Advocates' Association for Indigenous Rights of Assamese Moves SC Against CAA [Read Petition]

The Advocates' Association for Indigenous Rights of Assamese (AAIRA) has moved the Supreme Court, challenging the constitutional validity of the Citizenship Amendment Act, 2019. The plea broadly contends that the CAA is repugnant to the fundamental as well as constitutional rights of the people of Assam, as guaranteed to them under Articles 14, 15, 19, 21, 25, 29, 325, 326 and 355 of the Constitution. It is also alleged to be violative of the Assam Accord and the Immigrants (Expulsion From Assam) Act, 1950, that were enacted to protect the indigenous inhabitants of Assam. As per the CAA, Hindus, Sikhs, Buddhists, Parsis, Jains and Christians who migrated to India without travel documents from Pakistan, Bangladesh and Afghanistan on or before December 31, 2014 will not be regarded as illegal migrants. The Petitioners have pointed out that the case relating to influx of illegal immigrants in Assam and other areas of the north-east between 1951 to 1971 was already pending before a Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court. In these circumstances, the government could not to have introduced the impugned Act, since it only creates haywire and adds burden on the courts. The grounds taken by the Petitioner are enlisted as follows: Violative of Article 21 of the Constitution The plea states that the impugned Act infringes the right to life and liberty of the people of Assam inasmuch as they will be affected adversely by the massive influx of illegal immigrant. It has been submitted that legitimizing the entry and continued stay of "illegal migrants" will massively affect the socio-economic condition of the State and will reduce the indigenous people of Assam to a minority in their home State. The Petitioner has further contended that the Act will have serious implications on the State's internal security. "State of Assam has repeatedly witnessed ethnic clashes and violence leading to loss of human lives and destruction of properties. The State is unable to ensure the safety and security of its inhabitants thereby resulting in a direct infringement of Article 21 of the Constitution of India," the plea read. Reliance was placed on Sanmilita Mahasangha & Ors. v. Union of India & Ors., (2015) 3 SCC 1. The Petitioner also states that the Act will surge Indian population, and will burden the hitherto scarce natural resources. "The State cannot arbitrarily increase the population of the state without an effective policy for settlement, economic and political rights of the migrant population. Any action by the State without laying down any measures for protection of the said cultural and economic rights of the Citizens of India living in the state of Assam which are guaranteed as fundamental right under 21 of the Constitution of India would be both constitutionally as well as judicially susceptible," it was submitted. Violative of Article 29 (1) of the Constitution The plea states that Article 29(1) of the Constitution confers a fundamental right on all sections of citizens residing in the territory of India, having a distinct language, script or culture of its own, to conserve the same. However, the impugned Act, in complete derogation of the same allows immigration from the three countries, posing a real threat to the language, cultural and ethnic identity of the Assam. "The application of section 3 of the CAA in allowing citizenship to large numbers of illegal migrants, to non-Tribal areas of Assam without adopting international standards for the intake of refugees and leaving the burden of proof of religious/ persecution largely on the state, seriously endangers its local people's right to conserve its own culture language and culture," the plea states. Violative of Article 14 of the Constitution (1) The plea denigrates Section 6B (4) to the Citizenship Act, 1955, introduced by Section 3 of the CAA, for being violative of Article 14 of the Constitution. It has been submitted that the provision was introduced to constitutionally protect indigenous people in North Eastern states by classifying the State of Assam into tribal and non-tribal areas for the purpose of application of the impugned Act. However, it has been contended that the provision bears no rational nexus to its objective of protecting indigenous people who are dispersed across the entire state, including its non-tribal areas. Moreover, it has been submitted that Section 6B(4) excludes the entire states of Mizoram, Nagaland, Arunachal Pradesh and Manipur from having to grant citizenship to any persons from Bangladesh, Afghanistan or Pakistan under the CAA, to protect their indigenous cultures. Thus, it has been contended that not exempting the entire state of Assam is a wholly unreasonable classification vis-a-vis the other North Eastern states. (2) The plea further states that the Act grants arbitrary and unfettered power to the Centre,...

Advocates' Association for Indigenous Rights of Assamese Moves SC Against CAA [Read Petition]

AKSHITA SAXENA

Tags