CIL Aaryavart

DHARMASHASTRA NATIONAL LAW UNIVERSITY,
JABALPUR
Session: 2022-23
BALLB (Hons.) – VII Sem
CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION LAWS
PROJECT TITLE
CAA 2019 AND SECULARISM
“Constitutional Analysis”
__________________________________________
SUBMITTED TO
MS. BHAGYASHREE AGARWAL

Teaching Associate, DNLU Jabalpur
____________________________________________________
SUBMITTED BY
AARYAVART CHOURASIA
BAL/038/19
1
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
The success and outcome of this project required a lot of guidance and assistance
from many people and we are extremely privileged to have all got this along with
completion of our project. We would like to thank our vice chancellor Prof. (Dr.) V.
Nagraj and our subject teacher Ms. Bhagyashree Agarwal (Teaching Associate,
DNLU Jabalpur) for their valuable support throughout our project.
AARYAVART CHOURASIA
2
Contents
RESEARCH PROBLEM...........................................................................................................3
RESEARCH OBJECTIVES......................................................................................................4
RESEARCH QUESTIONS........................................................................................................4
SCOPE AND LIMITATION.....................................................................................................4
RESEARCH METHODOLOGY...............................................................................................4
INTRODUCTION......................................................................................................................4
(CITIZENSHIP AMENDMENT ACT 2019)............................................................................5
AMENDMENTS FROM PREVIOUS ACT..............................................................................7
CYNICAL PERSPECTIVE.......................................................................................................8
ARGUMENTS SUPPORTING...............................................................................................11
GROUND OF DISCRIMINATION AND SUBJECT OF DISCRIMINATION....................13
CONCLUSION AND SUGGESTIONS..................................................................................14
REFRENCES...........................................................................................................................15
3
RESEARCH PROBLEM
Problem is that there is lack of awareness and understanding about ‘Citizenship
(Amendment) Act, 2019’, although much is known about it on the superficial basis. Through
this study an attempt to attain the basis stances of the concerned topic, its importance & its
issues, along with an attempt to examine its scenario in the contemporary times has been
made.
RESEARCH OBJECTIVES
 To study and understand the meaning of Citizenship.
 To study and understand the features of Citizenship (Amendment) Act, 2019.
 To study, understand and analyse the impact of the Citizenship (Amendment) Act,
2019.
RESEARCH QUESTIONS
 What are the criticisms of the Citizenship (Amendment) Act, 2019?
 What are the arguments in favour of the Citizenship (Amendment) Act, 2019?
 What were the changes made to the previous law through this amendment?
SCOPE AND LIMITATION

Scope of the study is limited to an overview of the ‘Citizenship (Amendment) Act, 2019: An
Constitutional Analysis’, focusing solely on the subject of Citizenship and Immigration Laws
& the topic concerned. And such as it is not a thorough study but a general study. However,
researcher has made an attempt to understand and study the topic concerned, thoroughly.
RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
The nature of the study is Doctrinal. The relevant primary and secondary data were collected
through Books, reports, recommendations, journals, articles and web sources.
INTRODUCTION
"One of the most important aspects of a person's identity is their citizenship. It is essential
that the person utilise all of his liberties and privileges. A person is recognised by their
4
citizenship in today's worldwide and fast-paced culture. It is crucial to a person's sense of
self. Without citizenship, a person is seen as a stateless person and lacks a unique identity He
is seen as an outsider everywhere because he is not a citizen of any country. Regarding the
Indian context, Article 21 of the Indian Constitution provides the right to life and liberty. This
privilege includes citizenship. Additionally, only citizens are granted specific privileges
under the Constitution. Even certain Fundamental Rights, such as:"
1. “Article 15: Prohibition of discrimination on grounds of religion, race, caste, sex or

