One is a
relative, the other a stranger, say the petty minded
The entire world is a
family, say the magnanimous
[[Maha upnishad: Chapter
6, verse 72]
Note: Vasudhaiva Kutumbakam
(the entire world is a single family), the verse above, is engraved at the
entrance to the hall of India’s parliament.
Crime
of the descendents
In June
1971, Sabbir Rafi fled his village near Dhaka and crossed the border into West
Bengal. The Pakistani military was raping, looting, torturing and killing the
East Pakistanis in what was the largest genocide operation since Hitler. Sabbir
was fortunate to run away with his wife and children. His son Nabil was 10 and
daughter Safina, 6. In India, Sabbir began working as an electrician, his
children graduated, Nabil worked in a bank and Safina taught in a school. Sabbir
had four grandchildren born between 1988 and 1990. The family further expanded
with great-grandchildren born between 2010 and 2013. At the time of his death
in 2015, Sabbir Rafi had two children, four grandchildren, and four great
grand-children. Other than Nabil and Safina, who entered India as kids, the rest
of the family was born in India, had never left India, and had never set foot
in Bangladesh. Not having seen or been to another country, they considered
themselves Indian.
India’s
CAA-NRC package (citizenship amendment act/national register of citizens) now
prescribes sending Nabil, Safina, their four children and four grandchildren to
detention camps. All existing Indian detention centers are inside jails. The
Rafi family can be officially detained there for three years with no right to
bail. In case Bangladesh doesn’t accept them as citizens, they can be held in
jail for ever. As the descendents of illegal immigrants, they can never become
Indian citizens.
If
Sabbir Rafi and his family had been Hindus, they would be awarded Indian
passports in a government ceremony instead of rotting in detention camps.
Inclusion
includes exclusion
It is
argued that the CAA is about giving, rather than taking away, citizenship. Sounds
like a bunch of schoolgirl bullies ostracizing a girl by not talking to her. Anyone
who has studied the set theory in mathematics knows that what is not
included is excluded. At the toss before a cricket match, a team of 11 players
is announced. They are the privileged ones. Try telling others that the team
selection was about picking the 11 players, not un-picking the rest. Whichever
angle you choose to look from, the fact is that those not in the team are
denied the honour of playing in the match.
CAA is not
a standalone act. CAA along with the proposed NRC (National register of
citizens) and the government order to build detention centers across
India is a comprehensive initiative.
Persecution
of minorities
People
like Sabbir Rafi fleeing East Pakistan were persecuted by Muslims (West
Pakistanis). The argument that Muslims can’t be persecuted in Muslim countries
is false. Most Bangladeshi refugees in 1971 were persecuted in a Muslim country
by fellow Muslims. And their children, grandchildren and great-grandchildren, forming
a majority of the illegal population, are India-born and India-bred.
The Indian
government has chosen Trumpism as its model. But it has managed to out-trump
Trump himself. In the USA, children born of parents, however illegal, are
American citizens as long as they are born on American soil. India now plans
to arrest, detain and deport all Muslims under 32 years (1 July 1987 is the
cut-off date) whose ancestors entered India after 1971.
Human
existence is the proof
For
decades, Indians could take pride in that they could live their entire life
without any documents. My own father, (who never went to school) has no birth
certificate, naturally no school-leaving certificate nor a marriage certificate.
But at 86, he exists, is happily married and thinks of himself as an Indian.
Human
existence itself should be the proof of human existence, not documents. In the welfare
societies of Europe and America, documentation helps citizens procure benefits-
unemployment allowance, pensions, social security and so on. India is a poor
country; its government offers no social security. Why then imitate the welfare
States by being obsessed about documents?
By
threatening imprisonment, the proposed legislation shifts the onus of proving
existence to the citizens. Unlike America, birth in India (after
1987) no longer makes you a citizen. You need to prove none of your ancestors,
alive and dead, migrated to India illegally. Not only Sabbir Rafi’s family,
whose ancestors really entered India from East Pakistan, but each and every
Muslim family must prove their ancestors were legal.
In a
country that had little or no documentation, this is a burden that will be a
source of harassment, corruption and mental torture. In a country where birth
certificates were not mandatory, its government is now asking its Muslim
residents to prove the pedigree of their ancestors. Since this is done with
retrospective effect, it is illogical and bad in law. The Indian state can
make birth certificates mandatory if they wish, create a State mechanism to
ensure everyone gets one at birth, and only then require the residents to offer
it as a proof of their existence, not with retrospective effect.
