More than three weeks after
Citizenship Amendment Act, 2019 got the assent of President of India, people are
now understood that CAA has nothing to do with Indian citizens (that includes
Muslim community too). Some anti-CAA group still argue that the act is
unconstitutional as it discriminates a particular religion. On this my one-point straight answer is, if
it’s unconstitutional, then wait for Supreme Court’s decision which will hear
such pleas on January 22nd 2020. If it’s unconstitutional then SC
will be struck it out. Why then so much protest marches that ultimately leading
to vandalism and violence?
Kerala assembly passed a resolution against CAA act
2019. Unfortunately, citizenship is a central government subject and only
Parliament has the power to enact any law on it. Thus, politics is so bitter
that Kerala assembly ignored the dignity and sanctity of Parliament while
violating the decorum of federalism of this democracy.
Then comes NPR. Interestingly NPR
was already exercised in 2010 by UPA government. During its enforcement then UPA
minister, P.Chidambaram said that NPR is pro-poor. The same thing is claimed by
BJP government now whereas Congress leader Rahul Gandhi says that NPR is a tax
to poor. I am yet to understand why then UPA did that exercise in 2010? Or
whatever UPA had done if repeated by BJP government becomes a different matter?
There should be a limit to duality.
Then NRC. PM Narendra Modi said
that nothing has been drafted yet on NRC. Yes, NRC is one of the electoral
promises by the BJP government. But it’s amply clear that BJP is not in favour of
SC monitored the NRC method implemented in Assam. Thus, there will be some
different method which will definitely be under scrutiny when it comes to the table. If it’s against Indian citizen and unconstitutional then we have Supreme Court which will strike it down.
We have a Constitution which has necessary
checks and balance to take care of any arbitrary and unconstitutional acts.
When we vow for Constitution, why not trust in Constitutional Machinery such
as Supreme Court?
My point is simple. In this perception
game of politics, somewhere the real issue had been lost. The fact is that in
our neighbouring Islamic countries, religious minorities are severely
persecuted. At present everyone knows about Pakistani cricketer Danish Kaneria.
Just imagine, why people from these countries are leaving their home and
property and came to our country as a refugee? Have we ever realised their
precarious conditions?
It’s not that the anti-CAA group
not know regarding this. Mahatma Gandhi during partition said that the
religious minorities from undivided India (or say Pakistan then) should be
settled here in India. As per official records, former Prime minister Manmohan
Singh and Former CPM chief Prakash Karat demanded to give citizenship to
these religiously persecuted people (who are refugees).
Dr Udit Raj, former BJP MP of
Delhi tweeted that CAA is anti-Dalit. I don’t know why he is thinking so,
because he hasn’t given any reason. But then many refugees belong to the Dalit
community. CAA will help them. Thus, I don’t think it has anything to do with
either Dalits or Muslims or anyone who is an Indian citizen.
Mr Owaisi loudly claims that the
Indian Muslims are not in India by chance rather in India by choice. No one is
denying that. Yes, Indian Muslims by their choice stayed back in India on the assurance of secularism. I don’t think Indian Muslims are persecuted in India
rather they have more political power (per se) because of strong vote bank.
But then let’s realise the
condition of religious minorities of the neighbouring Islamic countries. Do
they ever ask partition on religious line? Do they ever want the neighbouring
countries to be an Islamic republic? They were part of undivided India and now a victim of partition that based on religion. It’s a political decision in 1947
for which they have suffered a lot. Many of them forcibly converted and many
are massacred. Doesn’t Secular India have any responsibility towards victims of
undivided Indians due to political decision of partition?
What is secularism?
As per dictionary Secularism means ‘no concern with religion’. This is a
western concept. In Indian concept, the secularism means no persecution to
religious minorities by the majority community. In India irrespective of religion
or caste, everybody is at par citizen. In fact, there are some privileges
guaranteed by the Constitution to the oppressed community of India along with
minorities. How can India not sensible to religious minorities of the
neighbouring Islamic Countries which were part of undivided India? The Islamic Country means the constitution of that country acknowledges Islam as the only religion. Thus religious minorities don't have Constitutional safeguards in those Theistic countries.
I wish better sense prevails on
all politicians and activists. Politics is a game of perception no doubt, but
then the smokescreen shouldn’t be dragged too much. The present public of
India is smart and mature. They can see through the intent and design behind
the game (of perception) and knows how to punish the conspirators electorally.
