The Citizenship Amendment Bill (CAB) seeks to confer nationality on six non-Muslims communities who have faced 바카라persecution바카라 in three neighbouring countries but are not defined as refugees. The term refugee confers an internationally recognised political status. But India is not a signatory to the Geneva Convention that binds governments to protect refugees facing persecution바카라religious, political, linguistic, ethnic etc. There is no clarity in the CAB on what criteria has been applied or is to be applied on determining the scale of persecution.
In this context, we need to understand why Assam and adjoining states in the Northeast have erupted with such vehemence. Much anger was simmering after the National Register of Citizens (NRC) in Assam turned up an 바카라excluded list바카라 of 1.9 million, which included a majority of Hindus, a smaller number of Muslims, the native tribal communities and other groups, including Gurkhas. The BJP said it does not accept the Assam list and plans a nationwide NRC.
The question then is what happens to the exercise in Assam바카라the money Âinvested, the time taken, the energy spent, not to speak of the deep frustration and anxiety that have grown as a result. The Assam government has not come before the Supreme Court to formally reject the NRC list. Until that happens, the chapter is not closed. The process of challenging the exclusion from the list is a task that 1.9 million people (including numerous Indians) have to go through. It바카라s a tortuous process of going to foreigners바카라 tribunals (there are 100 which are functional, while 200 more are being set up), the high court and finally the Supreme Court. Just think, Indians have to go before foreigners바카라 tribunals to assert their citizenship!
What clearly put those who batted for the NRC on the back foot was that the majority of people from the 바카라excluded바카라 1.9 million (who cannot be defined as foreigners until the legal process is completed) are Hindu and remain unsure of their future, many without access to legal aid. So, there was an underlying anger and it tipped again with the new law that appeared to be dismissive of Assam바카라s concerns. Also, there is fear that granting citizenship to people who have come illegally over the decades from Bangladesh, Afghanistan and Pakistan could change Assam바카라s demography. There is a plan to provide protection through the Inner Line Permit (ILP) system. But experience has shown that the ILP바카라in place in Nagaland, Mizoram and Arunachal Pradesh for decades바카라has not been effective. The Centre tried to walk a fine line by applying the ILP provision across both Sixth Schedule areas, which is an affirmative action law providing ethnic, cultural and political reservation to tribal interests in Meghalaya and Mizoram as well as tribal areas of Assam and Tripura. However, the Sixth Schedule does not cover Nagaland, Arunachal and Manipur. Consequently, a complex situation has become even more challenging.
The government says the CAB seeks to settle the issue of persecuted religious minorities바카라millions of Hindus and other religious 바카라minority바카라 groups바카라in Pakistan, Bangladesh and Afghanistan. But could it not trigger further persecution and Âviolence against these very groups, whom India seeks to protect, in their Âcountries? How would the cloak of protection embrace them? Adequate, sustained dialogue and asserting the trinity of liberty, equality and inclusivity could help even at this very late hour.
International director, Commonwealth Human Rights Initiative. Views expressed are personal.