The
hypocrisy
This is
not the first time for a CAA initiative - there was a previous attempt four
years ago. The Ministry of Home Affairs had issued a notification on 7 September 2015 to amend the passport act. That notification had a similar,
but not identical, wording.
On 12
December 2019, the CAA (citizenship amendment act, 2019) was passed
by both the houses. It came into force on 10 January 2020.
If you
read those two documents carefully, there are three key differences.
a.
The wording “Persons belonging to minority
communities” is now omitted. Minority communities, I presume, is a
sensitive phrase.
b.
Afghanistan has
been included for good measure. In 2015, only Pakistan and Bangladesh were mentioned.
Why this change? Afghani refugees are tiny in number; India’s foreign ministry
gave a figure of 18,000 in 2011. This inclusion is probably a result of
lobbying. Or it’s a prelude to inclusion of more Muslim countries in the future
– à la
Trump. Pakistan and Bangladesh are any way
the most sensitive and controversial. Because their migrants speak the Indian
languages, and are indistinguishable from Indian Muslims. That opens up an
opportunity to question the origins of every Indian Muslim.
c.
The words “… who were compelled to seek
shelter in India due to religious persecution or fear of religious persecution
and entered into India on or before the 31st December 2014…” are
a surprise omission.
India’s
Home Minister has been talking of persecution of Hindus and other minorities,
but in the Act, references to minorities and persecution
are both omitted. Why? Because only during the 1971 war, there was major
persecution (including that of Muslims by a Muslim state). The majority of
illegal entrants in later years have come for economic reasons. Keeping the
word persecution would have meant kicking out Hindu economic migrants.
This is, in fact, what people in Assam want. They want all illegal
immigrants, Hindus and Muslims alike, to be removed from India.
Talking
to the media about persecution and omitting it from the Act is as great a
hypocrisy as writing ‘world is a single family’ on the parliament’s entrance
and introducing this act inside.
The
problem started in Assam in the 70s. That post-war immigration problem has now been
distorted to give it a Muslims persecuting Hindus colour.
Which
country sends the highest number of visitors to India? Bangladesh. It’s
the only country from which more than 2 million tourists visit India each year.
If it was such a persecuting nation, why would India issue millions of visas to
its residents, and increase the risk of illegal migration? No, it’s simply
another example of duplicity. Bangladesh has more than 12 million Hindus, the
largest minority group. Though declining in percentage because Muslims are more
fertile than Hindus, the absolute number grows each year.
Pakistan
statistics quoted by India’s home minister qualifies as ‘alternative
facts’. He repeatedly quotes Pakistan with 23% and Bangladesh with 22%
non-Muslims in 1947. A deliberate case of double counting. West Pakistan
(today’s Pakistan) had only 3.4% non-Muslims, not 23%. The proportion of non-Muslims
in Pakistan has gone up from 3.4% (1951) to 3.7% (1998) as per the
Pakistani census.
Identifying
Hindus and Muslims
Rajan
Khan is a prolific best-selling Marathi writer. He is an atheist. He was born a
Hindu. To protest against bigotry, he changed his name to Khan. Everyone in his
family carries that surname. How will the police classify his family? As
Hindus? As Muslims?
Nature
and science can only distinguish between a man and a woman. Or between a man
and an animal. Religion is man-made. No Indian ID mentions a person’s religion.
India has no procedure to register a person’s religion at a temple. Will the
government specify how to identify a Hindu and a Muslim? Features such as a beard?
Skull cap? Pierced ears? Circumcision?
What if
a Pakistani migrant converted to Hinduism? Does he become a citizen? What if a
Bangladeshi Hindu converted to Islam? Is he sent to jail? And what about
atheists? The Act doesn’t offer pardon to atheists.
The
updating of the NRC for Assam started in 2013. Mainly because a judge from
Assam (Ranjan Gogoi) became a Supreme Court judge in 2012. It took six years
to update the register. Out of 33 million, 1.9 millon applicants were
excluded. If it took 6 years for 33 millon (Assam), mathematically, for 1.4
billion (India) it will take 254 years. To shorten the time, India will
need to abandon all economic activity, recruit a few million people to create
the NRC, and a few million policemen to investigate and arrest.
Supreme
Court has little choice
Above
are only a few of the key arguments.
The Act
does not reflect the Government’s stand (no reference to persecution or
minorities).
The Act
coupled with the National Register is unconscionable in that any Muslim under
32 can be arrested, detained and deported, even when born and bred in India.
The Act
is discriminatory and unconstitutional in that while an Indian-born Muslim
under 32 can be imprisoned, a non-Muslim under 32 is awarded citizenship.
