RAJYA SABHA _______ SUPPLEMENT TO SYNOPSIS OF DEBATE _______ (Proceedings other than Questions and Answers) _______ Wednesday, December 11, 2019 / Agrahayana 20, 1941 (Saka) _______ GOVERNMENT BILL The Citizenship Amendment (Bill), 2019 - Contd. SHRI SWAPAN DASGUPTA: The two categories of 'refugees' and 'migrant' are distinguished. In this Bill, the principle related to refugees has been taken from the definition of a refugee given under the Geneva Convention of 1951 but that principle has been put here into a specific context of India. However, an attempt is being made through this Bill to make the entire Bengali Hindus, who came from East Bengal, invisible citizens. They have an identity, and that identity must be recognized. An attempt is being made to ignore the fact that they also actually suffered from persecution. Therefore, I register my protest. SHRI BISHWAJIT DAIMARY: There are some reasons for the apprehension among local people of the North-East regions about this Bill. After mass scale migration of foreigners from the neighboring countries, the local communities of the region felt marginalized. They strongly resisted the marginalization, in which many people were martyred and after that, an agreement was settled with the Central ___________________________________________________ This Synopsis is not an authoritative record of the proceedings of the Rajya Sabha. 550 Government in 1985, according to which an assurance was given by the Central Government to grant constitutional protection to the local people of the region. But it has remained an assurance only for the last 35 years, and nothing has happened so far to fulfill the assurance. Therefore, the people have lost their faith and due to this, they doubt the intention behind the Citizenship (Amendment) Bill, 2019 also. They apprehend that after implementation of this Bill, more refugees will come there and become citizens and it would adversely affect the interest of local population. There is a lot of difference between the people from other places of our country and the local people of the North-East region. They cannot assimilate with other people, as the local people have lived with their art, culture and language for thousands of years. Here today again, an assurance has been given by our Home Minister while introducing this Citizenship Bill and I do hope that his assurances will be converted into reality. Necessary provisions should be made for preservation of art, culture and language of the local people and also to ensure their political security. Provisions should also be made to ensure that the local people could have control over the administration. Such provisions need to be made under this Bill, which are necessary to implement Section 6 of the Assam Accord. Therefore, I support this bill. .SHRI BIRENDRA PRASAD BAISHYA: (Spoke in Assamese.) SHRI P. CHIDAMBARAM: We have a Citizenship Act in this country, which recognizes citizenship by birth, by descent, by registration, by naturalization and by incorporation of territory. These are universal principles. Now, this Government is introducing a new category called ‘citizenship by arbitrary executive fiat’ and asking this Parliament to support the Government in passing. We have a responsibility to pass what is constitutional. This Bill will eventually go before the Judges and they will ultimately decide what we do is constitutional or not. Knowing this is unconstitutional, I am absolutely confident that this law will be struck-off. Government has to take ___________________________________________________ . Synopsis of speech delivered by hon’ble Member in Assamese will be published separately as supplement. 551 responsibility for answers to these relevant and well-known questions. How do you group three countries – Afghanistan, Pakistan and Bangladesh – and leave out the other neighbours? How do you identify only six religious groups – Hindu, Sikh, Buddhist, Jain, Parsi and Christian – and leave out others like Ahmadis, Hazaras and Rohingyas? Ibrahamic religions are three – Christianity, Judaism and Islam. Why have you included Christianity and left the other two? Why have you excluded Sri Lankan Hindus and Bhutan’s Christians? This exclusionary, inclusionary hyphenation is beyond commonsense and logic. Why only religious persecution? Are people not persecuted for political reasons? Are people not persecuted on linguistic grounds? Are people not persecuted by unleashing internal wars against them? Why only religious persecution? Why not every kind of persecution? Does not the Bill violate the fundamental elements of Article 14 of the Constitution? It does not stand on the principle of equality before law. Any unreasonable or irrational classification cannot be made in the Bill. Arbitrariness is writ large on the face of this Bill. I dare the Government to lay the opinion of the Law Department; I