place of birth.”
2. “Article 16: Right to Equality of opportunity in matters of public employment.”
3. Article 19: Six basic freedoms (as illustrated under this Article.)
4. Article 29: Protection of minorities (their culture, language etc.)
5. “Article 30: Right of minorities to establish and administer educational institutions.”
"On December 11, 2019, the Indian Parliament enacted the Citizenship (Amendment) Act
2019, which is regarded as one of the most divisive reforms ever. On December 12, 2019, the
president gave his approval to the legislation. By expediting Indian citizenship for
unauthorised immigrants (Buddhists, Hindus, Sikhs, Jains, Parsis, Christians, and Afghanis)
from the states of Afghanistan, Pakistan, and Bangladesh, the bill intended to alter the Indian
Citizenship Act of 1955. The measure was hotly contested shortly after it was approved by
the Parliament and ultimately sparked huge protests around the nation. The Indian
government's approach to these protests has drawn harsh criticism from several individuals
and international human rights organisations.
(CITIZENSHIP AMENDMENT ACT 2019)

BEFORE THE PASSING OF THE ACT:
An illegal immigrant is not permitted to petition for citizenship under the current legislation.
They cannot register or naturalise in order to become citizens of India. Such individuals are
prohibited under the Foreigners Act and the Passport Act, which also provide for the
imprisonment or expulsion of unlawful immigrants. By registering, a person can get Indian
citizenship.Section 5 (a) of Citizenship act of 1955: A person of Indian origin who is
ordinarily resident in India for seven years before making an application for registration;1
1
Citizenship Amendment Bill, 2019, https://byjus.com/free-ias-prep/citizenship-amendment-bill-2019/
5
 And they should have lived in India continuously for 12 months before submitting an
application for citizenship.2
Under the Citizenship Act, 1955, one of the requirements for citizenship by naturalization is
that the applicant must have resided in India during the last 12 months, as well as for 11 of
the previous 14 years.3
INTENTION:
The Citizenship (Amendment) Act, 2019, seeks to amend the Foreigners Act, the Passport
Act, and the Citizenship Act if the illegal immigrants are from the three neighbouring nations
of Bangladesh, Pakistan, and Afghanistan and are members of religious minority
populations.4
FEATURES OF CITIZENSHIP (AMENDMENT) ACT, 2019:
 “The Act aims to alter the Citizenship Act of 1955 to offer citizenship to illegal
immigrants from Afghanistan, Bangladesh, and Pakistan who are Hindu, Sikh,
Buddhist, Jain, Parsi, and Christians. In other words, the Act aims to make it simpler
for persecuted individuals from India's neighbouring nations to get Indian citizenship.
 Those who were "forced or coerced to seek sanctuary in India owing to persecution
on the basis of religion" are covered under the law. It tries to safeguard these
individuals from unlawful immigration processes.
 The amendment relaxes the requirement of naturalization from 11 years to 5 years as
a specific condition for applicants belonging to these six religions.5
 The cut-off date for citizenship is December 31, 2014, which means the applicant
should have entered India on or before that date.6
 The Act says that on acquiring citizenship:
o Such persons shall be deemed to be citizens of India from the date of their
entry into India, and7
o All legal proceedings against them in respect of their illegal migration or
citizenship will be closed.8
2
Id.
3
4
5
6
7
https://byjus.com/free-ias-prep/citizenship-amendment-bill-2019/
8
6
 “Additionally, it states that those with Overseas Citizen of India (OCI) cards, which
allow foreign nationals of Indian ancestry to reside and work in India permanently,
risk losing their status if they break local laws for both big and small offences and
transgressions.
EXCEPTIONS:
 The Act adds that the provisions on citizenship for illegal migrants will not apply
to the tribal areas of Assam, Meghalaya, Mizoram, and Tripura, as included in the
Sixth Schedule of the Constitution.9
 “These tribal areas include Karbi Anglong (in Assam), Garo Hills (in Meghalaya),
Chakma District (in Mizoram), and Tripura Tribal Areas District.”
 It will also not apply to the areas under the Inner Line Permit under the Bengal
Eastern Frontier Regulation, 1873.10
AMENDMENTS FROM PREVIOUS ACT

