SC to rule on legality of Citizenship Act provision in Assam

The petitioners see the NGO Assam Public Works, the Assam Sanmilita Mahasangha, and others who assertion that mounting a antithetic cut-off day for citizenship successful Assam is simply a discriminatory practice.

What does Section 6A state? Why has it been challenged? And what are the arguments successful enactment of the provision?

What does Section 6A of the Citizenship Act provide?

Assam has historically had a occupation of amerciable introduction of radical from East Pakistan/ Bangladesh crossed the porous borderline crisscrossed by galore rivers and streams. A cardinal constituent of the Assam Accord was determining who is simply a “foreigner” successful the state.

Clause 5 of the Assam Accord states that January 1, 1966 shall service arsenic the basal cut-off day for the detection and deletion of “foreigners”, but it besides contains provisions for the regularisation of those who arrived successful the authorities aft that day and upto March 24, 1971.

Section 6A was inserted into the Citizenship Act to facilitate this. I says that each persons of “Indian origin” who entered the authorities earlier January 1, 1966 and person been “ordinarily resident” successful Assam ever since “shall beryllium deemed to beryllium citizens of India”.

Additionally, it provides that anyone who entered and resided successful Assam aft January 1, 1966 but earlier March 24, 1971 who has been “detected to beryllium a foreigner” would person the accidental to registry themselves according to rules made by the Central government.

Following specified registration, they would beryllium granted the rights of citizens but that they would not beryllium included successful electoral rolls for the purposes of voting successful elections for a play of 10 years. Those entering aft March 24, 1971, would beryllium considered amerciable immigrants.

The verdict whitethorn besides person an effect connected the National Register for Citizens (NRC) successful Assam. In 2019, a two-judge Bench led by past CJI Ranjan Gogoi passed an bid stating, “We marque it wide that taxable to orders arsenic whitethorn beryllium passed by the Constitution Bench successful Writ Petition (C) No.562 of 2012 and Writ Petition (C) No.311 of 2015, National Register of Citizens (NRC) volition beryllium updated.”

Why was Section 6A challenged?

The petitioners argued that the cut-off day provided successful Section 6A is discriminatory and violates the close to equality (Article 14 of the Constitution) arsenic it provides a antithetic modular for citizenship for immigrants entering Assam than the remainder of India — which is July 1948. The Assam Sanmilita Mahasangha (ASM), 1 of the pb petitioners successful the case, argued that the proviso is “discriminatory, arbitrary and illegal”.

They besides claimed that the proviso violates the rights of “indigenous” radical from Assam. Their petition, which was filed successful 2012, states that “the exertion of Section 6A to the State of Assam unsocial has led to a perceptible alteration successful the demographic signifier of the State and has reduced the radical of Assam to a number successful their ain State. The aforesaid is detrimental to the economical and governmental well-being of the State and acts arsenic a potent unit against the taste survival, governmental power and employment opportunities of the people.”

During the hearings, the petitioners argued that the changing demographics successful the authorities volition impact the rights of “indigenous” Assamese radical to conserve their civilization nether Article 29 of the Constitution of India.

What were the arguments successful defence of Section 6A?

The Centre relied connected Article 11 of the Constitution which gives Parliament the powerfulness “to marque immoderate proviso with respect to the acquisition and termination of citizenship and each different matters relating to citizenship”. It argued that this gives Parliament the powerfulness to marque laws connected citizenship including for a “particular object” without violating the close to equality.

Other respondents, including the NGO Citizens for Justice and Peace, argued that if Section 6A is struck down, a ample fig of existent residents volition beryllium rendered “stateless”, and volition beryllium considered foreigners aft enjoying citizenship rights for implicit 50 years. They besides argued that the demographic signifier of the authorities changed successful effect to geopolitical events adjacent earlier Section 6A was introduced, and that Assam has agelong since been a multilingual and divers state.