Indian population is woefully short and so we must have people coming from all over the world to occupy Indian space and resources is not an argument that even the critics of CAA believe in.

The amendment which was passed constitutionally was tailored to specifically provide shelter to refugees who have fled from the neighbouring countries because of religious persecution. Hindus, Sikhs, Buddhists, Jains, Parsis and Christians are minorities in these three states and have faced religious persecution for decades. To identify this persecuted class, the CAA has taken a cue from the definition of refugee in the Geneva Convention of 1951.

The atrocities minorities have faced in these parts is clearly visible from the fact that the minority population in Pakistan has decreased from 23 per cent in 1947 to 3.7 per cent in 2011. Similarly, the minority population in Bangladesh has decreased from 22 per cent in 1947 to 7 per cent in 2011. Situation in Afghanistan is no different. In 1952, Afghanistan had a minority population of 2 lakh Hindus and Sikhs. As of 2018, the population has declined to a meagre 500. In 1941 the Muslim population in Pakistan was 79.2 per cent. By 2015 it rose to 96.28 per cent. Similarly in 1951 the Muslim population in Bangladesh was 76.9 per cent and it rose to 90.4 per cent by 2011. Did the Muslim population in these states decline? Do Muslims face conversion or harassment for practicing Islam? Unlike the minority, do the Muslims need to display a yellow-colored cloth on their houses? Unlike the minority, do Muslim women need to identify themselves by putting a yellow-colored mark over their clothes? In many parts of these Islamic worlds, women are forced to wear burkhas, inspite of their religion. No one can deny these atrocities and religious persecutions faced by minorities in these countries. The CAA takes into consideration this poignant reality of persecution on religious grounds in Pakistan, Afghanistan and Bangladesh.

The Modi government has not done anything new. They have just followed past precedents which have also provided similar tailored solutions to address particular evils. In 1971, Indira Gandhi gave shelter to Bangladeshi refugees only. A Congress Chief Minister from Rajasthan appealed to another Congress Home Minister of the Central Government to provide citizenship to only Hindu and Sikh refugees from Pakistan. The Congress governments delivered such citizenship on two known occasions. On 25 November 1947, the Congress passed a resolution stating that every non-Muslim refugee of Pakistani nationality shall be provided shelter in India.

Gandhi Ji promised in a prayer meeting in Delhi on 16 July 1947, “There is the problem of those who fear, imaginary or real, will have to leave their own homes in Pakistan. If hindrances are created in their daily work or movement or if they are treated as foreigner in their own land, then they will not be able to stay there. In that case the duty of the adjoining province on this side of the border will be to accept them with both arms and extend to them all legitimate opportunities. They should be made to feel that they have not come to an alien land”.

On 26 September 1947, Gandhi ji invited (only) Hindu and Sikh nationals of Pakistan and proclaimed that it would be the first duty of the Indian government to not just shelter such refugees but also provide them with employment, voting rights and enrich their lives in general.
Jawaharlal Nehru, in the Parliament on 5 November, 1950 said, “There is no doubt, of course, that those displaced persons who have come to settle in India are bound to have the citizenship. If the law is inadequate in this respect, the law should be changed.” Former Assam Congress Chief Minister, Tarun Gogoi on 20 April 2012 submitted a Memorandum to Dr. Manmohan Singh demanding citizenship for Hindu migrants. Dr. Manmohan Singh in Rajya Sabha stated that it is the moral responsibility of our country to provide citizenship to minorities of Bangladesh and Pakistan. There have also been several instances where the Congress or other governments provided citizenship to only Sri Lankan Tamils.

Unfortunately, when this dream of opening the doors of India for her cultural children was about to be realized, it is sheer hypocrisy on the part of political parties that are blatantly playing the card of vote-bank politics and shamelessly backing out from an obligation which is in the form of National Assurance given to these persecuted minorities at the time of partition and then onwards. To create an anti-Muslim narrative disregarding all such precedents, just because Modi government has been able to successfully address those very concerns does no good to the nation.

Forget precedents, this bill is not anti-Muslim for more reasons. China has cracked down on religious structures of the Confucian and Taoist beliefs. But India has not provided shelter to these beliefs. India hasn’t offered citizenship to Nepali Hindus, Sikhs, Buddhists, Jains, Parsis and Christians; it hasn’t offered citizenship to Sri Lankan Tamil Hindus, Buddhists or Christians; it hasn’t offered citizenship to Rohingya Hindus and it hasn’t offered citizenship to Tibetan Buddhists as well.

Ahmadis and Baloch from Pakistan might have been murdered, more because of their internal rivalry and not for their religious beliefs, but India has not provided shelter to them. The reason is not CAA but because they themselves do not seek any shelter. They do not oppose the state discrimination but instead seek shelter in the same Islamic Republic and not in the one that India offers. Further, nowhere does the CAA state that Baloch, Ahmadis or any others fleeing persecution and managing to enter India will be deported. Their cases too shall be examined on the merits and circumstances and under the same current laws of the land.

If this bill was aimed at being anti-Muslim, how does one explain the exclusions mentioned above? CAA does not mean Muslims or any others may not apply for Indian citizenship. They still can, and their cases would be duly considered in accordance with India’s existing asylum laws. Also, the passing of CAA has no bearing on India’s Muslims citizens whose status is on par with any Indian citizen of any faith. The CAA is about securing human rights and not excluding any religion. The CAA is in keeping with the idea of India as envisioned by those who laid the foundation of Independent India.

Minorities, who are victims of oppression just because of their religious identity in their own countries, any action for their protection will not amount to denting secularism in India. It, in fact, upholds and strengthens our secularism which seeks to protect and promote the rights of every individual, irrespective of religion. The very purpose of CAA is to ensure the well-being of minorities who were and are being subject to religious persecution in Pakistan, Bangladesh and Afghanistan.