Guwahati, 13th March: Debabrata Saikia, Leader of Opposition in the Assam Legislative Assembly, filed an Interlocutory Application (IA) before the Supreme Court challenging the rules for implementing the Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA) and the Act itself.
In his argument, Saikia pointed out that both the Rules and their parent Act introduce a classification based on religion and country, which fails to meet the ‘manifest arbitrariness’ test outlined in the Shayara Bano V Union of India (2017) 9 SCO 1 case.
He argued that this classification is unfair, discriminatory, lacks transparency, and is prone to favoritism or nepotism, thereby not aligning with the principles of healthy competition and equitable treatment. Additionally, Saikia emphasized that these Rules contravene Article 14 of the Constitution, which guarantees equality to all individuals, irrespective of citizenship status.
Saikia also asserted that the Rules for the Citizenship Amendment Act infringe upon Clause 6 of the Assam Accord of 1985. By granting citizenship to non-Muslim illegal migrants who arrived in India from Afghanistan, Bangladesh, and Pakistan before December 31, 2014, the Act directly contradicts the terms of the Assam Accord, he argued.
Expressing concern over the potential impact on the delicate ethnicity and socio-economic fabric of the State of Assam, Saikia requested a stay on the implementation of the CAA rules, citing the Act’s enactment in 2019 and its non-implementation for over four and a half years. He argued that delaying the implementation until the court’s final decision on the current Writ Petition would not cause any prejudice.
The Union Home Ministry announced the rules for implementing the CAA on Monday evening, just before the announcement of the Lok Sabha elections schedule. The Act aims to grant Indian citizenship to non-Muslim migrants facing persecution, including Hindus, Sikhs, Jains, Buddhists, Parsis, and Christians, who migrated from Bangladesh, Pakistan, and Afghanistan and arrived in India before December 31, 2014.
Saikia stated that the Rules violate Article 14 of the Constitution, which ensures equality for all persons, citizens and foreigners. He added that differentiating people based on religion, particularly in matters of citizenship, would be a violation of the Constitution.
Read More: Tripura CPI(M) Leader Opposes Citizenship Amendment Act