Key Points About CAA 2019 and Muslim Exclusion:

– Union Home Minister Amit Shah cited two reasons for excluding Muslims from Pakistan, Afghanistan, and             Bangladesh in the Citizenship (Amendment) Act (CAA) 2019: Partition and the official Islamic status of these       countries.

– The argument blaming all Muslims for Partition is flawed as it was primarily driven by Muslim elites and                 opposed by many Indian Muslims, including prominent leaders like Khan Abdul Ghaffar Khan and Maulana            Abul Kalam Azad

– Despite resistance to Partition, many Indian Muslims faced confusion and challenges during that time, as              evidenced by the efforts of Maulana Abul Kalam Azad to retain Muslim officials in India.

– While there is persecution of religious minorities in Pakistan, Bangladesh, and Afghanistan, not all Muslims can     be blamed for Partition. The complexities of Partition and its aftermath are highlighted by scholars like Ayesha     Jalal.

– The CAA 2019 exclusion of Muslims needs to be understood in the broader context of the Hindu right’s                 ideological politics, including the BJP’s decision not to field Muslim candidates and actions targeting Muslim         institutions like madrasas and mosques.

– Delhi Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal’s remarks on asylum seekers demonstrate xenophobia and a lack of               understanding of the challenges faced by genuine victims of religious persecution.

– The exclusion of Muslims in the CAA 2019 reflects a larger ideological project aimed at de-Islamisation of             India,  for which the secular political class and Muslims lack a well-crafted political response.

Rules Issued Concerning CAA 2019:

Application Process:

The Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA) 2019 introduced a specific application process for individuals seeking citizenship under its provisions. This process is governed by Section 6B of the Citizenship Act, 1955.

Criteria for Citizenship:

Applicants are required to meet several criteria to qualify for Indian citizenship under the CAA. These criteria include proving their country of origin, religion, date of entry into India, and demonstrating proficiency in an Indian languages.

Proof of Country of Origin:

The rules provide for relaxed requirements regarding the documents that applicants can submit as proof of their country of origin. Acceptable documents may include birth or educational certificates, identity documents, licenses, land records, or any document proving previous citizenship of the mentioned countries.

Date of Entry into India:

Similarly, applicants are allowed to submit various documents as proof of their entry into India. These documents may include visas, residential permits, census slips, driving licenses, Aadhaar cards, ration cards, government or court letters, birth certificates, and more.

Implementation Mechanism:

The Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA) has delegated the task of processing citizenship applications under the CAA to the Postal department and Census officials under the Union government. Background and security checks are conducted by Central security agencies like the Intelligence Bureau (IB).

Empowered Committees:

Final decisions on citizenship applications are made by empowered committees led by the Director (Census Operations) in each State. These committees comprise officials from various departments, including the Intelligence Bureau, Post Master General, State or National Informatics Centre, and representatives from the State government’s Department of Home and Divisional Railway Manager.

District-Level Committees:

At the district level, committees headed by the Superintendent of the Department of Post review applications. These committees may include representatives from the District Collector’s office as invitees.

Concerns Related to CAA 2019:

Constitutional Challenge:

Critics argue that the CAA violates Article 14 of the Indian Constitution, which guarantees the right to equality before the law and prohibits discrimination based on religion. Granting citizenship based on religion is seen as

Potential for Disenfranchisement:

There are concerns that the combination of the CAA and the proposed National Register of Citizens (NRC) could disenfranchise several citizens who are unable to prove their documentation. The Assam NRC saw over 19 lakh people left out of the final draft, raising fears of widespread exclusion.

Impact on Assam Accord:

In Assam, there are concerns regarding the compatibility of the CAA with the Assam Accord, 1985. The Accord established criteria for determining citizenship in Assam, and the differing timelines for granting citizenship under the CAA could lead to legal and political complications.

Secularism and Social Cohesion:

Critics argue that the focus on religion as a criterion for citizenship eligibility undermines the secular principles upon which India was founded. It could exacerbate communal tensions and create divisions within society.

Exclusion of Certain Religious Communities:

The exclusion of certain religious communities from the CAA, such as Sri Lankan Tamils and Tibetan Buddhists, raises concerns about discrimination and selective treatment based on religion.

In response to these concerns, suggestions have been made for inclusive refugee policies, assistance with documentation, stakeholder engagement, international diplomacy, and educational campaigns to promote understanding and uphold principles of equality and secularism.

Can a CM runs government under Judicial custody

Why in news?

– Kejriwal arrested by the Directorate of Enforcement (ED) for avoiding nine summons related to the Delhi liquor     policy case.

– High Court denies protection from arrest, leading to Kejriwal becoming the second opposition Chief Minister to     face arrest by the ED within a short period.

Legal and Logistical Challenges

– No legal mandate for a Chief Minister to resign upon arrest.

– Disqualification only occurs upon conviction under the Representation of the People
Act, 1951.

– Logistical challenges of governing from detention while under arrest.

Potential Deadlock and Successors

– AAP leaders affirm Kejriwal’s refusal to resign and determination to govern while detained.

– AAP faces challenges in finding a successor of comparable stature to Kejriwal.

– Internal sources suggest potential successors, including Atishi and Saurabh Bharadwaj.

Complex Power Structure in Delhi

– Delhi’s unique power structure features an elected Chief Minister and a Lieutenant Governor appointed by the       Centre.

– Lieutenant Governor can seek Presidential intervention, potentially leading to the imposition of President’s rule.

– Historical precedents highlight repercussions faced by Chief Ministers entangled in legal issues.

Historical Precedents

– Examples of Chief Ministers facing legal repercussions in the past, such as Lalu Prasad Yadav’s resignation in    1997 and J. Jayalalithaa’s conviction in 2014

– Hemant Soren’s recent resignation prior to arrest mirrors similar instances in the past.

Understanding Custody:

– Custody refers to the apprehension of an individual for protective care.

– “Custody” and “arrest” are distinct terms; while every arrest involves custody, the reverse is not true.

– Arrest directly infringes upon an individual’s personal liberty and freedom.

Police Custody:

– Occurs when a police officer apprehends a suspect following the receipt of information about a crime.

– The suspect is detained at the police station for interrogation, with the detention not exceeding 24 hours.

– The police officer must produce the suspect before the appropriate judge within 24 hours, excluding travel time.

Judicial Custody:

– Involves the custody of the accused under the jurisdiction of the concerned Magistrate.

– Differs from police custody in that the accused is lodged in jail instead of a police station lockup.

– Upon arrest, the suspect is taken into police custody, and then presented before a magistrate who decides           whether to remand them to judicial or police custody.

Difference between Police and Judicial Custody:

– In police custody, the suspect is under the physical custody of the police, while in judicial custody, they are             under the jurisdiction of the Magistrate.

– A suspect may be released on bail or remanded to judicial or police custody based on the Magistrate’s decision.

Laws Governing Custody in India:

– Section 167 of the Code of Criminal Procedure regulates the detention of individuals for further investigation.
– Judicial custody may extend up to 90 days for severe crimes and 60 days for other offenses, with deductions         for time spent in police custody.

– Custody serves as a preventive measure until the court determines guilt or innocence.