The proposed change would modify a number of the law's current provisions. The following
are discussed:
The Citizenship of India Act, 1955 forbids unlawful migrants, as defined in Section 2(b),
from obtaining citizenship, however the proposed bill makes exceptions for those persons
who belong to specific religious groups and nations and who are not considered to be
migrants in the sense of the Act. Hindus, Sikhs, Parsis, Jains, Buddhists, and Christians from
any of the following nations: Afghanistan, Bangladesh, and Pakistan are included in this
category.
(i) "The Citizenship of India Act, 1955, provides for overseas citizenship under
Sections 7 A, 7 B, 7 C, and 7 D. According to the statute, a foreigner may submit
an application for Overseas Citizenship of India if one of two conditions is
satisfied: either the applicant is of Indian descent or the applicant has a spouse
who is of Indian heritage. A third reason, which prohibits the granting of Indian
citizenship abroad, is included in the law in addition to these two. Any individual
who has broken the law is prohibited from becoming an Overseas Indian Citizen,
9
10
7
according to the legislation. The Act's original language stated that the application
for overseas citizenship under Section 2(b) of the Citizenship of India Act, 1955
shall not approve if the Overseas Citizenship of India had been registered through
fraud,11 or
(ii) if within five years of registration, the Overseas citizen of India was sentenced to
imprisonment for two years or above.12
"The Act of 2019 also outlines the process for obtaining Indian citizenship through
naturalisation. The law stipulates that in order to become a citizen of India by naturalisation,
a foreigner must have lived there for a minimum of 12 years. For persons of Sikhism,
Hinduism, Jainsm, Buddhism, and Christianity from any of the three nations, namely
Afghanistan, Pakistan, and Bangladesh, the same sentence has been lowered to six years
under the proposed amendment.
CYNICAL PERSPECTIVE
The criticisms of the Citizenship (Amendment) Act, 2019 are as following:
 It is against Muslims:
 The fundamental criticism of the Act has been that it specifically targets
Muslims.13 Thus, the religious basis of citizenship not only violates the
principles of secularism but also of liberalism, equality, and justice.14
 It fails to allow Shia, Balochi, and Ahmadiyya Muslims in Pakistan and
Hazaras in Afghanistan who also face persecution, to apply for citizenship.15
 A key argument by the critics against the Act is that it will not extend to those
persecuted in Myanmar and Sri Lanka, from where Rohingya Muslims and
Tamils are staying in the country as refugees.16
 It violates Article 14:
 Critics argue that it is violative of Article 14 of the Constitution, which
guarantees the right to equality.17
 The Act is in the teeth of Article 14, which not only demands reasonable
classification and a rational and just object to be achieved for any
11
https://pdfcoffee.com/citizenship-amendment-act-pdf-free.html
12
https://pdfcoffee.com/citizenship-amendment-act-pdf-free.html
13
14
Id.
15
16
17
Id.
8
classification to be valid but additionally requires every such classification to
be non-arbitrary.18
 One of the criticisms is that this Act is an instance of class legislation, as
classification on the ground of religion is not permissible.19
 Why North East is objecting to the concerned Act?
 In the North eastern states, the prospect of citizenship for massive numbers of
illegal Bangladeshi migrants has triggered deep anxieties, including fears of
demographic change, loss of livelihood opportunities, and erosion of the
indigenous culture.20
 “The Act appears to violate the Assam Accord, both in letter and spirit.”
 The Assam Accord, signed between the then Rajiv Gandhi-led central
government and the All Assam Students’ Union (AASU), had fixed March 24,
1971, as the cutoff date for foreign immigrants. 21 Those illegally entering
Assam after this date were to be detected and deported, irrespective of their
religion.22
 The Citizenship Amendment Act moved the cutoff date for six religions to
December 31, 2014, something that is not acceptable to the Assamese-
speaking people in Brahmaputra Valley, who insist that all illegal immigrants
should be treated as illegal.23
 There is also an economic problem. If tens of thousands leave Bangladesh and
start staying legally in Assam and North East, the pressure will first show in
the principal economic resource land.24
 Also, since, these will be legitimate citizens, there will be more people joining
the queue of job hopefuls that can potentially lower opportunities for the
indigenous and the locals.25
 It also boils down to the political rights of the people of the state. Migration
has been a burning issue in Assam.26
18
19
Id.
20
21
22
23
24
Id.
25
Id.
26
9
 There is a view that illegal immigrants, who will eventually become legitimate
citizens, will be determining the political future of the state.27
 Other issues surrounding the concerned Act:
 This Act does not consider Jews and atheists. They have been left out of the
Act.
 The basis of clubbing Afghanistan, Pakistan, and Bangladesh together and
thereby excluding other (neighbouring) countries is unclear.28
 A common history is not ground as Afghanistan was never a part of British
India and was always a separate country.29
 Countries such as Nepal, Bhutan, and Myanmar, which share a land border
with India, have been excluded.30
 The reason stated in the ‘Statement of Objects and Reasons’ of the Act is that
these three countries constitutionally provide for a “state religion”; thus, the
Act is to protect “religious minorities” in these theocratic states.31
 The above reasoning fails with respect to Bhutan, which is a neighbour and
constitutionally a religious state with the official religion being Vajrayana
Buddhism.32
 Non-Buddhist missionary activity is limited, construction of non-Buddhist
religious buildings is prohibited and the celebration of some non-Buddhist
religious festivals is curtailed.33 Yet, Bhutan has been excluded from the list.
 Focus only on religious persecution:
o “On the classification of individuals, the Act provides benefits to
sufferers of only one kind of persecution, i.e. religious persecution
neglecting others.”
o “Religious persecution is a grave problem but political persecution is
also equally existent in parts of the world. If the intent is to protect
victims of persecution, the logic to restrict it only to religious
persecution is suspect.”
27
Id.
28
29
30
31
32
33
10
 As per critics, the provisions of the Act will deny equal protection of laws to
similarly placed persons who come to India as “illegal migrants” but in fact
grant citizenship to the less deserving at the cost of the more deserving.34
 “As per critics, the provisions of the Act might lead to a situation where a
Rohingya who has saved himself from harm in Myanmar by crossing into
India will not be entitled to be considered for citizenship, while a Hindu from
Bangladesh, who might be an economic migrant and have not faced any direct
persecution in his life, would be entitled to citizenship.”
 Similarly, a Tamil from Jaffna escaping the atrocities in Sri Lanka will
continue to be an “illegal migrant” and never be entitled to apply for
citizenship by naturalization.35
 There is also a reduction in the residential requirement for naturalization from
11 years to five.36 The reasons for the chosen time frame have not been
stated.37
ARGUMENTS SUPPORTING
The arguments in favour of the Citizenship (Amendment) Act, 2019 are as following:
 It is not against Muslims:

