedures for application and eventual verification. The applicant belonging to a minority community as deemed by the Citizenship Act and hailing from Afghanistan, Pakistan or Bangladesh has to apply for citizenship online and the verification of this application shall be done by the Collector at district level or the Secretary at the state level.

Related:

US Government lambasts India on Freedom of Religion
Give online applications for Indian citizenship under CAA: MHA
Seven Years of Narendra Modi in power

The post IUML moves SC against MHA order inviting applications for citizenship as per CAA appeared first on SabrangIndia.

The Delhi High Court has asked the Union Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA) to inform the court of the procedure to be followed to repatriate foreign nationals, who do not have any documentary proof of their native country. The bench of Justice Prathiba M Singh was dealing with a petition filed by 3 Bangladeshi nationals housed in shelter home in Delhi.

The Kamla Market Police Station informed the court that the 3 petitioners were could not provide any documentary proof in their support but they claim to be Bangladesh citizens and also informed that they do not have any criminal antecedents. The police station has also sent a request letter for deportation to Bangladeshi High Commission.

The court took notice of these submissions and directed the MHA to place on record:

(i) The procedure to be adopted in such cases where no documentary evidence exists in respect of the nationality of a foreign national;

(ii) The procedure for repatriation/deportation of such foreign nationals; and

(iii) If such a procedure exists, the time period and formalities to be completed for the same.

The court has directed MHA to file an affidavit in this regard by May 13. The case will next be heard on May 17.

The order may be read here:

Related:

Covid lockdown: Over 150 academicians voice migrant workers’ demands
Manipur: CCM applauds HC order allowing safe passage to Myanmar refugees
We want to serve humanity: Rohingya refugees offer help amidst Covid

The post Delhi HC seeks procedure of deportation of foreign nationals found without documents appeared first on SabrangIndia.

On February 10, Rajya Sabha Member A. Vijayakumar questioned the Centre whether it would state the number of sedition charges filed in the country and if the accused persons were being freed due to a ‘weak law’ in place. He also asked if the Government intends to strengthen the law.

G. Kishan Reddy, the Minister of State for Home Affairs, in his written response stated that the responsibility of maintaining law and order, including investigation, registration and prosecution of crimes, protection of life and property, rests primarily with the respective State Government.

However, he revealed that the National Crime Records Bureau (NCRB) compiles and publishes information on crimes in its publication “Crime in India”, including the State-wise data of cases registered, charge sheeted, conviction rate etc., under the offence of sedition.

The 2019 data reveals that a total of 93 cases of sedition under section 124A of the Indian Penal Code have been registered across 36 States and Union Territories, resulting in zero cases discharged or withdrawn. But the total number of arrests stand at a staggering 96.

Karnataka tops the list with 22 cases lodged, but only 13 persons being chargesheeted with no conviction. In 2019, Assam accounted for the highest number of arrests at 23, with 17 cases registered and 12 acquittals. But the number of persons convicted for sedition stood at zero.

Besides these States, sedition charges have also emerged from Jammu and Kashmir (11), Uttar Pradesh (10), Nagaland (8), Kerala (4), Jharkhand (3), Rajasthan and Tamil Nadu (4 each), Delhi (1), Haryana (2) and Odisha (2).

On the question of whether the Centre is planning to strengthen the sedition law as it stands today, the MoS’ cryptic answer read: “Amendment of laws is an ongoing process”. 

It is pertinent to note that recently, a plea was filed in the Supreme Court challenging the constitutional validity of section 124A (sedition) of the Indian Penal Code on grounds that there is an increasing chilling effect of the blatant misuse of it on constitutional democracy, fundamental rights and under Article 19(1)(a) and Article 21.

On February 9, the top court dismissed the plea citing that the petitioners lacked a definite cause of action, which is a prerequisite to challenge any legislation.