The Act
is bad in law because the burden of proof is shifted to the citizen with
retrospective effect. Particularly bad, because such proof (birth certificate
and others) was never mandatory. The proof required now includes proof of citizenship
of ancestors long dead.
The Act
doesn’t specify the way to identify a person’s religion. It is silent on
converted Hindus, converted Muslims and atheists. Creating the NRC (National
Register of Citizens) on the lines of Assam is likely to take 254 years.
The Act
converts India from a democratic to a police state. An order to build detention centers in each state and filling them with young Muslim families is a bigoted,
immoral action. Having a great-grandfather who ran away from a Pakistani war
zone fifty years ago is defined as a crime of Indian Muslim youth.
India’s
Supreme Court has little choice. In 2006, it struck down a similar but less
horrifying initiative (IMDT act, 1983) by the Indira Gandhi government (Sarbananda Sonawal vs Union of India on 5 December 2006). It took the court 22 years to
decide the case by calling the act ultra vires the constitution.
This
time, hopefully, the Court will be faster in banning the CAA-NRC package. It’s
not a great feeling to belong to a Police State.
Ravi
References:
1.
https://indianfrro.gov.in/frro/Notifications_dated_7.9.2015.pdf Notification in September 2015 which talked
about the persecution of minorities, a reference now omitted.
2.
https://indiancitizenshiponline.nic.in/UserGuide/E-gazette_2019_20122019.pdf
The text of the 2019 Citizenship Amendment Act.
3.
https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/politics-and-nation/cab-shows-bjps-ignorance-about-assamese-sensitivities/articleshow/72500425.cms
Criticism by Assam’s chief minister.
5.
https://www.indiatoday.in/india/story/pakistan-bangladesh-non-muslim-population-citizenship-amendment-bill-bjp-1627678-2019-12-12
Since its formation, Pakistan’s (today’s Pakistan) non-Muslim population was
never more than 3.5%. Including East Pakistan is a case of double counting.
6.
https://indiankanoon.org/doc/1436100/
The Supreme Court strikes down the Illegal migrants act, 1983 (Indira Gandhi
government) declaring it ultra vires the constitution.
7.
https://www.loc.gov/law/help/undocumented-migrants/india.php
Children of undocumented migrants. A disturbing document.
8.
https://www.hrln.org/admin/issue/subpdf/Refugee_populations_in_India.pdf Report of refugee populations in India.
Though outdated (2007), makes an interesting reading.
9.
https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/geos/bg.html
CIA states Hindus in Bangladesh constitute 10% of the population.
10. https://www.upsciq.com/magazine_months/march-2019/?shaarSlug=model-detention-manual
The Indian central govt has asked all states and union territories to set up at
least one detention center. It is suggestive that the detention manual is not
available anywhere in the internet.
R.
What a fatuous post! Full of idiotic arguments and outright falsities. The author reveals his ideological predilections in this para: "Human existence itself should be the proof of human existence, not documents. In the welfare societies of Europe and America, documentation helps citizens procure benefits- unemployment allowance, pensions, social security and so on. India is a poor country; its government offers no social security. Why then imitate the welfare States by being obsessed about documents?" WoW! So poor countries should open their borders because they give no social security? If indeed "human existence" is proof of "human existence" then why have passports to cross international borders? Why spend billions on census? And I could go on. Perhaps the writer believes there should be no nation states. It's a POV held by sorry ass communists who have learned nothing from the collapse of murderous Marxist regimes the world over. With them there could be no rational discourse. However, one must call out their lies. For instance, Abhyanker claims "West Pakistan (today’s Pakistan) had only 3.4% non-Muslims, not 23%. The proportion of non-Muslims in Pakistan has gone up from 3.4% (1951) to 3.7% (1998) as per the Pakistani census." Another WoW! Wonder where he pulled these numbers out from? Let me quote one of the most liberal Indian websites for the real story: "The truth is when Pakistan was created in 1947, Hindus constituted about 15 per cent of the population of West Pakistan (current Pakistan); by 1998 it is about 1.6 per cent" (source: https://www.dailyo.in/politics/the-missing-hindus-in-south-asia-and-a-conspiracy-of-silence/story/1/1149.html)! While I am at it, let me also provide related links to 'liberal' Western media that might be helpful reads for the naive people who might stumble on this moronic blog. BBC 2015: https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-india-34645370 and New York Times 2019: https://www.nytimes.com/2019/10/05/world/asia/pakistan-hindu-india-modi.html Instead, the author's explanation of dwindling Hindu/minority populations of Pakistan and Bangladesh? It is "...because Muslims are more fertile than Hindus, the absolute number grows each year"!!
ReplyDeleteBelieve this guy at your own peril.