 The Ahmediyas and Rohingyas can still seek Indian citizenship through
naturalization (if they enter with valid travel documents).38
 In any case, since India follows the principle of non-refoulment (even without
acceding to the Refugee Convention 1951), they would not be pushed back.39
 If a Shia Muslim is facing persecution and is in India seeking shelter, his case
to continue to reside in India as a refugee shall be considered on its merits and
circumstances.40
 With regard to Balochi refugees, Balochistan has long struggled to be
independent of Pakistan and including Balochis in the concerned Act could be
perceived as interference in Pakistan’s internal affairs.41
34
35
36
37
https://www.slideshare.net/BishalBarman1/citizenship-amendment-act-2019
38
39
Id.
40
41
Id.
11
 The concerned Act, therefore, does not exclude Muslims from Pakistan,
Bangladesh, and Afghanistan to apply for Indian citizenship.42
 It is significant to note that even the minorities shall not be granted automatic
citizenship. They would need to fulfill conditions specified in the Third
Schedule to the Citizenship Act, 1955, namely, the good character requirement
as well as physical residence in India.43
 Harish Salve, one of India’s biggest names in national and international law,
has stated that the Citizenship Amendment Act is not anti-Muslim.44
 “As per Salve, the countries specified in the Act have their own state religion
and Islamic rules. He added that Islamic majority nations identify their people
as per who follows Islam and who does not. Addressing governance problems
in neighbouring countries is not the purpose of the Act.”
 Over the issue of Rohingyas, Salve stated that a law that addresses one evil
does not need to address all the evils in all countries and it is notable, here,
that Myanmar, though a Buddhist majority nation, does not have a state
religion and Myanmar does not feature in the Act.45
 The Act is not a violation of Article 14:
Sovereign space
 To begin with, the justiciability of citizenship or laws that regulate the entry of
foreigners is often treated as a ‘sovereign space’ where the courts are reluctant
to intervene.46
 Thus, in Trump v Hawaii No. 17-965, 585 U.S. (2018), the US Supreme Court
upheld a travel ban from several Muslim countries holding that regulation of
foreigners including ingress is “fundamental sovereign attribute exercised by
the government’s political departments largely immune from judicial control.”
 Indian courts have generally followed similar reasoning. In David John
Hopkins vs. Union of India (1997), the Madras High Court held that the right
of the Union to refuse citizenship is absolute and not fettered by equal
protection under Article 14.47
42
Id.
43
44
45
46
47
12
 Similarly, in Louis De Raedt vs. Union of India (1991), the Supreme Court
held that the right of a foreigner in India is confined to Article 21 and he
cannot seek citizenship as a matter of right.48
 With respect to North East:
 Citizenship Amendment Act does not dilute the sanctity of the Assam Accord
as far as the cut-off date of March 24, 1971, stipulated for the
detection/deportation of illegal immigrants is concerned.49
 Citizenship Amendment Act is not Assam-centric. It applies to the whole
country. Citizenship Amendment Act is definitely not against the National
Register of Citizens (NRC), which is being updated to protect indigenous
communities from illegal immigrants.50
 Further, there is a cut-off date of December 31, 2014, and benefits under the
Citizenship Amendment Act will not be available for members of the religious
minorities who migrate to India after the cut-off date.51
 Historical Connections:
 The Act does not give a carte blanche to Hindus and Christians and Sikhs from
other countries to come to India and get citizenship. 52 Just these three
countries, Why?
 Because each of these has been civilizational ties with India. The
circumstances in which they were partitioned from India have created a
situation where Hindus and other minority populations have been dwindling
ever since the partition took place.53
 Regarding including other countries in the neighbourhood the argument could
be that we can deal with them separately if the need arises as we did in the
case of persecuted Sri Lankan Tamils.54
GROUND OF DISCRIMINATION AND SUBJECT OF DISCRIMINATION

