Only Supreme Court can ban citizenship amendment law

Only Supreme Court can ban citizenship amendment law


Reports of opposition to the Citizenship Amendment Act have been noticed in the media. Under this law, the government will give citizenship of India to Hindus, Buddhists, Jains, Sikhs, Christians and Parsis. The condition is that these people came to India before 31 December 2014. These people should be from three countries - Pakistan, Bangladesh and Afghanistan.

The movement against this law will end soon. Regardless of its opposition, this act has been passed by both houses of Parliament. It has been signed by the President. Some states like Punjab and West Bengal may refuse to implement it. This will not be the first time.

Punjab has been refusing to implement the Supreme Court's decision on the Sutlej Yamuna Canal for a long time. However, the citizenship amendment law cannot be stopped from being implemented in places other than a limited area.

An institution that can still stop it is the Supreme Court. It should also do so. On Wednesday, he refused to ban it. She will hear 59 petitions related to it on 22 January. No person can argue that this law is secular. It clearly discriminates against Muslims. Because of this, not only opposition parties have opposed it but civil liberties groups have also raised their voice against it.


The central government has defended the decision to grant citizenship to the minorities being tortured in three neighboring countries. Those opposing this law say that this law of the government is discriminatory. Why have the laws not included neighboring countries such as the Uygar of China, the Rohingya of Myanmar and the Tamils ​​and Muslims of Sri Lanka?

This argument against the law can be stayed in the Supreme Court, it can also be dismissed. It can be said that its basis is geographical and not religious. The constitution does not prevent Parliament from discriminating against any country. In the days of apartheid, a decision was taken to ban trade from South Africa.

However, the Constitution expressly prohibits any religious community from discriminating against it. The Supreme Court can dismiss this law using just a few words. He can say that discrimination on the basis of religion is not allowed. Does this law discriminate on the basis of religion? The answer is yes. Therefore, the Supreme Court should not take long to dismiss this law.

Many analysts believe that the Supreme Court will legalize this law. He argues that the Supreme Court was the force behind the National Register of Citizens (NRC). It seems that this law will not get the approval of the Supreme Court for two reasons.

First, there are many differences between NRC and this law. In NRC, no community has been discriminated against on the basis of religion. Both Hindus and Muslims come under its purview. Secondly, those who think that the BJP keeps the Supreme Court in the pocket, they think wrong. Recently, many decisions of the Supreme Court have gone in that direction, which the BJP supports. Despite this, it cannot be considered a universal truth.

In May 2018, in Karnataka and in Maharashtra last month, the BJP inspired governors considered close to appoint their chief minister. He tried to avoid proving majority in the assembly so that the MLAs get time to buy. But, in both the cases, the Supreme Court ordered an early majority test. Due to this, the attempt of horse-trading by MLAs failed and the opposition got a chance to form the government.

Yogesh and Ram Bajad & Associates with law firm. A law firm is normally an organization between legal counselors who have met up to offer their skill to customers under one name. We provide you this service like – Cyber Law, criminal law, corporate law, and Tenant lawyer advice.

Contact us : 098275 25296