SC refusestostay CAA, issuesnoticetocentre
CITIZENSHIP LAW Top court agrees to examine constitutional validity of the amended act
NEWDELHI:THE Supreme Court on Wednesday declined to stay the Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA) 2019, but agreed to examine the constitutional validity of the new law.
CAA, which fast-tracks citizenship rights for members of six minority communities (Hindus, Paris, Christians, Jains, Buddhists and Sikhs) from three neighbouring countries (Afghanistan, Pakistan and Bangladesh), has triggered large-scale protests across the country.
A three-judge bench of the court, led by the Chief Justice of India SA Bobde, issued notices to the Centre and Attorney General of India, seeking their response on about 60 petitions that have challenged the legality of the new law.
The petitioners include Trinamool Congress (TMC) Lok Sabha member Mahua Moitra, the Congress’s Jairam Ramesh, All India Majlis-e-ittehadul Muslimeen’s (AIMIM) Asaduddin Owaisi, various NGOS, and the Indian Union Muslim League (IUML), among others
“We are not going to grant a stay,” the bench, also comprising justices BR Gavai and Suryakant said, adding that arguments on granting stay can be advanced to January 22, the next date of hearing.
Senior advocate Kapil Sibal, representing one of the petitioners in the case, had requested the court to grant a stay on enforcement of the law since the rules under the Act were neither drafted nor notified.
Congress spokesperson
Abhishek Manu Singhvi later clarified that the party did not seek a stay on Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA) and insisted that “misinformation” was being spread about it.
He told reporters that the petition filed by his party colleague Jairam Ramesh wanted a show cause notice to be issued.
“We made three requests in our petition. This Act is unconstitutional. It is against our international duties. This government has violated territorial agreements signed by previous governments,” Singhvi said.
However, Attorney-general KK Venugopal, appearing for the Centre, opposed the plea, saying there were four judgments of the Supreme Court that barred the court from staying a law enacted by Parliament. Venugopal said the arguments on the petitions seeking stay would be “as lengthy as the petition”.
The passage of the law has triggered protests in several parts of the country, first in the northeast, and later as a students’ movement in other parts of the country.
In New Delhi, one such protest around Jamia Millia Islamia turned violent on Sunday, leading to police action.
The central university has accused the police of entering the campus to target students, who were not indulging in violence. The police crackdown on Jamia students set off protests against the alleged excess in many other universities and institutions.
Many of the petitions before the Supreme Court broadly challenge the law on the ground that it discriminates against people on grounds of religion, and that in India, which is a secular country with no state religion, faith cannot be linked with citizenship.
The government argues that CAA only affects “persecuted minorities” in other countries, and does not include Muslims because they form the majority in each of the three countries to those citizens it is applicable.