The answer may be read here: 

Related:

Sedition law threatens Fundamental Rights: Plea in SC challenges validity
SC dismisses plea challenging sec 124A of IPC for lack of cause of action
BREAKING: SC stays arrest of Shashi Tharoor, journalists over sedition FIRs

The post 93 sedition cases registered, but only 2 convicted in 2019: MHA appeared first on SabrangIndia.

The Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA) was questioned by Aparajita Sarangi of BJP, representing Bhubaneshwar, Orissa on how many prisoners contacted Covid-19 until now, and how many of them died due to it. The MoS, MHA G Kishan Reddy however, said it had no data on the same.

Sarangi also raised questions on overcrowding in prisons, and the number of undertrials in each state. The Ministry relied on the National Crime Records Bureau’s Prison Statistics Report of 2019 which showed that 21 out of 36 States and UTs had over-crowded prisons, meaning they housed more prisoners than they had the capacity for. Uttar Pradesh reported the highest overcrowding (167.9%) followed by Uttarakhand (159.0%), Meghalaya (157.4%), Madhya Pradesh (155.3%), Sikkim (153.8%), Maharashtra (152.7%) and Chhattisgarh (150.1%).

Data on undertrials was also presented from NCRB report which showed that as of 2019, there were over 3.3 lakh undertrials on a national scale; with Uttar Pradesh housing over 73,000 undertrials in its prisons.

The Supreme Court, on March 23, 2020 in one of its first Covid related orders, had directed all States and UTs to constitute a High Powered Committee to determine as to which class of prisoners can be released on parole or interim bail, for such period as may be thought appropriate by them.

The answer may be read here.

Related:

Orissa High Court directs state to pay Rs. 5 lakhs for negligence causing custodial death
Faizan police brutality case: Delhi HC directs police to file affidavit on working CCTV cameras
Joe Biden orders end of use of private prisons

The post No data on number of prisoners testing Covid positive: MHA appeared first on SabrangIndia.

On February 2, the second day of business of the Budget Session, the Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA) faced questions about Census, National Register of Citizens (NRC) exercise in Assam, as well as the controversial Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA) passed in December 2019.

MP V.K.Sreekandan of Congress Party, representing Palakkad, Kerala questioned the government on how soon it plans to implement CAA and whether the law remains ineffective without the Rules which are yet to be framed. To this, MoS MHA, Nityanand Rai in a written reply stated that CAA has come into force with effect from January 10, 2020 and the Committees on Subordinate Legislation, of both houses have been granted extension of time to frame the rules. The Lok Sabha Committee has time until April 9, 2021 and the Rajya Sabha committee has been given time until July 9, 2021.

The CAA was passed in Parliament in December 2019 amidst much opposition from members and citizens alike which was followed by nationwide protests led by students and people from different walks of life to raise their voice against the discriminatory law that seeks to facilitate grant of citizenship to non-Muslim people hailing from Afghanistan, Pakistan and Bangladesh who entered India seeking refuge.

Further, Abdul Khaleque of Congress, representing Barpeta, Assam, questioned why the final list of NRC in Assam has not been notified yet as per Clause 7 of the Schedule to the Citizenship (Registration of Citizens and Issue of National Identity Cards) Rules, 2003 despite publication of the final NRC on August 31, 2019. The written response of Rai stated that the apex court has directed the NRC state co-ordinator to apply the same security regime as for AADHAAR data, to NRC data on inclusions and exclusions, and hence only thereafter the same shall be notified and be made available to the State Government, Central Government and Registrar General India.

It is pertinent to note here that recently a plea has been filed and notice has been issued by the apex court to state coordinator Hitesh Dev Sarma as Jamiat Ulema-i-Hind has questioned why the final NRC is being reverified when the entire process was carried out under the close monitoring and scrutiny of the Supreme Court itself.

The answers may be read here:

Related:

NRC Reverification: SC responds to contempt petition, issues notice to Hitesh Dev Sarma
Government tries to dodge questions about NRIC, says no decision yet
SC allows declared foreigner to file review petition before Guwahati HC first

The post CAA rules yet to be framed, NRC in Assam yet to be notified, says MHA appeared first on SabrangIndia.