The Supreme Court agreed to hear on March 19 pleas to stay the operation of the controversial Citizenship (Amendment) Act (CAA), 2019 and its rules, notified on March 11, which fast-track the grant of Indian citizenship to non-Muslim migrants from Afghanistan, Bangladesh and Pakistan.
“The Act was enacted in 2019. They wait for four-and-a-half years and notify the rules just days ahead of the elections… Once the process of grant of citizenship starts under this Act, it cannot be reversed. Please hear our applications for stay,” senior advocate Kapil Sibal urged a three-judge Bench headed by Chief Justice of India D.Y. Chandrachud in an oral mentioning of the case on March 15.
CAA implementation reactions | Live updates
Mr. Sibal represents the Indian Union Muslim League (IUML), a political party also represented by advocate Haris Beeran. The League is the primary petitioner in the lead case which has 237 separate petitions challenging the legality of the CAA on the ground that it discriminates in granting citizenship on the basis of religion. The Democratic Youth Federation of India, represented by advocate Subhash Chandran K.R., has also filed an application seeking an interim stay on the implementation of the law.
Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, appearing for the Union government, said listing the case early, on March 19, was “absolutely the prerogative of the court”.
“However, none of these petitioners have the locus standi to say whether or not the Centre can grant citizenship… That may be kept in mind… Whether it is now the first day or the last day before the elections, the petitioner (represented by Mr. Sibal) need not go into that, this is a constitutional court,” Mr. Mehta objected strongly.
The court said all 237 petitions would be listed on March 19.
The IUML has argued that the rules, which govern the actual implementation of the CAA at the ground level, facilitate a highly truncated and fast-tracked process for grant of citizenship to “illegal migrants” belonging to Hindu, Sikh, Buddhist, Jain, Parsi, Christian communities from Afghanistan, Bangladesh or Pakistan who entered into India on or before December 31, 2014.
The rules have done away with the independent and tiered scrutiny of applications of citizenship by District Collectors on the ground, and recommendations of State governments as to the wisdom of granting citizenship to the applicants have been done away with. The Citizenship Rules of 2009 had required the Centre to consult the State governments in the grant of citizenship process.
“The scrutiny of the application for registration or naturalisation was held at three levels — the Collector, the State government and the Central government. It is ultimately the Central government that made the decision to grant citizenship,” the application said.
The CAA Rules, 2024 grants the power of scrutiny to a ‘District Level Committee’ to verify documents and administer the oath of allegiance. An ‘Empowered Committee’ has been authorised to also scrutinise the citizenship applications, but it is not mandatory. Even the composition of the Empowered Committee is defined in the rules, the IUML has said.
“There is no scope for the State government to give recommendations or for the Central government to conduct an inquiry about the suitability of the applicant,” it noted.
Besides, the government ought to have waited for a final decision from the Supreme Court.
“In case the Supreme Court finds CAA unconstitutional, then these people who would have got citizenship would be deprived of it, which would create an anomalous situation… It is best to defer the implementation of CAA and the rules… This is a legislation which is based on the exclusion of religion. It strikes at the concept of secularism,” the IUML said.
