Dr. Asangba Tzüdir The Citizenship Act of 1955 envisaged the ‘right of blood’ as the primary determinant of Citizenship. It also provides the conditions for naturalization or the process by which one may come to acquire Indian Citizenship. It also includes provisions for dual Citizenship in the form of Overseas Citizen of India and person of Indian origin. This act has been amended five times because of the evolution of contesting nature of Citizenship. Under the Citizenship Act of 1955, foreigners who came to India without valid travel documents, or stay in the country beyond their visa period, then become illegal migrants. Over the years, certain exceptions have been made to this law. In September 2015, illegal migrants from Afghanistan, Bangladesh or Pakistan and coming to India on or before December 31, 2014, were allowed to stay. Coming to the Citizenship (Amendment) Bill 2016, it was introduced on July 19 in the Lok Sabha. It seeks to allow illegal immigrants from certain minority communities belonging to the Hindu, Sikh, Buddhist, Jain, Parsi or Christian religious communities coming in from Afghanistan, Bangladesh and Pakistan eligible for Indian Citizenship and not to be imprisoned or deported. In other words it amends the Citizenship Act of 1955 which regulates the acquisition and determination of Citizenship. Further, it reduces the minimum years of residency in India to apply for citizenship to be lessened from the current 11 years to 6 years. The Bill, however, does not extend to illegal Muslim migrants and some other minority communities. The release of the National Register of Citizens (NRC) in Assam, containing names of 1.9 crore citizens out of 3.29 crore applicants has brought out the contested idea of Citizenship in India and the complex nature that has evolved over the years, though the debate on Citizenship is not in any way new. Assam is the only state to have come out with such a list and its most recent draft is being seen as a new chapter in addressing the influx of illegal immigrants. The introduction of this Citizenship (Amendment) Bill has caused debates as well as protests whereby it gives preferential treatment to minorities coming from Muslim majority countries. However, the Bill does not immediately grant Indian Citizenship to the said minority communities. It only qualifies them for application and in no way hold a guarantee that they will be granted Citizenship. Primarily, the whole point of contention is that, the exceptions have been created for these minorities who are mostly leaving their country for fear of persecution and who have genuine concerns for the safety and security of their lives and not those immigrants who willingly move out seeking economic opportunities and livelihood. The bill, while its intent to address the quandary of these people who lived in fear is positive, it brings to fore the limit of the Bill which has ignored the likes of Rohingya Muslims and other Muslims from Pakistan, China, etc. Thus, the debate surrounding the Citizenship (Amendment) Bill centers on religious biasness. This is explicated by the fact that ‘persecuted Hindus to be given refuge in India’ was part of the BJP manifesto of the 2014 Lok Sabha elections. Today, the protests have gained heightened tones under the aegis of the North East Students’ Organisation (NESO) lending support against the Citizenship (Amendment) Bill, where the Naga Students’ Federation (NSF) also joined the protest with a sit-in at Kohima Raj Bhawan expressing serious concerns over the issue of increasing influx of illegal immigrants. The idea of giving Citizenship on grounds of giving protection and refuge due to persecution on religious line sounds noble, but over and above, each state of “India’s North-east” have genuine concerns. And this detour will only open the flood gates of immigration. The ethnic identity of the people finds seriously threatened besides other security concerns, as in the case of Nagaland protected by provisions under Article 371 A of the Indian Constitution. Added to this, there is another worst case where the local economy is being controlled. Such ground realities needs to be put across factually to the centre to protest against the current Citizenship (Amendment) Bill. The idea of Citizenship has only become more contentious besides being incomplete and playing around political overtones. Therefore, as noble as it may sound, evidences are too strong to attest that it lacks inclusivity and therefore while envisioning the idea of an Indian Citizenship, it should not be shredded within the BJP manifesto of making India into a Hindu homeland.
(Dr. Asangba Tzudir is a Freelance Research and Editing Consultant. He contributes a weekly guest editorial to The Morung Express. Comments can be mailed to asangtz@gmail.com)
