India granted citizenship to its first batch of 14 refugees under the controversial Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA) on Wednesday. These refugees are from neighbouring countries of Pakistan, Afghanistan and Bangladesh. The Act was proposed and passed in 2019 by the Indian Cabinet, amending the Citizenship Act of 1955, specifically Section 2.
The amendment provides that persons belonging to minority communities, including Hindus, Sikhs, Buddhists, Jains, Parsis and Christians from Afghanistan, Bangladesh and Pakistan shall not be treated as illegal migrants. However, it faced heavy criticism for being discriminatory against Muslims, who did not come under the act. Notably, the act automatically grants citizenship to non-Muslim refugees after seven years of residence, a provision that Indian Muslims do not benefit from.
This contentious legislation led to violent protests within the country. The situation only eased after a stay-at-home order was issued following the outbreak of COVID-19. Despite this, the government officially notified that a set of rules based on the CAA was to be implemented, with none of the original provisions, including the allegedly discriminatory sub-clause that excludes Muslims from citizenship, being altered.
Since implementation, there have been over 300 applications from people originating from the specified countries and entering India before the cut-off of December 31, 2014. The government justified the Act by stating that Muslims, being the majority in these nations, cannot be minorities or victims of persecution.
For those applying, the procedure involves processing, scrutiny and granting by state-level administrative bodies in the state where the applicant resides. Applicants are required to provide proof of their origin from Pakistan, Afghanistan or Bangladesh and evidence of their entry into India before the deadline.
A shadow still looms over this law as the Supreme Court is yet to review some petitions opposing it. Chief Minister of West Bengal, Mamata Banerjee, has also expressed dissension, stating her opposition to the CAA if it threatens to curtail the rights of Indian citizens.
For further information about the implementation of the contentious CAA, please see the full report.