For the third time in a row, the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) led National Democratic Alliance (NDA) despite lacking in numbers in the Rajya Sabha, the government managed to get the controversial Citizenship Amendment Bill, 2019 (CAB) passed with 125 votes in its favour and 105 against it. In a bid to wriggle itself from the tight corner that it was put in by the Congress, the three members of the Shiv Sena staged a walkout from the house after supporting the bill in the Lok Sabha.
The CPI-M, Congress, Trinamool Congress (TMC) tried to move a notice to send the bill to select committee of the house too was negated. The amendment moved by K K Ragesh (CPI-M, Kerala) was negated with 125 members voting against the notice, 99 voting in favor of it, with 1 abstention.
In all 7 members – 2 members of the Nationalist Congress Party (NCP) Adv Majid Memon (reported sick) and Vandana Chavan (wedding in family), Anil Baluni (BJP) and Amar Singh (Independent) both remained absent hospitalization due to illness. In the house actual strength of 245, there are 5 seats vacant. In the current 240 member house, 7 MP’s remained absent. Hence out of the 233 MP’s, only 230 MP’s remained present during voting.
Senior Shiv Sena leader Sanjay Raut announced that the Sena had boycotted the voting on the CAB. He however, refused to give any reasons for it. Sources disclosed that the change about in the Sena stand came after a livid Congress leadership madeits displeasure known to the Sena leadership. According to unconfirmed reports, the Congress apparently seemed to indicate to the Sena that it would have to consider whether it wanted Congress support for the Chief Minister post in Maharashtra.
Thereafter, making an apparent U turn, Chief Minister Uddhav Thackeray was forced to issue a statement stating that the Sena had given its suggestions to the bill in the Lok Sabha and expected the government to take them seriously. He further added that till the doubts of the Sena are not clear till then the Sena cannot support it. During his reply to the debate, Union Home Minister Amit Shah wanted to know from Sanjay Raut that the Sena which had supported the bill in the Lok Sabha what prompted it to change its stand overnight, was it the lure of power that prompted the change?
This is the third time in a row that the BJP has managed to push through its contentious legislations through the upper house. Earlier, the BJP had managed to pass the Triple Talak bill and the abrogation of Article 370 from Jammu and Kashmir.
Throughout the day the debate in the Rajya Sabha was marked by sharp exchanges between Shah and Congress members – Kapil Sibal, P Chidambaram, Anand Sharma and leader of opposition Ghulam Nabi Azad.
Sibal argued that the two nation theory was first propounded by Veer Savarkar. In a stinging remark, he further said “those who have no idea of India, cannot protect India”. He further urged the government not to convert India into a Jurassic republic. Chidambaram in his speech while terming the CAB as insidious stated that the law will be stuck down in the court of law. Azad wanted to know how many of the refugees from Pakistan, Bangladesh and Afghanistan were there in the country and how many of them ever stated that they had been persecuted in their country of origin.
Making an intervention in the debate Union Law Minister Ravi Shankar Prasad clarified that the government had whetted the bill from the Law and Judiciary department and legal experts before tabling it in the Parliament. Shah too contended that the bill had been in the process of making since 2015 and was not suddenly brought about.
In his reply, Shah stated that there is no appreciation of the fact that people from 6 religions have been included in the purview of the bill. But the focus of the opposition is only on why Muslims are not included. He added that the present laws have provisions for giving citizenship to persecuted Muslims and argued that there is no possibility of Muslims being persecuted in these Muslim countries. The Union Home Minister argued that the CAB grants citizenship rights and does not take away citizenship rights from anyone.
In a sharp rejoinder to Sibal’s comment on idea of India, Shah in an indirect reference to the Congress president, remarked that he did come to India from abroad, was born here and would die here. Pleading ignorance to whether Savarkar had indeed mooted the two nation theory, he however wanted to know as to why the Congress party accepted the division of the country on religious lines.
In response to Chidambaram’s hint that the law could be challenged in the court of law, he reminded that as per the constitution the Parliament is supreme and is capable of making laws. To the legal challenge, he reminded the former Home minister that the Parliament in the past had overturned the Supreme Court judgment (Shaha Bano case).
