The Act is not taking away any rights of Indian Muslims, contrary to the propaganda being peddled.
By: Ashwani Dubey
Ever since the Citizenship Amendment Act 2019 came into effect, protesters have sought to intimidate the country by burning trains and buses, pelting stones and attacking police. The propaganda machine on social media has been coordinating to create an image of a nation in flames. The truth of course, is totally different. Outside the North East, where there might be long held fears stemming from a complicated history that caused pain on all sides, the violent protests elsewhere have been very localized to one group of people and one group of institutions.
The situation in Assam has improved very rapidly but the epicenter of violence has moved to Murshidabad in West Bengal, Jamia University in Delhi and Aligarh Muslim University in Uttar Pradesh. So much anger just because a tiny bit of justice was given to minorities of Afghanistan, Pakistan and Bangladesh. This can only be called ‘protests of entitlement’ and definitely not guaranteed under Article 19 of the Constitution of India.
What do these so called protesters feel entitled to?
First, they feel entitled to destroy public property, burn buses and trains and pelt stones at the police. The entitlement mentality of having ‘first right to resources’ at work. This makes it much more than a mere remark from a senior politician; it becomes official policy announcement by the then Union Government.
Why do we need the Act today? After independence, if partition was not accepted on the basis of religion, then, we would have not needed the Act. Issues of national interest, cultural identity, civilizational causes, humanitarian and governance concerns should not be decided taking into account vote-bank. It is surprising and unfortunate that when the moment came to correct the injustices done to victims of Radcliffe line which had demarcated a partitioned India in 1947 and had inflicted untold miseries on a large number of people, some politicians– especially who ruled India for the longest period– prioritized their interests based on vote-bank.
It is ironical to see them opposing the Act, more so because their forefathers argued in favour of minorities from Pakistan. Shifting the goalposts, these leaders have gone all out in opposing the Act. The parties, ruling the bordering states like West Bengal, are most loudly opposing the Act, which will confer citizenship to large number of beleaguered people.
The party, which is responsible for partition of the country and is the originator of problems in Assam, is giving a message that India does not really belong to persecuted Hindus Sikhs Jain Buddhists etc. People, who advocate unrestrained and free entry to Rohingya and Bangladeshis in India, are opposing the Act, simply because those who benefitted from this are Hindu, Sikh, Jain, Christian and Parsi. For them, these minorities have no human rights and don’t deserve to be recognized as persecuted and therefore entitled to Indian citizenship.
This dual standard and political opportunism, to cater to the infiltrator vote-bank while dumping the Hindu refugees of West Bengal is a historic act of betrayal. The majority of these refugees are SC, ST and OBC.
The propaganda of violation of Article 14 compromise with secular character of the Constitution and that the Act being Anti-Muslim needs to be clarified to expose hypocrisy and double-standards of political parties. The Act has nothing to do with Indian Muslims and they need not be worried about the Act. It is not meant to take away anyone’s citizenship but to confer citizenship. Interestingly, if one were to look in the past, many prominent members of the Constituent Assembly like Pt. Thakurdas Bhargava, Sardar Bhupinder Singh Man, Professor Shibbanlal Saxena on 11th and 12th, August, 1949 raised their voice for giving citizenship to Hindus and Sikhs across the globe considering India as their only homeland though the idea was vetoed by Pt. Nehru. But today in the case of Pakistan’s failure to ensure the rights of its minorities, they become the responsibility of India and cannot be left to die or be faced with forced conversion.
Union Government had tried on similar lines by conferring special rights to District Collectors in Rajasthan – Gujarat to decide applications of citizenship for Hindus and Sikhs refugees. The propoganda that the Act discriminates against Muslims, it must be understood that it offers a future and a protected existence for minorities who in these countries are facing religious persecution. Since Pakistan, Afghanistan, Bangladesh are declared Islamic republics – and Muslims are neither oppressed nor minorities, they are not eligible for Indian citizenship. This classification in the Act qualifies the test of ‘Reasonable Classification’ for giving preferential treatment as has been laid down for Article 14 and is in consonance with the law of the land.
There is no religious discrimination in the Act, it ascertains interests of the minorities and as per the commitment given to them during partition focuses on fulfilling that commitment. The opposition parties stand exposed, they have fumbled on their commitment to these refugees, they are blinded by vote-bank politics. Dr. Syama Prasad Mukherji resigned from the Cabinet in opposition of Nehru-Liaqat Pact inked on 8.4.1950. He foresaw that the ‘Delhi Agreement’ would fail. It was unfortunate that in order to pander to a pseudo-secular conscience, millions of refugees and victims of religious persecution were sacrificed.
