Just a few weeks ago, violent protests were widespread in every corner of India, responding to the Citizenship Amendment Act (2019) issued by the Indian Government.

The Act seeks to amend the classification of illegal immigrants focusing on Hindu, Sikh, Parsi, Buddhist and Christian immigrants from Pakistan, Afghanistan and Bangladesh who live in India without documentation. Under the Act, any individual that falls within one of the religious categories would have their citizenship procedure fast-tracked. The purpose is to protect those that have fled their home countries due to a fear of religious prosecution. What the Act failed to do, arguably deliberately, was to provide any provisions to protect Muslim immigrants. For this reason, many people are identifying the amendment as ‘anti-Muslim’. The Act has been criticised as being a device which is making Indian society more divisive, especially on the political front, fuelling the existing hostility between Muslims and Hindus.

THE AMENDMENT V THE CONSTITUTION

The Indian Constitution covers the right to equality (article 14) and the right to life and liberty (article 21) - two rights that any person in India, be they a citizen or an immigrant, deserve to have without question.

Denying the same rights to another individual based on their religion is undoubtedly denying them the rights granted to them under the Indian Constitution. The Supreme Court of India recognised this in the case of National Human Rights Commission v State of Arunachal Pradesh (1996). The Court considered the status of the Chakma refugees; undocumented immigrants from Bangladesh. The Court observed that the Chakma refugees are entitled to the rights outlined under articles 14 and 21, regardless of whether they have formal citizenship. That same principle has now been threatened by the government’s decision to issue this amendment. The amendment has simply disregarded the Muslim community in India.

As it stands, the Act prevents the minority Muslim minority population, many of whom fled to India in fear of religious persecution from their home countries, from getting citizenship in the same way that others would be able to.

TAKING THE BATTLE TO THE COURTS

Nearly 140 petitions were filed in the Supreme Court of India challenging the amendment for violating the Constitution. These were filed mainly by Muslim groups, opposition parties and human rights activists all opposing the amendment. In early March 2020, the UN Commissioner for Human Rights, Michelle Bachelet, also informed the government of India that her office had filed an application urging the Supreme Court to make the UNHRC a third party in one of the petition’s which was filed by a formal civil servant.

The judgement will determine the fate of the largest democracy in the world. A decision in favour of the amendment would suggest that India is clearly discriminating against Muslims. A favour against the amendment might show that the Courts are able to stand up for their minority population in times of inequality and injustice.

Mudit is a recent Law Graduate, and is an aspiring writer, with a strong interest in all areas related to International Law.

LinkedIn