1
0
FACT SHEET on India’s Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA)
(Image source and Credit – Reuters)
As the US being stewards of democratic principles and human rights, within the context of the profoundly consequential partnership between the United States and India in the 21st century, we diligently scrutinize developments impacting both nations. The Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA) has emerged as a subject of debate within the United States, and in the past, sparking protests and discourse. In our commitment to provide factual analysis for policy makers for their analysis, statements and decision-making, we offer a fact-based analysis to foster a nuanced understanding of the CAA. Our aim is to ensure that discussions and comments regarding this legislation are grounded in factual evidence rather than conjecture or apprehension.
We also observed that past protests and misinformation surrounding the CAA have understandably caused concerns among Indo-Americans. As such, our analysis seeks to address these concerns by providing accurate information and contextualizing the legislative intent behind the CAA. We recognize the importance of maintaining open dialogue and ensuring that the voices and perspectives of all stakeholders, including the Indo-American community, are heard and considered in discussions surrounding this legislation. We address lawmakers and statesmen with the utmost respect for the importance of their deliberations on matters of national and international significance
CAA Notification: The Government of India issued a gazette notification on March 11, 2024, regarding the Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA) which was passed in December 2019 to protect those seeking refuge due to religious persecution. [1] The law expedites citizenship for refugees from neighboring three Islamic countries (Pakistan, Bangladesh and Afghanistan) prosecuted based on the minority’s religions (Hindu, Christian, Sikh, Buddhist, Jain, and Parsis) [1] . As of now this matter is in the Supreme Court of India and we can expect a judgement on the CAA in near future.
Here’s a summary of its key points:
Overview:
- Expedited Citizenship: The CAA creates an accelerated pathway to Indian citizenship for persecuted religious minorities reducing the residency requirement from 11 years to 6 years. [2]
- Eligibility Criteria: These immigrants must have fled religious persecution in Afghanistan, Pakistan, or Bangladesh and entered India before December 31, 2014. [2]
- Simplified Documentation: The notification simplified the documentation process to prove their refugee and residency status. [2]
- Application Process: The persecuted minority refugees need to apply online with supporting documentation which is reviewed and approved by a regional board comprising 6 officials. [2]
Additional Considerations:
- The CAA does not automatically grant citizenship. immigrants must still apply and meet other requirements. [2]
- Proponents of the CAA argue it provides refuge to minorities facing persecution in neighboring countries. [2]
Historical Context:
- Islamic Republic of Pakistan: In 1947, India underwent partition, leading to the creation of present-day India and Pakistan along religious lines. This division was marred by devastating riots that claimed the lives of hundreds of thousands of non-Muslims, many of whom sought refuge in India. The minority communities that remained in Pakistan have faced ongoing persecution and marginalization, causing their population percentage to plummet from 23% to 3% since the partition. [3]
- People’s Republic of Bangladesh: Following the 1971 separation of Bangladesh from Pakistan, the Pakistani Military and extremist Muslim factions such as Jamat-E-Islami and Razakars orchestrated a brutal genocide targeting minority communities, predominantly Hindus, resulting in hundreds of thousands of fatalities, widespread sexual assaults, looting, and destruction. Consequently, an estimated 7-8 million individuals sought refuge in neighboring India. Since 1971, the minority population in Bangladesh has significantly decreased from 23% to 8.5%. [4]
- Islamic Emirates of Afghanistan: Since the 1980s Soviet occupation, Afghanistan has been plagued by instability, particularly under the influence of the extremist Taliban regime. Minorities in the country have faced relentless attacks, atrocities, and endured substandard living conditions. Consequently, some persecuted minorities have been compelled to flee Afghanistan in search of safety and security.