Contrarily, it might be claimed that the NCA and CAA are different in that the NCA
discriminates against children because they would be born to parents who are already
48
49
50
Id.
51
52
53
54
13
citizens of the country. Despite being based on sex, the alleged prejudice does not take
into account the parents' sex, i.e., those who are already citizens. There is no sex
discrimination against a citizen who is a single father to a non-citizen girl kid. As a result,
it may be argued, there is no sex-based discrimination here against any of the citizens. It
is important to stress that this is not a technical distinction; rather, it is the one made by
those who support the notion that Article 15 does not apply to the CAA. They argue that
the CAA does not categorise people based on their current citizenship rather than their
religion, which is something that is obviously true.
In other words, they contend that Article 15 has two requirements: (a) the prejudice must
be based on the listed grounds; and (b) the target of the discrimination must actually be a
citizen, not just someone who might become one in the future.
My NCA example amply demonstrates the problems in this line of thinking that is
frequently offered in support of the CAA. Even if the NCA, in theory, (a) does not
discriminate on the basis of sex between those who are already citizens and (b) only does
so between those who may become citizens, its implications could be disastrous because
it undermines the fundamental aim of Article 15. A strictly formal interpretation of
Article 15 would produce ludicrous outcomes. Entry requirements are so obviously
pertinent to Article 15.
CONCLUSION AND SUGGESTIONS

