![Sample our Social Sciences journals, sign in here to start your FREE access for 14 days]({"type":"image" , "src" : "/sda/110822/TOC-Subject-Sample-2021-Social-Sciences.jpg"})
ABSTRACT
This article is an attempt to unpack how the Citizenship Amendment Bill 2016 that proposed citizenship on the basis of religious affiliation trace its past from narrative rooted in partition and idea of religious identity in determination of citizenship status in India. The act proposes, persons belonging to minority community namely Hindus, Sikhs, Jains, Parsi and Christians from Afghanistan, Bangladesh and Pakistan who have either entered into India without valid travel documents or the validity of their documents have expired are eligible to apply for Indian citizenship by naturalisation in 7 years instead of existing 12 years. Building on existing scholarship, field experience and media reports this article argues proposed citizenship amendment bill that favours citizenship status for persecuted minorities defined primarily as Hindus leaving Muslims is not an attempt to redefine citizenship but reinforce logic that favours narrative of India for Hindus.
Disclosure statement
No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author.
Notes
1. Barbora et al., “Migration Matters in South Asia,” 57.
2. See Sinha and Bal, “De-Partitioning Society- Contesting Borders,” 75–97.
3. Samaddar, “Still They Come Migrants in the Post Partition Bengal,”128–9.
4. Jayal, Citizenship and its Discontents, 59.
5. Dutta, Refugees and Borders in South Asia, 68.
6. Zamindar, The Long Partition and the Making of Modern South Asia Refugees, 7.
7. Terminology is very important thus Refugees, abductees and evacuees were used. Each term defining different treatment.
8. Chatterji, “Secularisation and Partition Emergencies Deep Diplomacy,” 43.
9. For details see Jayal, Citizenship and Its Discontents, 75–77.
10. Roy, Partitioned lives Migrants, Refugees, Citizens,71, also see Roy, “Paper Rights,” 329–49.
11. Zamindar, The Long Partition and the Making of Modern South Asia Refugees, 104.
12. Chatterji, “Right or Charity?” 74–110.
13. Roy, Mapping Citizenship in India, 95.
14. Chatterji, “South Asian Histories of Citizenship,” 1049–71.
15. Ibid., 1050.
16. Ibid.
17. Jayal, Citizenship and its discontents An Indian History, 79 also see Pandey, “Can a Muslim be an Indian?” 609–29.
18. Roy, Mapping Citizenship in India; Dutta, Refugees and Borders in South Asia; and Jayal, Citizenship and its Discontents.
19. Roy, Mapping Citizenship in India, 74.
20. Zamindar, The Long Partition and the making of Modern South Asia Refugees, 107.
21. Roy, Mapping Citizenship in India, 91.
22. italics are mine to enforce the idea how in case of Hindu migrants intention was given prominence over documentation in 1950s and also in 2004 and 2016, B Tyabji 8 January 1953, PV III, F-II/53-PSP, NAI.
23. Roy, “Paper Rights,”343.
24. For details see Daniel, “The Securitization of Dual Citizenship,” 18–36.
25. Schendel, The Bengal Borderland Beyond State and Nation in South Asia, 193, also see Schendel, “Stateless in South Asia,” 115–47.
26. On the complexities of cross border migration and settlement in the borderland see Rahman and Schendel, “I Am Not a Refugee,” 551–84.
27. Roy, Partitioned lives Migrants, Refugees, Citizens, 133.
28. Ibid., 134.
29. For detailed discussion refer to Jayal, Citizenship and its Discontents An Indian History, 66–67.
30. The Times of India, December 24, 2016.
31. Dutta, Refugees and Borders in South Asia, 90.
32. Ibid., 115.
33. Schendel, The Bengal Borderland Beyond State and Nation, 212.
34. All Assam Students Union (AASU) had argued that 1971 had no moral, legal or constitutional justification to be selected as the cut-off date but government of Assam released a press note on 30 March 1979 arguing vigorous action was taken during 1960s to detect and deport illegal immigrants. Thus, 1971 could be accepted as cut off for identifying any further entry.
35. Roy, “Between Encompassment and Closure,” 236.
36. Jayal, Citizenship and its Discontents, 72.
37. https://barandbench.com/india-hindu-country-meghalaya-high-court-full-judgment Accessed December 15, 2018.
38. Roy, “Ambivalence of Citizenship in Assam,” 45.
39. For details see Sadiq, Paper Citizens.
40. To be included in the list of NRC one has to prove that she or their ancestors are in India before 24 March 1971. To prove this submission of identity proof as well as documents to establish relationship with the pre 1971 ancestor is required.31 December 2018 was the last date to file claims for those 40 lakhs inhabitants who failed to make it in the draft published on 31 July 2018.
41. The Financial Express, November 2, 2016.
42. The Assam Tribune, November 17, 2016.
43. Sinha, “The Report on Illegal Migration in Assam,” 8.
44. The Assam Tribune, November 23, 2016.
45. Baruah, “Separatist Militants and Contentious Politics in Assam, India,” 958.
46. Asian Age, August 15, 2012.
47. Kashyap, “Bangla Infiltrators Now kingmakers in Assam”.
48. The Assam Tribune, March 30, 2017.
49. For details see Assam Tribune, May 2, 2018; and Assam Tribune, May 6, 2018.
50. The Indian Express, November 2, 2016. Plea was also filed in the Supreme Court arguing illegal immigration had led to demographic changes in Assam and requested the court to declare the passport (Entry into India) Amendment Rules 2015, the foreigners (Amendment) order 2015 and the order issued by the Home Ministry on December 2016 under the citizenship act that allowed naturalisation of illegal immigrants who are Hindus, Sikhs, Buddhists, Jains, Parsi and Christian as illegal and invalid.
51. The Assam Tribune, May 10, 2018. Demand for a separate Union Territory for Barak Valley (Cachar, Karimganj and Hailakandi) gained momentum during this phase.
52. The Assam Tribune, November 1, 2017.
53. Daniel, “The securitization of Dual Citizenship,” 31; and Chimni, “Outside the Bounds of Citizenship,” 292.
54. Chimni, “Outside the Bounds of Citizenship : The Status of Aliens, Illegal Immigrants and Refugees in India” 292.
Additional information
Notes on contributors
Chetna Sharma
Chetna Sharma is Assistant Professor in the Department of Political Science, Kamala Nehru College University of Delhi, India. She obtained her Ph.D., M.Phil. M.A. from University of Delhi. Her research interest are Political Theory, Citizenship, Minority Rights, Multiculturalism, with special interest in Politics of Assam. Early draft of this paper was presented at Brown International Advance Research Institute (BIARI), Brown University Providence, USA.