Why The Citizenship Amendment Act Is Unconstitutional

CAA_madras_courier
A protestor holding a placard, questioning the legality of the Citizenship Amendment Bill. Image: 7MB
The Citizenship Amendment Act, 2019, goes against the principles of the Constitution of India.

There are massive public protests going on in India against the recently enacted Law on citizenship. Protesting against this Law, students from different universities in India have come onto the streets. The enlightened civil society has also joined the protests. The government, on the other hand, is trying its best to suppress it by using brute force. But the protests do not seem to abate.

The Law on citizenship, passed by the Indian Parliament last week, is very controversial. The citizenship (amendment) Act, 2019, seeks to amend the original citizenship Act of 1955. The purpose of this amendment is to state emphatically that persons belonging to the Hindu, Sikh, Budh, Jain, Parsi and Christian communities who came to India from Pakistan, Afghanistan and Bangladesh and who have faced religious persecution or who had a fear that they would be persecuted, shall not be treated as illegal migrants although they have no passport or valid travel documents.

As is clear from the above, Muslims who entered into India in the same manner without a passport or other travel documents are excluded from this special dispensation, and they will continue to be treated as illegal migrants. The object of this Law is to grant to all persons who belong to the above mentioned six religious communities citizenship of India – except Muslims.



To continue reading, please subscribe to the Madras Courier.

Subscribe Now

Or Login


 

-30-

Copyright©Madras Courier, All Rights Reserved. You may share using our article tools. Please don't cut articles from madrascourier.com and redistribute by email, post to the web, mobile phone or social media.
Please send in your feed back and comments to editor@madrascourier.com

0 replies on “Why The Citizenship Amendment Act Is Unconstitutional”