United States International Religious Freedom Commission (USIRF) Reports:
- Pakistan:
Since 2002, the USCIRF has consistently designated Pakistan as a “Country of Particular Concern” (CPC) with regard to the protection of its religious minorities including those referenced in the CAB. In its 2015 annual report, the USCIRF mentions that the Pakistani government “failed to provide adequate protection to targeted groups or to prosecute perpetrators and those who advocate for violence”. Almost every annual report for nearly two decades has consistently highlighted the persecution faced by these minority communities and reiterated Pakistan’s status as a CPC. [5] - Afghanistan:
The USCIRF’s report on Afghanistan is much worse as it documents the severe atrocities committed by the Taliban against the Afghan population. In its 2015 Annual report, the agency explains the persecution suffered by various minority groups. Further, the report critiques the Afghan government’s stance on religious freedom stating that “the Afghan constitution fails to protect the individual right to freedom of religion or belief, allows ordinary laws to supersede other fundamental rights, and contains a repugnancy clause stating that no law can be contrary to the tenets of Islam.” The report also details the instances of killings and kidnappings, instilling fear and insecurity among the minority communities. [6] - Bangladesh:
The 2015 USCIRF report on Bangladesh notes that the parliamentary elections of the country held in 2014 were “not free or fair”. It also mentions that post-elections violence occurred in 16 out of 64 districts, with minority areas experiencing the worst attacks. Numerous instances of looting, vandalism, and arson targeted Hindu properties, resulting in the displacement of hundreds of Hindus. Additionally, Christian and Buddhist communities also faced targeted violence during this period of unrest. [7]
Parity of CAA with the United States amendments:
Granting expedited citizenship based on factors like region, ethnicity, religion, or race is routinely adopted by various countries and often shaped by historical and current geopolitical contexts. Here are key amendments enacted by the United States to illustrate targeted immigration policies.
- The Lautenberg Amendment: The Lautenberg Amendment was passed by the United States Congress in 1990. The amendment aimed to address the unique plight of certain religious minorities facing persecution in specific countries, primarily focusing on Jews, Christians, and Baha’is. [8]
- The Jackson-Vanik Amendment, enacted in 1974, was a U.S. law aimed at pressuring the Soviet Union to specifically allow Jewish emigration. [9]
- The Specter Amendment: The Specter Amendment allowed for fast tracked immigration processing for Hungarian and Cuban refugees. [8]
Controversies and Clarifications:
- Religious Discrimination of Muslims: Critics argue the CAA discriminates against Muslims by excluding them from the eligibility criteria. However, it is crucial to view this law, within the context of the regional, historical and contemporary challenges posed by oppressing regimes in neighboring Islamic countries. These countries have witnessed targeted attacks, atrocities, and egregious crimes against religious minorities, causing them to flee to other countries. The focus of the law is to address the plight of persecuted minorities in these specific contexts rather than targeting any particular religious group.
- Potential Disenfranchisement: The CAA, when viewed alongside a proposed National Register of Citizens (NRC), raises fears of a system that could disenfranchise Muslim citizens who might not have proper documentation. However, it’s important to note that the CAA and NRC are separate matters. India’s Home Minister Amit Shah has explicitly stated that the implementation of the CAA does not involve the application of the NRC, debunking any rumors suggesting otherwise. [10]
Myths vs Facts:
- Myth: CAA would take away citizenship of Muslims.
Fact: CAA is about giving citizenship and there is no provision for removal of citizenship based on religion or any other factor. - Myth: CAA would result in confinement camps.
Fact: CAA is about giving citizenship to those applicants who are qualified under its rules. There is no provision to identify anyone nor confinement. - Myth: CAA would result in deportation of Muslims.
Fact: The CAA’s primary objective is to grant citizenship, without provisions for deportation based on religious affiliation. - Myth: Without the CAA provision undocumented Muslims in India would not have a way to get Indian
Fact: Undocumented Muslims in India can still apply for citizenship under existing laws parity with everybody else except these fast tracked categories of applicants - Myth: CAA would take jobs away from citizens.
Fact: CAA makes the applicants eligible, but their percentage is very small compared to the other eligible citizens, moreover as they are supposed to be staying in the country for the last 6+ years, they might have found a way to work and earn.
Summary: Based on factual analysis, the provision in question aims to grant citizenship to persecuted religious minorities from (India’s) three neighboring Islamic countries. Contrary to misconceptions, it does not involve depriving or revoking the citizenship of or deporting Muslims in India. Therefore, it could aptly be called the “Act for Expedited Citizenship for Religious Minority Persecuted. ” We trust that the USCIRF, other agencies and interested entities will find this information on CAA appropriate and find CAA directly addresses some of the concerns raised by the USCIRF regarding the situation of minorities in Afghanistan, Bangladesh, and Pakistan.
Media Coverage:
