CAA is against Indian Muslims? [PART 2] B.8

By Samartha Chakrawarti - August 15, 2020

Hello Everyone,

WISH YOU A VERY HAPPY INDEPENDENCE DAY

In the previous blog, I made an attempt to explain to you the Constitutional side of CAA. If you haven't read it, I recommend it, you should. https://samarthchakrawartiblog.blogspot.com/2020/08/understanding-caa-part-1.html#more. Earlier I told you that we will be discussing the following questions and queries from CAA.

Why Muslims are not included in this act?
Why we are giving citizenship to Illegal Immigrants?
Why is Afghanistan Included in this act? Because Afghanistan is not a part of undivided India.

Let's pick one question at a time: Why not Muslims? It is true that along with all the minorities Ahmadiyya Muslims are also equally annihilated and persecuted in Pakistan, they are not even recognized as Muslims in Pakistan. So why doesn't the Government of India include "AHMADIYAA MUSLIMS" in the act?

This is a very valid question. But before answering these questions let's analyze my favourite part of the blog "FACTS". According to the data, there are almost 50 Islamic countries in the world or Muslim majority country in the world, so whenever an Ahmadiyya Muslim escapes Pakistan he/she opts for an Islamic country such as (Iran, Iraq, UAE etc) over India.[I am not saying that no Ahmadiyya Muslim opts for India] but when we compare it with the minorities of Pakistan who immigrate to India, it's immensely less because of a simple reason that they prefer an Islamic country over India.

There are very few Ahmadiyya Muslims who demanded Indian citizenship from the government but at the same time, there are millions of Non-Muslim who demanded the same. Apart from this no other Muslim is persecuted on the basis of "Religion" constitutionally. It is correct that Muslims are persecuted in Pakistan, but most people forget that "they have a right to file a case in court, File an FIR" and they are not persecuted on the basis of their religion. But such privileges are not offered to a non-Muslim of Pakistan and Bangladesh and it is clearly stated in the act that this offers citizenship to those who are "Constitutionally persecuted on the basis of religion."

So the demand of including Muslims is totally inappropriate and most of the protesters were in favour of including Muslims, do you think this is practically possible?? People who were demanding about Muslims should have been very particular about "Ahmadiyyas" but very few of them were. See... we have to understand that India is not a hospice or Dharamshala, it is a country with a population of billions and with a limited amount of resources. So what can an Ahmadiyya do if he/she has immigrated from Pakistan to India?

Does Ahmadiyya have any alternative, the answer is yes. Ahmadiyya can apply for Indian citizenship any time but the problem is it is very time consuming and they can't be left alone. "What I personally feel is that an Ahmadiyya is equally persecuted so they should be offered a very easy method of adopting Indian citizenship or a specific bill should be brought in parliament by our government so that Ahmadiyya can also live freely" this is my suggestion to the government.

The demand of including every Muslim is very illogical but still, if a Muslim is persecuted and wants to adopt citizenship of India, they can. Around one thousand Muslims have already made theme selves as Indian Muslims. What would have been more logical to ask is that protesters asking for the citizenship of an Ahmadiyya. "Still, if you feel that I have missed out on something or I am wrong, feel free to comment".

The second question raised was "Why Afghanistan" this is a very good question to ask, but again before giving you the answer let's go through some facts. Sikhs in Afghanistan in particular have faced the same, not by the government of Afghanistan but by the TALIBAN.
The Sikh community are directly attacked by them and now their population is close to none. There is no Sikh majority country or Sikh country by the constitution, so the majority of persecuted Sikhs come to India for the sake of saving their lives. So this is the reason why the Minority of Afghanistan is included in this act too.

As earlier stated that India has limited resources, so why are we Inviting people? but we are not inviting people, we are giving citizenship to all the immigrants who are already living and feeding on the resources for nearly 50 years without even having a legal identity. The most important part which we forget is, there are a lot many Islamic and Christian countries but no Hindu country, No Jain country, No Parsi country.

Even India, with a majority of the Hindu population, is a secular country. every Hindu, Parsi, Jain etc., they will seek only India for help because no country other than India follows the principle of (सर्व धर्म सम भाव) [Every religion is equal and leads to god]. Do you find anything unconstitutional here: Undemocratic or regional injustice? But still, thousands of people Protested, Very big media houses and political leaders were against it.

So in the next blog, I will be discussing "how this act became the biggest controversy of the year and some problems with this act. If you feel that I have misrepresented the facts or I have committed mistakes "Please enlighten me".

#NOTE: Suggestions and comments given by me are my personal opinion. It is not motivated by anyone.

If you like my content, subscribe to my blog and if you are new I suggest you read my previous blogs. The links are provided below

THANK YOU FOR READING