“Finally, the relevant Act makes it simpler for non-Muslim immigrants from India's three
Muslim-majority neighbours (Pakistan, Bangladesh, and Afghanistan) to get Indian
citizenship if they fled their home nations to avoid religious persecution. Hindus, Sikhs,
Buddhists, Jains, Parsis, and Christians arriving from Bangladesh, Pakistan, and Afghanistan
have an opportunity to become Indian citizens even if they lack the necessary paperwork.
They won't be deported as a result of their lack of documentation, either. For six religions
from the three countries who had arrived in India prior to the Citizenship Act of 1955
revision, the criterion that the applicant have lived in India for 11 of the preceding 14 years
has been reduced from 11 to 6 years.prior to December 31, 2014, in India Due to their
inclusion in the Constitution's 6th Schedule, the tribal territories of Tripura, Mizoram, Assam,
14
and Meghalaya are exempt from the Act. Additionally, the Bengal Eastern Frontier
Regulation, 1873's Inner Limit Notified Areas would not be covered by the Act. This
virtually excludes the entirety of Arunachal Pradesh, Mizoram, and Nagaland from the Act's
application.Thus, upon analysis, the concerned Act enunciates two classifications:
1. “It amends Section 2(1)(b) of the Citizenship Act by giving the Union Government
discretion to exclude Hindus, Sikhs, Buddhists, Jains, Parsis, and Christians from the
definition of "illegal immigrants," prioritising these religious communities over
others. Religion-specific classification treats a religious denomination as a whole as
distinct group or class.
2. “country-specific categorization, which restricts immigrants from Bangladesh,

Pakistan, and Afghanistan who are members of the designated minority populations
from becoming citizens.
“After reading the complaints and the justifications for this Act, it becomes clear that the
main problem with the amendment is that it only offers citizenship to non-Muslim
immigrants who have resided in the three nations for five years. Any foreigner may still seek
for citizenship, however they will only be recorded once they have been residents of India for
11 years, or through the standard naturalisation procedure. Therefore, the strength of the
criticisms of the Act and the arguments in its favour determines whether the Act is
constitutionally legitimate.
As a result, this study was successful in obtaining the answers to the research questions and
the research objectives.
REFRENCES
 Constitution of India, https://legislative.gov.in/constitution-of-india
 Citizenship Act of India, 1955, https://egazette.nic.in/WriteReadData/1955/E-2210-
1955-0023-101599.pdf
 Vedika Goel, Citizenship (Amendment Act), 2019, (August 27, 2022),
https://blog.ipleaders.in/citizenship-amendment-act-2019/
 Citizenship Amendment Bill, 2019, https://byjus.com/free-ias-prep/citizenship-
amendment-bill-2019/
15
 Rijuka Naresh Jain, Constitutional validity of Citizenship Amendment Act, 2019,
(April 27, 2022), https://articles.manupatra.com/article-details/Constitutional-
Validity-of-Citizenship-Amendment-Act-2019
 Mohammad Wasim, Ten reasons why the Citizenship (Amendment) Act, 2019, is
unconstitutional, (September 11, 2022), https://theleaflet.in/ten-reasons-why-the-
citizenship-amendment-act-2019-is-unconstitutional/
 Citizenship Amendment Act, https://www.scobserver.in/cases/indian-union-muslim-
league-citizenship-amendment-act-case-background/
16

CIL Aaryavart

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

CIL Aaryavart

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

DHARMASHASTRA NATIONAL LAW UNIVERSITY,

CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION LAWS

MS. BHAGYASHREE AGARWAL

SCOPE AND LIMITATION.....................................................................................................4

(CITIZENSHIP AMENDMENT ACT 2019)............................................................................5

AMENDMENTS FROM PREVIOUS ACT..............................................................................7

GROUND OF DISCRIMINATION AND SUBJECT OF DISCRIMINATION....................13

CONCLUSION AND SUGGESTIONS..................................................................................14

SCOPE AND LIMITATION

1. “Article 15: Prohibition of discrimination on grounds of religion, race, caste, sex or

(CITIZENSHIP AMENDMENT ACT 2019)

FEATURES OF CITIZENSHIP (AMENDMENT) ACT, 2019:

AMENDMENTS FROM PREVIOUS ACT

 It is not against Muslims:

GROUND OF DISCRIMINATION AND SUBJECT OF DISCRIMINATION

CONCLUSION AND SUGGESTIONS

2. “country-specific categorization, which restricts immigrants from Bangladesh,

You might also like