The clarification by the Ministry of External Affairs that an Indian passport is primarily a travel-related document and not conclusive proof of citizenship is going to keep the pot boiling on a critical and sensitive issue. One cannot say conclusively why the cat was set among the pigeons and whether it was done wittingly or unwittingly. Speculation oscillates between “dark, sinister plans” and “much brouhaha about nothing”. It could either be a premeditated political or governance masterstroke or just a fortuitous and accidental goof-up, depending on where one stands in a deeply polarised discourse.
If there is one thing that can be said conclusively, it is that the BJP has been accused of politicising the issue of citizenship, and its critics allege that it is being done to reap political gains through polarisation. The Bangladeshi immigrants and subsequent Rohingya refugee issue is a complex, decades-long matter, and the causes are linked to economic deprivation caused by conflict or environmental degradation. In fact, steps to identify and expel undocumented migrants were initiated by the UPA government, and the updation of the NRC was monitored by the Supreme Court. The BJP made it a Bangladeshi Muslim infiltration issue and weaponised it with divisive political and electoral rhetoric, while administrative actions relating to detention and deportation fell short of international norms.
In recent times, the Election Commission’s controversial Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls was variously interpreted as a ruse or a subterfuge as it brought citizenship within its ambit. Earlier, revisions were usually limited to removing duplicate or deceased voters or correcting errors, as the percentage of undocumented immigrants was too minuscule to warrant large-scale revision, and the EC was deemed inadequate and therefore inappropriate for it. The Supreme Court approved the EC’s power to examine citizenship limited to electoral eligibility and emphasised that the final determination would be made by authorities under the Citizenship Act. The SIR, intentionally or otherwise, played a part in further complicating the issue.
Legal experts are of the view that the citizenship law has moved from citizenship by birth to citizenship by birth or descent, provided neither parent is an undocumented immigrant (illegal immigrant in common parlance). Other ways, like citizenship by naturalisation, registration, and incorporation, were included, but their numbers are too small.
A documentation regime for establishing citizenship has never been an issue for most citizens, but in recent times, initiatives like the SIR, National Register of Indian Citizens, or National Population Register would make documentation critical for all. The BJP, for now, appears to be in favour of retaining the present system of keeping it open, and therefore reluctant to come up with a single document as a valid proof of citizenship.
The ubiquitous "government sources" have claimed that the passport has never been proof of citizenship, and it is true that the NDA government has not taken any new decision in this regard in the last 12 years. Even if it may well be within its powers, the government and constitutional authorities should tread with caution and refrain from triggering unwarranted anxiety among millions of citizens regarding their citizenship. Instead, efforts should be made to come up with a fairer and more humane system that is in sync with international norms to deal with undocumented immigrants.