India strongly rebuffs U.S. criticism of CAA, calls it ‘misinformed’
In a sharp rebuke, India on Friday said the U.S. State Department’s criticism of the controversial Citizenship (Amendment) Act is “misinformed and unwarranted”.
In a weekly press briefing, Ministry of External Affairs (MEA) spokesperson Randhir Jaiswal argued in support of the inclusive provisions of the Constitution and dismissed any concern regarding the Act, describing it as “laudable”.
“The CAA is about giving citizenship, not about taking away citizenship. It addresses the issue of statelessness, provides human dignity, and supports human rights. As regards the U.S. State Department’s statement on the implementation of CAA, we are of the view that it is misplaced, misinformed and unwarranted,” Mr. Jaiswal said.
No grounds for any concern on treatment of minorities, says MEA spokesperson
Concerns of U.S. govt.
“We are concerned about the notification of the Citizenship Amendment Act on March 11,” U.S. State Department spokesperson Matthew Miller told reporters during his daily briefing on Thursday. “We are closely monitoring how this Act will be implemented. Respect for religious freedom and equal treatment under the law for all communities are fundamental democratic principles,” Mr. Miller added.
In response, Mr. Jaiswal said: “India’s Constitution guarantees freedom of religion to all its citizens. There are no grounds for any concern on treatment of minorities. Vote bank politics should not determine views about a laudable initiative to help those in distress. Lectures by those who have a limited understanding of India’s pluralistic traditions and the region’s postPartition history are best not attempted.”
The CAA was passed in Parliament on December 11, 2019 and received assent from the President the next day. The law, aimed at granting citizenship to persecuted religious minorities from Pakistan, Bangladesh and Afghanistan except Muslims, was greeted with widespread protests in many parts of India, including in Assam and Delhi.
The law did not come into force during the subsequent four years and two months.