Dr. S.P. Mukherji’s words still ring true in this context. He said: “Let us not forget that the Hindus of East Bengal are entitled to the protection of India, not on humanitarian considerations alone, but by virtue of their sufferings and sacrifices, made cheerfully for generations, not for advancing their own parochial interest, but for laying the foundations of India’s political freedom and intellectual progress. It is the united voice of the leaders that are dead and of the youth that smilingly walked upto the gallows for India’s cause that calls for justice and fair play at the hands of Free India of today…”
Justice and fair-play has now been finally worked out with the passage of the Act. A historic wrong has been rectified, a historic commitment fulfilled. Persecuted minorities won’t only get citizenship but also permanent residency. The Act is in line with India’s centuries old ethos of assimilation and belief in humanitarian values. This is not the first occasion, when a government has taken a decision on citizenship. In 1971, Smt. Indira Gandhi had decided to give citizenship to everyone who came from Bangladesh. Even after 1971, minorities have been continuously persecuted in Bangladesh and genocide hasn’t stopped. Government gave refugees from Uganda citizenship and there was reasonable classification behind it. We need to look at not only the Constitution of these three countries but also the facts, ground situation and present circumstances, if we have to understand the Act religiously.
Article 2 of the Constitution of Afghanistan states that Islam is religion of the country. There are similar provisions in Constitutions of Pakistan and Bangladesh as well. During Partition, refugees were exchanged. The Nehru-Liaquat Pact happened in 1950 in which both countries promised to take care of its minorities but Pakistan did not fulfil its promise.
The Act is not taking away any rights of Indian Muslims, contrary to the propaganda being peddled. Ground of religious persecution of Muslims is out of question, because all three countries have Muslims as Majority. The Act will only bring justice to the people who have been waiting for it for 75 years. It is not targeting anyone and will do no injustice. It is the responsibility of State to protect its boundaries and stop infiltration. India can’t open the boundary for everyone. It is the duties of government to protect its border, stops intruders, and distinguish between refugees and intruders. Many countries have formulated law for granting citizenship to foreign nationals.
After 1971 war and formation of Bangladesh, refugees were given Citizenship but there are millions of people who’re suffering at the moment. The Act protects social and linguistic uniqueness of the North East people. Nagaland and Mizoram are protected by Inner Line Permit and it will continue to remain protected. Meghalaya is protected by the Sixth Schedule.
The Act is constitutional by all means and doesn’t violate Article 14. It does not violate Articles 21 or 25. It is in accordance with the constitution. India can’t make the mistake of not accepting someone who has to come here to protect his sisters and daughters or to protect his religion. This Act is for the minorities of those three nations only. Muslims in Bangladesh, Afghanistan and Pakistan cannot be minorities, because Islam is their national religion.
A lot of temples were destroyed in these three countries. In 1992, there were 2,000 Hindu and Sikh religious places in Afghanistan and in 2018 only 100 remain. Entire world witnessed the demolition of non-Islamic religious places. Lord Buddha’s statue was destroyed by a canon shell. Where would these minorities go? There is a fundamental difference between a refugee and intruder. The mistake of Nehru-Liaquat Pact has been corrected by the Act.
QUOTES FROM OUR FOREFATHERS ON THE ISSUE:
- 12.07.1947: Mahatma Gandhi said- Minorities of Pakistan are Indian citizen
- 26.09.1947: Mahatma Gandhi welcomed Pak minorities in India
- 15.11.1947: J.B.Kripalani said– We should give relaxation to Pak minorities
- 25.01.1948: Pt Nehru said– We will use rehabilitation fund for Pak minorities
- 09.02.1948: Abul Kalam said– We will give all opportunity to Pak minorities
- 27.02.1950: Pattabhi Sitaramaiya saidi- Pak minorities should be protected
- 19.04.1950: S.P.Mukharji said– Problem of Pak minorities is a national issue
- 12.02.1964: Tridib Chaudhary said– We should allow Pak minorities in India
- 12.02.1964: H.N. Mukharji said– We should provide home to Pak minorities
- 24.05.1971: Indira Gandhi said– I know the pain of Pak minorities
- 28.12.2010: Gautam Deb demanded citizenship to minorities of Bangladesh.
- 25.04.2012: Basudeb Acharia demanded citizenship to Bangladesh minorities.
- 18.02.2014: Union Government announced long term Visa to Pak minorities
- 12.12.2019: The Citizenship (Amendment) Act 2019 came into effect
Now Fake new is being propagated about the Act that it is anti-Muslim. Politician are misusing the religion for electoral gain and Fake, ghost and duplicate social media accounts are being used to promote enmity between communities.
(Disclaimer: The views and opinions expressed above are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of India.com. Any content provided by the author is of his/her opinion and is not intended to malign any religion, ethnic group, club, organization, company, individual or anyone or anything.)
Source link
