Endless ordeal of Abdul Basheer | ‘No land’s man’ now languishes in Mangaluru rehab

New Delhi, Jan 27: Non-Muslim refugees from Pakistan, Bangladesh and Afghanistan will have to provide proofs of their religious beliefs while applying for Indian citizenship under the controversial Citizenship Amendment Bill (CAA), officials said on Monday.

The applicants belonging to Hindu, Sikh, Christian, Buddhist, Jain or Parsi faiths will also have to furnish documents to prove that they entered India on or before December 31, 2014.

Those who will seek Indian citizenship under the CAA will have to provide proofs of their religious beliefs and this will be mentioned in the rules to be issued under the CAA, a government official said.

According to the CAA, members of Hindu, Sikh, Buddhist, Jain, Parsi and Christian communities who have come from Pakistan, Bangladesh and Afghanistan till December 31, 2014, due to religious persecution there will not be treated as illegal immigrants and will be given Indian citizenship.

The central government is also likely to give a relatively smaller window of just three months to those who want to apply for Indian citizenship in Assam under the CAA, another official said.

Some Assam-specific provisions are expected to be incorporated in the rules to be issued for the implementation of the CAA.

Assam chief minister Sarbananda Sonowal and his finance minister Himanta Biswa Sarma had made a request about a fortnight ago to keep a limited period window for applying under the CAA and also incorporate some other Assam-specific provisions in the CAA rules.

The move comes in view of continuing protests against the CAA in Assam that have been going on since the legislation was passed by Parliament in December last year.

There has been a growing feeling among the indigenous people of Assam that the newly enacted legislation will hurt their interests politically, culturally as well as socially.

The Assam Accord provides for detection and deportation of all illegal immigrants who have entered the country after 1971 and are living in the state, irrespective of their religion.

The protesters in Assam say that the CAA violates the provisions of the Assam Accord.

Bengaluru/Kodagu, Feb 24: Three days after the sloganeering by 19-year-old college student Amulya Leona Norohna at an anti-CAA rally and her subsequent arrest on charges of sedition kicked up a storm, Karnataka minister BC Patil on Sunday advocated central legislation that enables authorities “to shoot at sight” those chanting pro-Pakistan slogans.

Responding to reporters’ queries on the ongoing fracas over the chants, Patil said he would appeal to Prime Minister Narendra Modi to bring in a law so that anti-national elements are “killed on the spot”.

“The Centre must promulgate a law that enables authorities to shoot those who do anything that is seen as anti-national and chant pro-Pakistan slogans,” Patil said. “These elements must be killed on the spot. I am appealing to the PM, through the media now, to bring in such a law. I will also write to the PM.”

In Kodagu, Union minister for chemicals and fertilizer, DV Sadananda Gowda, echoed state home minister home minister Basavaraj Bommai’s line that stringent action will be taken against those indulging in anti-national activity, saying there will be “no mercy” for those taking a pro-Pakistan stance.

“The Union government will assist in the police investigation in Amulya,” he said. Gowda went on to claim that many anti-national organizations have been using CAA protests for political gain.

“We will curb such incidents forever. We will not allow such incidents to happen in future. Organisers of such rallies should be thoroughly questioned,” Gowda said.

Bommai on Saturday had also claimed the government will initiate action against educational institutions and hostels it they fail to act against students indulging in such activity.

“The government will discuss ways to prevent such incidents in colleges and hostels. We will instruct heads of educational institutions and hostel wardens to initiate action against such students. If they fail, the government will take action against them,” Bommai said, without defining what constitutes anti-national activity.

However, despite Congress saying there is no room for anti-national activity and stringent action must be taken against those indulging in such activity, former minister and senior functionary DK Shivakumar suggested he found nothing in Amulya’s background to suggest she is anti-national.

“Let me make it absolutely clear that the Congress party will not support any person or persons who hail another country and bring shame to India,” Shivakumar said. “However, I have seen the girl’s [Amulya’s] previous posts on social media and read her statements on various forums. She has been making statements on an ideological ground. Let us not jump the gun, but investigate exactly what she meant to say.”

New Delhi, Jan 19: Senior Congress leader Kapil Sibal on Sunday asserted that every state assembly has the constitutional right to pass a resolution and seek the amended Citizenship Act's withdrawal, but if the law is declared constitutional by the Supreme Court then it will be problematic to oppose it.

His remarks came a day after he had said there is no way a state can deny the implementation of the Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA) when it is already passed by the Parliament.

"I believe the CAA is unconstitutional. Every State Assembly has the constitutional right to pass a resolution and seek its withdrawal. When and if the law is declared to be constitutional by the Supreme Court then it will be problematic to oppose it. The fight must go on!" Sibal said in a tweet.

His remarks on the CAA at the Kerala Literature Festival (KLF) on Saturday had caused a flutter as several non-BJP governments, including Kerala, Rajasthan, Madhya Pradesh, West Bengal and Maharashtra, have voiced their disagreement with the CAA as well as National Register of Citizens (NRC) and National Population Register (NPR).

"If the CAA is passed no state can say 'I will not implement it'. It is not possible and is unconstitutional. You can oppose it, you can pass a resolution in the Assembly and ask the central government to withdraw it.

"But constitutionally saying that I won't implement, it is going to be problematic and going to create more difficulties," said the former minister of law and justice.