Thread by @anticaaTN

#CAA_NRC_NPR Public discussion in Chennai

@nramind begins by highlighting the spontaneous, partly organised, nature of the mass revolt “upsurge” against an unjust piece of legislation.

Young people feel suffocated. Attacks across campuses - police wantonly attack on the libraries of Jamia with a glorious past linked to the national independence movement, attack on JNU - all with no indications that justice will be served.

Why such special savagery against Jamia, AMU? Let me blunt about it. It is repression of protestors, Muslims in particular.

BJP manifesto outlines their Hindutva agenda. In flagrant violation of the principles of secularism their manifesto laid the vision for CAA. This flies in the face of equality, fairness and justice doctrine.

Hindutva directly challenges another principle of secularism - the resolution of the constituent assembly that religion shall not be exploited for political gains.

.@nramind SC failed to do anything to undo this mischief. Quotes @gautambhatia88 that the rights court has been converted into an executive court. Manipulation, subversion of many institutions - police, bureaucracy - needs to be watched.

Justice AP Shah minorities subject to rule of communal not political majority. It is for the majority to realise that there should be no discrimination against minority.

This country was founded on nationalism that was centred on the idea of inclusion - freedom was the unifying factor. However there also existed a contesting view of nationalism - that only a Hindu has rights to the territory of India.

AP Shah recounts his childhood growing up with Savarkar’s writings that justified Hitler’s anti-Jews policy. The present mass upsurge is against this homogeneous, Hindutva idea of India.

The combination of CAA-NRC is to alienate Muslims. It is based on the same indefensible moral values as fascist regimes.

People suffered to produce their documents, establish their citizenship claims during Assam NRC. Most of those excluded in Assam NRC are Hindus.

The NRC has a divisive agenda.

CAA is defended on grounds that it is a benevolent legislation for those escaping religious persecution. But are Muslim majority nations the only places where persecution takes place? Are Muslims the only persecutors?

CAA is a law to deny Muslim refugees citizenship.

Why is Myanmar genocide against Rohimgyas not considered? Or Eelam Tamils.

CAA violates Article 14 by discriminating on a religious basis who can get citizenship.

Recounting his experiences as part of the jury on People’s Tribunal reg Assam NRC, Justice AP Shah points out that foreigners tribunals are ill equipped and arbitrary in their functioning.

What police did in UP is unimaginable. The Chief Minister said badla Lena hai, can you imagine a CM talking about exacting revenge on people? The govt is trying to suppress people. But people are continuing to raise their voice.

Secularism has come out of academic discourse, people are reading the preamble on the streets. Justice AP Shah highlights the lexicon employed by the state to discredit the protestors - “anti nationals”, “Tukde tukde gang”. Always the language is “go to Pakistan”!

Usha Ramanathan - The first citizenship act came only in 1955, the first elections were held before this. The one thing that the constituent assembly was clear about is that religion will not be a basis for citizenship - against the background of partition.

The reason for CAA opposition in Assam is different - it is about protecting their shrinking political space, protecting indigenous interests. It is important to acknowledge and be sympathetic to this perspective.

2003 is when the changes to citizenship were introduced. The context for this was the Kargil war. This shifted the discourse towards migration from Bangladesh. Migration got characterised as external aggression.

The idea of NPR and a national identity card was introduced.

Introduced the notion of “illegal migrants”. Also changed the criteria for citizenship by birth - introducing a generational criteria. If we read the CAA carefully, we cannot remain sanguine about OCI provision - cancellation of OCI is now an executive action.

The CM of UP calls “Azaadi” seditious - OCI cancellations can be similarly arbitrary. All utopias are bad - in this utopia (of BJP) the executive controls who can and cannot live, move in this country.

Aadhar is the chief villain this piece of NPR-NRC. Registrar was handing over data to the UIDAI. There is collusion and collaboration between these two - every time we get databased. NPR is Data aggregation and collection, none of which entitles us to citizenship.

Govt is not interested in everyone’s documents but they will exercise extraordinary executive control to decide who they will chase for documents. Arbitrary decision making for marking who is a “doubtful” citizen. That is why the idea of secularism is extremely significant.

Rohini Mohan shares experiences of the NRC in Assam, once someone has earned a D (indicating doubtful) against their name, it was very difficult to undo.

.@rohini_mohan citizenship determined by ancestry, not birth alone - one has to prove that either parent is not “illegal”, it is not by birth. People in Assam kept more documents than anyone else in the country.

Many women had gotten married early, never went to school, never existed in records anywhere. The process for such people was to go to a recognised community leader and get a letter.

NRC head made a statement saying such documents (from community leaders) were being faked. Following this women who had used such documents were excluded. @rohini_mohan

Assam prone to flooding. Those affected by floods due to loss of documents, changing geographies due to floods, excluded from NRC.

People from the army, academicians, children below age of 10 - excluded.

An entire village did not make the NRC - the humiliation that one has to undergo to establish one’s identity and losing it overnight.

NRC is not a clean slate, it is tainted. A family was not included because some members had faced foreigners tribunals earlier.

Foreigners Tribunals are the most opaque, arbitrary process I have ever seen. @rohini_mohan

You could be proud of ramshackle courts if they functioned well. Verdict only says, if someone is a foreigner or someone is not a foreigner - “Hum declared hain” is common in local narratives.

Surname spelling changes, addition to surnames after events such as (Haj) - clerical errors - barriers to proving ancestry.

Is there a pattern of bias to the foreigners tribunals? Based on RTIs, 89% of cases were of Muslims. 9 out of 10 Muslims faced rejections, 4 out of 10 Hindus faced rejections. @rohini_mohan

@threadreaderapp unroll