How PM Modi fulfilled CAA dream of Gandhi, Nehru and Congress

“The Hindus and Sikhs who are in Pakistan, if they do not wish to live there, then without doubt, they have the right to come to India. In this matter, the Government of India will be bound to provide them employment, citizenship, and all facilities to live a comfortable life.” - Mahatma Gandhi

“We feel concerned about our brothers and sisters who have become alienated from us due to political boundaries and are not able to participate in freedom celebrations. I would like to say that they belong to us, will always belong to us. Their welfare and difficulties shall always be uppermost in our minds. The Sikhs and Hindus of Pakistan, whenever they choose to come to India, we shall welcome them.” - Pt. Jawaharlal Nehru

“Congress is duty-bound to provide complete security to all Non-Muslims of Pakistan who have crossed the boundary or are likely to come here to protect their life and honor.” - Indian National Congress, Official Resolution, 25th November 1947

More from Opinion

Sergio Gor’s senate hearing signals the future of Indo-American ties How Trump’s ‘War on Drugs’ buildup against Venezuela has a hidden agenda

As India embarked on the journey of Independence in 1947, Mahatma Gandhi, the torchbearer of non-violence, foresaw the challenges faced by non-Muslims in the newly carved Pakistan. In a prayer meeting in Delhi on 16 July, 1947, he articulated, “There is the problem of those who fear, imaginary or real, will have to leave their own homes in Pakistan." He emphasized that if hindrances were created, the duty of the adjoining Indian provinces would be to accept them with open arms, providing opportunities to build a new life.

Gandhi acknowledged the fears of the Hindu minority in Pakistan, expressing his concerns during a prayer meeting in New Delhi on 21 July, 1947: “If all the Hindus of Pakistan or a very large number of them come away from Pakistan, will India give them shelter? I think that such people should certainly be given shelter." His words reflected the pressing need for India to provide refuge to those facing persecution across the border.

Impact Shorts

More Shorts

How army remains Pakistan’s biggest business house

60 years on, why 1965 India–Pakistan war still matters

Similarly, Jawaharlal Nehru, the first Prime Minister of independent India, expressed concern for the displaced brethren in the Parliament on 5 November, 1950. “The Hon’ble Member referred to the question of citizenship. There is no doubt, of course, that those displaced persons who have come to settle in India are bound to have citizenship."  Nehru recognized the need for legislative changes to ensure the rights and security of those who chose to make India their new home.

In an official resolution adopted on 25 November, 1947, the Indian National Congress declared its duty to provide complete security to all non-Muslims of Pakistan who sought refuge in India. The resolution echoed the sentiments of Gandhi and Nehru, emphasizing the commitment to safeguard the lives and honour of those who had been displaced.

However, as time unfolded, the dream of a secure and welcoming haven for the Hindu and Sikh minorities from Pakistan faced its share of challenges. The echoes of promises made by Gandhi, Nehru, and the Indian National Congress lingered, prompting reflection on the journey from partition to the present, and the fulfilment of the collective vision for a harmonious and inclusive India.

In the shadow of history, the plight of West Pakistani Hindus during the partition remains a silent narrative, known to few outside the community. The early signs of tragedy unfolded even before partition, etched in the Muslim League attack on Sikhs and Hindus in the Punjab 1947 report. The massacre in Havelian, a chilling preview, left thousands dead, prompting an exodus to seek refuge in Punjab.

Tragically, the horrors birthed a pattern of persecution against non-Muslims in Pakistan, a reality etched in documented massacres and tragic events like Sheikhupura, where 10,000 and 20,000 Hindus and Sikhs died in two days. Orchestrated by the government and military, ethnic cleansing forced many to leave everything behind. The train attack in Kamoke, where refugees were butchered and children murdered, stands as a testament to the orchestrated violence.

Fast forward to the present, religious minorities in Pakistan endure persistent persecution, denied and downplayed by the government. The US designation of Pakistan as a “country of particular concern” for religious freedom violations highlights the stark contrast between official denials and harsh realities.

Amidst this, the rise in forced conversions and marriages of young girls from religious minorities raises disturbing questions. According to the Human Rights Commission of Pakistan’s report, around 1,000 girls are forcibly converted to Islam every year.  How did we reach a point where families feel powerless against these atrocities? The urgent call for immediate measures to curtail such practices echoes globally, pleading for intervention against ongoing human rights violations.

In Pakistan, the plight of Dalit and Hindu women and girls is heart-wrenching. Despite the official census figures, the actual number of minorities, especially scheduled castes, is likely much higher, yet they remain unseen and unheard. Bonded labour grips their lives, with young Dalit women in agriculture facing unspeakable horrors of violence and exploitation. Take the case of Jeetvi, a 14-year-old, snatched from her family, converted, and married off as a second wife to settle a meagre debt. The destruction of community spaces leaves them exposed and defenceless. Their suffering demands our urgent attention and action.

The misuse of blasphemy laws poses a severe threat, casting shadows on international legal obligations and deep-seated discrimination against non-Muslims. Recent killings, mosque demolitions, and protests against false blasphemy cases unfold as modern-day examples, echoing the fears of Gandhi and Nehru.

