‘Indians have nothing to fear,’ has been the refrain of the proponents of the Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA). On the corollary move to implement a National Register of Citizens (NRC), they keep changing their positions — sometimes they say NRC and CAA have no link at all; other times they say the CAA will protect non-Muslims excluded from the NRC exercise. At times they say it is an internal matter of India, but they also promise to send back the “infiltrators” to places where they allegedly came from. The argument that Indians have nothing to fear — made repeatedly by Prime Minister Narendra Modi and Home Minister Amit Shah among others — is less a reassurance and more an assertion of the intent of the NRC-CAA. Yes, Indians have nothing to fear. But to be assured of no fear, she has to first PROVE that she is an Indian! The NRC puts onerous requirements that most Indians will find unable to meet, Hindu or Muslim. But non-Muslims have, at least theoretically, a route to citizenship under CAA. Muslims, if they cannot get into NRC — as a large number of them like all other communities, will end up — will have no route to citizenship. But the statement that ‘Indians have nothing to fear’ — while there are many reasons why they are worried — also suggests that those who are worried, the protesters, are not Indians or less Indians. The very act of protest itself undermines one’s credentials as Indians. Considering the reflex response of the regime that labels every critic of it ‘anti-national,’ this is a new twist. If you are Indian, you have nothing to worry. And inversely, if you are worried, you may not be Indian! [Extracted from ‘Citizenship Amendment Act – the fear factor’, by Varghese K. George, Editorial by The Hindu, December 17, 2019.]
1. Suppose if one Mr. X is a Muslim and another Mr. Y is a Hindu person. Both X and Y fail to satisfy the requirement required under the NRC. However, as per the law explained above, what effect will the CAA have on their status of citizenship?
a. Both Mr. X and Mr. Y will be denied citizenship as they failed in the NRC exercise.
b. Both Mr. X and Mr. Y will be granted citizenship as even though they were excluded by the NRC, they will be absorbed as citizens under the CAA.
c. Mr. X will continue to be a citizen of India as per the provisions of CAA but Mr. Y will not be considered to be a citizen of the country.
d. Mr. Y will continue to be a citizen of India as per the provisions of CAA but Mr. X will not be considered to be a citizen of the country
2. The author has expressed his views in support of the NRC-CAA exercise. The above given statement is True or False?
a. True, as the author constantly argues that the Indians have nothing to worry about the NRC- CAA.
b. False, as the author has argued that the concept of who is an ‘Indian’ has itself come into question, after the government response to criticism.
c. True, as the author appreciates the reassurance given by Prime Minister Modi and Home Minister Shah that Indians have nothing to worry.
d. False, as the author is worried about the non-secular nature of the law.
3. According to the above passage what is the response of the government to every critic?
a. Critics will have no route to citizenship under the NRC-CAA
b. Critics are labelled as ‘anti-national’ and ‘less-Indian’ and thus they are raising their voice against the law.
c. Critics should not worry as they are Indians and the law will not affect Indians.
d. Critics will not be able to meet the onerous requirements under NRC.
4. X is a Bangladeshi Hindu, who illegally infiltrated into the Indian territory. He is unable to prove his citizenship under NRC. What would be the correct position?
a. X cannot avail Indian citizenship because he has failed to prove his citizenship under NRC.
b. X cannot avail Indian citizenship because he is a Bangladeshi.
c. X can avail Indian citizenship because India is a Hindu majority country.
d. X can avail Indian citizenship under CAA.
5. X is an Indian Muslim and has married a Bangladeshi Muslim, Y. After staying for long time in India, Y has acquired Indian citizenship. After marriage, the couple adopted a child. Under NRC, X failed to prove his Indian citizenship while Y and the child successfully proved it. Decide the correct proposition?
a. X is already an Indian he cannot lose his citizenship under NRC.
b. Only one member of family i.e. X cannot be left out under NRC.
c. X will lose his Indian citizenship.
d. X can avail his citizenship under CAA.