- CAA is not in violation of Article 14/21 as they provide for reasonable justification in the constitution itself. Any Nation state has the right to choose who can enter its territory and who can be given its citizenship. The religious minorities in These 3 countries have been persecuted for decades and they need refuge & a normal life in the subcontinent & there can’t be better place for them than India where they already are.
Regarding secularism , yes it’s basic feature of the constitution, the state can’t differentiate between citizens in the basis of religion . Here we are talking about illegal immigrants so the applicability of doctrine of secularism does not apply here.
Regarding persecuted communities like ahmediyas in Pakistan , the gates are always open through CAA but there is necessarily a special case for religious minorities in these countries given their systematic persecution & human rights violations .
@Abraham-Maslow
For answering this , we have to go back to the history of partition. Though we never supported the two nation theory ,its well documented that Ahmedis in large number voted for Pakistan during partition .So its safe to say that It’s the communities self choosen motherland. But still , as a responsible neighbour & a secular nation , we should take steps to apprise the world of violation of human rights of these communities in Pakistan . At the same as a nation , we also have to take care of our economic & social concerns & at the end we can’t open or gates for each & every community of our neighbours . It might open the pandora box of deliberate persecutions of various communities in Pakistan to push them to India .
@ManchesterUnited
I have a doubt in this point
Illegal immigrants are not eligible to be given citizenship by naturalisation ( 11 yrs etc)
Now the CAA held that these 6 minorities will not be considered illegal immigrants & also reduces te period of residence required to 5 years for them.
So 11 years option is still not available to ahmedis etc .
Am I right ?
