CAA threatens constitution of India and foundation of country?

Citizenship Amendment Act
Image Credit: DNA India

The recently passed Citizenship Amendment Act has troubled many people, has troubled me badly 

This law itself is full of problems and due to its association with the National Register of Citizens (NRC), the problems have increased further.

I was involved in the People's Tribunal implementing NRC in Assam. We found that even though this process was being done through the court, it was a disastrous process and the results were very scary.

The protests that have taken place about the CAA are not surprising, but the manner in which the people involved in those demonstrations are being treated is certainly shocking.

The law-and-order machinery that the protesters have dealt with has led to violence in the largely peaceful protests led by the students and property damage across the country is unfortunate.

This indicates the kind of times in which we are living, it is also a sign that in the coming time a lot of the youth of the country will spend time in conflict with a leadership that is communal and autocratic as well. is.

Suppressed judiciary

The generation that has seen the phase of Emergency and has suffered it, the natural response of that generation should be sympathy for the new generation. In this case I personally feel that the voice of the judiciary is almost completely missing or the strong government Is choking under pressure.

The CAA is being introduced as a 'fast track' method of granting citizenship to religious minorities coming from Pakistan, Bangladesh and Afghanistan as part of the naturalization process. This includes Hindus, Sikhs, Parsis, Jains, Buddhists and Christians, people from these six communities coming from these three countries will not be considered as intruders.

Between the passage of the proposed bill, we have seen that a lot of ideas have emerged about this law, these different perspectives can help in understanding this law, and the politics that is taking place. The most basic and perhaps most important view is that this law is unconstitutional.

This is arbitrary and is a violation of Article 14 of the Constitution's provision of equality among citizens, besides it is unconstitutional for many other reasons. It deliberately alienates Muslims as a minority,

It makes religion the basis for granting citizenship. To do so is to hurt the soul of the Constitution.

There is no legal argument that citizenship can be granted only on the basis of religious persecution, there is no solid logical basis as to why citizens of three countries are being given citizenship in a 'fast track' manner. Actually there should be a provision to give citizenship to immigrants only to avoid harassment, any kind of harassment.

The definition of such harassment harms the foundation on which the foundation of the Republic of India was laid, it also ignores the realities of India's freedom struggle, the values ​​on which we gained independence are unity and diversity.


Second party argument

The people at the other end of the debate argue that no harm will be caused to the CAA, it is a step taken only to give citizenship to the oppressed quickly.

The CAA is unconstitutional, more important than this is that it will not harm anyone. This is an attempt to hide that 'Grand Design' under the carpet, a small part of which is the law.

You will ask what 'Grand Design' I am talking about. It is very clear that through the CAA, people whose identity is Muslim are being isolated.

If you believe that this law is only for those coming from outside, as this government is saying, then this law is automatically placing Muslim immigrants in second class. Even if they have also come to India due to the same reasons for which any Hindu or Christian has come. These reasons can also be economic and political harassment.

If you broaden your understanding of this law a little, as the government itself is connecting CAA and NRC with each other, the possibility of making all Muslims second class citizens is hidden in this law.

In this way, this law and this policy not only hurt the basic principles of the Constitution but can destroy it. The basic principles of the constitution are secularism, fraternity and humanity.

Hindu nationalism
At its core is the ideology of cultural and religious nationalism, which was promoted by Vinayak Damodar Savarkar and his colleagues. He believed that 'Hindu Rashtra, Hindu caste (race) and Hindu culture are ideal'.

This ideology of religious nationalism believes that there should be Hindu rule over India. Unbroken India was conceived on the basis that after the Britishers leave, only the right of Hindus is on this earth because it is their fatherland and a holy land.

Accordingly, Muslims and Christians were considered foreigners and it was said that their religion was born in some other holy land, so these people cannot consider India as a holy land.

My own background is connected to this story in many ways. My maternal grandfather was the president of the Hindu Mahasabha in the 1940s, the first books I was introduced to in life were the books written by Savarkar.

Savarkar was writing in the era of 1938 when Hitler was at his height, Savarkar justified Hitler's policy towards the Jews that he was chasing them from their homeland.

Savarkar said, "A nation is made up of the majority living there, what were the Jews doing in Germany? If they were a minority, they were expelled from Germany."

As a child, I was soaking up what he was reading and praising his poetry (I still do). I was also always questioning the Hindu Mahasabha and trying to understand why they do what they do. Even then, I found Savarkar's obsession with fascist dictators strange, especially towards Hitler and Mussolini.

The policy of the Hindu Mahasabha and the subsequent organizations to shore up the majoritarianism and minorities has always remained the same, there has been no change. This ever-changing ideology, which is a Hindu nation in its imagination, repeatedly forgets the reality of cultural, linguistic and religious diversity of modern India.

CAA is unethical and it is natural and necessary for the people to agitate, or else the fundamental principles on which constitutional India stands will be demolished, for something whose deep wounds will remain forever.


A new twist

Amid protests at the CAA, the country's Chief Justice was reported as saying that if protesters were to protest on the street, there was no need to come to court.

Some people will understand it that good behavior is necessary to get justice. Protesting in any case and knocking the court door are two such options that are available to the public. There is no doubt that disagreement and its performance is the life of democracy.

In such a situation, when the whole society is performing, there is no way to declare the protesters as good or bad. Historically, when the court has to give its final verdict in a serious matter, their track record is mixed. Especially when the executive is strong, the courts start making mistakes, we have seen a lot during the Emergency.

This is a historical turning point for the judges of this generation. They can correct the mistakes that their seniors made to the people of India during the Emergency 40 years ago. The mistake is eagerly waiting for improvement.