Today(on 15th March),Supreme Court, led by Chief Justice DY Chandrachud, to review all petitions regarding CAA and Citizenship Rules on March 19.
Thank you for reading this post, don't forget to subscribe!
NEW DELHI: Today(on 15th March),The Supreme Court of India, under the leadership of Chief Justice DY Chandrachud, has announced its decision to examine all petitions related to the Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA) of 2019 and the newly introduced Citizenship (Amendment) Rules of 2024. The hearing, scheduled for March 19, aims to address the legal challenges presented by approximately 190 petitions, alongside various interlocutory applications (IAs) that seek a suspension of the contentious Rules.
The bench, spearheaded by Chief Justice Chandrachud, emphasized the comprehensive nature of the upcoming review.
“We will schedule this for Tuesday. With over 190 cases, all will be addressed, and a complete batch will be presented along with the interim applications.”
-the Court articulated, highlighting the magnitude of the legal scrutiny anticipated.
ALSO READ:Kerala Government: Challenging Implementation of ‘Citizenship Amendment Act’ in Supreme Court
The urgency of the matter was brought to the Court’s attention by Senior Advocate Kapil Sibal, representing the Indian Union Muslim League (IUML), one of the primary challengers of the CAA. Sibal underscored the critical timing of the Rules’ notification, especially with the looming Lok Sabha elections.
He argued:
“However, with the Lok Sabha elections imminent, the Rules have been formally notified. Please add it to the list. Granting citizenship at this point would be irreversible.”
Contrarily, Solicitor General of India Tushar Mehta dismissed the electoral timing as irrelevant, asserting the Supreme Court’s role as a Constitutional Court.
“The petitioners shall lack the locus standi to address matters concerning citizenship.”
-Mehta contended, downplaying the petitioners’ concerns.
However, the Chief Justice agreed to prioritize the hearing, acknowledging the diversity of the parties involved and suggesting a streamlined approach to the arguments to avoid redundancy.
“All parties present diverse perspectives. It is requested that only a limited number of lawyers be designated to present arguments to minimize overlap. However, it is acknowledged that we cannot restrict participation.”
– he stated, ensuring an orderly and comprehensive examination of the cases.
The CAA, enacted on December 11, 2019, and subsequently challenged by the IUML, has been a subject of intense debate and legal scrutiny. It seeks to expedite citizenship for non-Muslim refugees from Bangladesh, Pakistan, and Afghanistan, who arrived in India on or before December 31, 2014. Critics argue that by excluding Muslims, the Act undermines the secular principles of the Indian Constitution and discriminates based on religion.
The recent notification of the Citizenship (Amendment) Rules, 2024, has reignited the controversy, prompting calls for a judicial stay on the Act and Rules. Opposition leaders and various organizations, including the Assam Congress, Asom Jatiyatabadi Yuba Chatra Parishad, Democratic Youth Federation of India, and the Social Democratic Party of India, have criticized the Rules as “unconstitutional” and “discriminatory.”
Despite the backlash, the Central government, led by the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), stands firm on its stance. Union Home Minister Amit Shah, in a recent interview, declared:
“It is our fundamental right to ensure Indian citizenship within our nation, a principle we steadfastly uphold. The Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA) will remain unchanged, as we stand firm on this decision.”
He criticized the opposition’s inconsistency and reaffirmed the government’s commitment to the Act, emphasizing:
“What BJP or PM Modi says is like carved in stone. Every guarantee made by Modi is fulfilled.”
ALSO READ: “CAA Goes Against Secular Values”|| Kerala CPI MP Binoy Viswam Addressed
The upcoming Supreme Court hearing on March 19 could redefine Indian citizenship and reinforce constitutional secularism, bearing immense legal, social, and political significance.