dare the Government to invite the Attorney General to this House to answer our questions. A small part of the Constitution is sought to be wrecked and demolished by this insidious Bill. Fortunately, we are three organs of the State. The Executive is complicit; the Legislature is being invited to collaborate; hopefully, the Judiciary will strike it down and will save India. SHRI K. J. ALPHONS: I strongly support this Bill. Before, we gave refuse to people from all over the world who were persecuted. India has allowed them to thrive here. It has been a compassionate country. The crux of the Constitution, ultimately, is all about compassion. Our greatness depends on how we are able to look after the marginalized people, the deprived people, and the oppressed people. That is exactly what this Bill proposes to do. The minority population in Pakistan, which was earlier 23 per cent, has reduced to 2.3 per cent. Pakistan is governed by the Shariyat law. There were 3.9 million Christians in Pakistan. Today, we don’t know what the number is. Minorities are being butchered and killed. Shouldn’t India give heed to those people? We need to do that. We are setting right what was wrong in history. This country is looking after the minorities. Prime Minister has said to them, “You believe in whatever you want to believe and I 552 will ensure that you are allowed to live here peacefully and prosper. I will protect you”. This land has been a home to everybody, to the oppressed. Therefore, this Bill seeks to give refuge to the people who are persecuted. International convention says that whenever religious minorities are persecuted anywhere in the world, the world has a responsibility to give them a refuge and that is what this Bill does. SHRIMATI VIJILA SATHYANANTH: Our Party Supremo Amma had asserted that she would take continuous steps to attain a separate homeland for Tamils in Sri Lanka and had asked the Centre to grant dual citizenship to refugees on Sri Lankan Tamils living in the state. She always fought for enabling Sri Lankan Tamils to live with full freedom and self respect and also for attaining a separate Eelam. AIADMK's policy was that any repatriation would be voluntary and based on the choice of the refugees after the situation in Sri Lanka changes. The Madurai Bench of Madras High Court agreed that granting Citizenship was within the exclusive executive power of the Centre. As per records, 4,60,000 people have arrived in India and registered themselves as repatriated Indian citizens from Sri Lanka. These Tamil people have refugee cards in support of their status but now they are considered as Stateless Indian Origin Tamils from Sri Lanka. They have no state identification and they are considered as Sri Lankan citizens. They are treated as illegal migrants so their claim for Indian citizenship were refused on legal grounds. 90 per cent children of these refugees are born in India and most of these people are living in India for more than 25-30 years and 90 per cent of the population belongs to Hindu. These refugees fulfill all required criteria and also keeping in mind the status of being persons of Indian origin, these people may be given Indian Citizenship. SHRI SANJAY RAUT: It is being told that those who do not support the Bill are not patriot. We are the citizens of this country and the people of this country have voted us. We support the cause of Minorities living in India and in Pakistan. We are seeing that the people living in Assam, Tripura, Mizoram and Manipur are not supporting this Bill. This Bill is not based on religion, it is based on humanitarian ground. Whether it is sure that the intruders would be sent back after passing this Bill. It is obvious that when the refugees are being citizenship then the intruders should be sent back. There should 553 be no politics in accepting the refugees There are refugees from Jammu and Kashmir, they also should be rehabilitated there. They were hopeful after the removal of Article 370. SHRI SATISH CHANDRA MISRA: We oppose this Bill. It is a welcome step that we are giving the citizenship to all the minorities of neighboring countries except Muslims. But there is a dead line of 31st December, 2014. What is the reason to decide this date as deadline. According to the Preamble of the Constitution we are secular and we should not favour to anybody and everybody has to be treated equal. This Bill violates the Article 14, Article 15, Article 21. Word 'citizen' is used in article 15 whereas in article 14 and in article 21 word 'person' is used not the word 'citizen'. So by excluding Muslims there is violation of article 14. So my Party is not in support of this Bill. PROF. MANOJ KUMAR JHA: A State which persecutes does not always differentiate between A, B and C. In Germany when Jews were persecuted at that time those Germans were also persecuted who stood behind Jews.