In this tumult, the Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA) emerges as a beacon of hope. Does it hold the promise of sanctuary and justice, aligning with the visions of Gandhi and Nehru? Yes, it does. As misinformation circulates about the CAA, it is crucial to separate fact from fiction and accept it wholeheartedly. Implemented by Prime Minister Narendra Modi, the CAA stands as a necessary and commendable step towards a compassionate and inclusive India, fulfilling the aspirations of those persecuted minorities seeking refuge.

In this analysis, I’ve encapsulated the key facets of the recently notified Citizenship (Amendment) Rules, 2024. The recently notified Citizenship (Amendment) Rules, 2024, supplement the existing Citizenship (Amendment) Act, 2019 (CAA), effective since 10 January, 2020. Centred on providing citizenship to minorities from Pakistan, Bangladesh, and Afghanistan, the CAA is now detailed by the new rules, disclosed on 11 March, 2024. The regulations emphasize a fully digital approach through the Indian Citizenship Online Portal, enhancing transparency. Two key committees, the District Level Committee (DLC) and the Empowered Committee (EC), ensure efficient district-level evaluation and centralised oversight, respectively, streamlining the implementation of the CAA. The rules maintain the focus on aiding refugees from Pakistan, Bangladesh, and Afghanistan, aligning with the objectives of the CAA. The cutoff date of 31 December, 2014, serves as an additional protective measure for pre-existing migrants, while also easing the citizenship process for those who arrived later.

The timing of the rules’ notification indicates a proactive approach by the government, possibly influenced by considerations of potential law and order issues and the impending General Elections. The opposition’s claim of the notification being ‘designed to polarize’ should be taken in the context of the political landscape.

The CAA rectifies historical limitations, redefining the citizenship process. Rooted in the Nehru-Liaquat Pact of 1950, which aimed to protect religious minorities in India and Pakistan, the pact’s unfulfilled promises led to ongoing persecution in Pakistan. The Muslim population in India has witnessed a significant sevenfold increase from 30 million in 1947 to 210 million in 2022. In stark contrast, at the time of partition, almost 23 per cent of Pakistan’s population comprised non-Muslims. However, today, there has been a drastic decline with their population almost wiped out, remaining as low as 3 per cent. In response, India implemented the CAA, offering refuge to persecuted minorities from Afghanistan, Bangladesh and Pakistan. Despite debates on its implications for secularism and minority rights, the CAA addresses the pact’s shortcomings, emphasizing the protection of marginalized communities.

The pact’s failure, marked by violence and discrimination against minorities in Pakistan, prompted international concern and paved the way for the CAA’s implementation. The rationale behind excluding certain communities from the CAA lies in its focus on specific forms of religious persecution in countries with a state religion, prioritizing the most vulnerable groups. These exclusions are justified based on the nature of persecution faced by different communities and practical limitations in providing refuge to all affected populations.

The CAA in the context of Assam transcends the simplified narrative of Hindu-Muslim dynamics. It’s a nuanced issue about preserving the Assamese identity and safeguarding against illegal migration. In Assam, the binary is between the Assamese and the outsiders, irrespective of their religious affiliations. This distinction might be lost on many in India who perceive it solely as a Hindu-Muslim dichotomy. The collective struggle in Assam is not limited to a specific religious community; it unites Hindus, Sikhs, Christians, and Muslims alike in the common goal of preserving the rich Assamese identity and the broader Indian cultural tapestry.

As an Assamese Muslim, endorsing the CAA is a recognition of the shared battle to protect our composite Indian culture, particularly the distinct Assamese culture. Growing up in Assam, whether one is Hindu, Muslim, or Christian, religion rarely came between us. Assam, with its lush landscapes and vibrant traditions, has been our shared identity. I spent a significant part of my childhood in Assam, where the tapestry of Assamese culture bound us together, transcending religious differences.

Assam’s cultural richness is embedded in its diverse festivals, traditional music, and warm hospitality. It’s an identity we all hold dear, regardless of our religious backgrounds. I wholeheartedly support the CAA as a means to protect this cherished identity, ensuring that the tapestry of Assamese culture remains vibrant and inclusive for generations to come.

Lastly, while acknowledging the historic significance of the work initiated by the CAA, it is crucial to address the concerns regarding the 2014 cut-off. The provision, while a positive step, needs continuous evaluation and modification to align with the evolving realities of the plight faced by non-Muslims in these neighbouring countries. The situation for religious minorities may vary each year, demanding a flexible approach to ensure the timely inclusion and protection of those in desperate need. This provision must undergo regular scrutiny and adjustments to maintain its effectiveness in safeguarding the rights and well-being of persecuted communities.

In conclusion, the implementation of the CAA is not just a legislative move; it is a compassionate response to the heart-wrenching plight of our brothers and sisters, whose suffering echoes the tragic experiences of the Jewish community under Hitler’s regime. Prime Minister Modi’s commitment to addressing the harrowing conditions faced by religious minorities mirrors the empathy and resilience embedded in the visions of Mahatma Gandhi, Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru, and the Indian National Congress. Let us collectively embrace this historic stride toward justice, equality, and compassion, ensuring that every Indian, irrespective of their faith, finds solace and protection in the land they call home.

The author is a practising Advocate. She writes articles on women’s rights, politics and law. Views expressed in the above piece are personal and solely that of the author. They do not necessarily reflect Firstpost’s views.