Himanta Biswa Sarma says CAA rules won't consider religious persecution

[The_Showstopper]

Himanta Biswa Sarma says CAA rules won't consider religious persecution
Prabin Kalita | TNN | Updated: Jan 18, 2020, 5:14 IST

Assam finance minister Himanta Biswa Sarma

GUWAHATI: Denying that "religious persecution" was a criterion for offering Indian nationality to Hindu and other select communities under the amended citizenship law, Assam finance minister Himanta Biswa Sarma on Friday claimed that watertight rules were being framed to detect "fraudulent conversion" and ensure strict compliance with the December 31, 2014, cut-off.
"There are three criteria for applying for citizenship. First, one has to be either a Hindu, Jain, Parsi, Christian, Sikh or Buddhist. Second, the applicant's country of origin has to be either Bangladesh, Afghanistan or Pakistan. Third, the applicant should have proof of residence in India before December 31, 2014. Religious persecution is not a criterion," Sarma told TOI.
He pointed out that the Citizenship (Amendment) Act has no provision for granting Indian nationality to a person on grounds of religious persecution because there was no way of proving an applicant faced such an ordeal before fleeing any of the three countries of origin.
"How can an applicant prove he or she is a victim of religious persecution or fled the country of origin and entered India owing to fear of religious persecuti-on? To get such proof, a person has to go back to Bangladesh or the other two countries and get a police certificate. Why should Banglade-sh, for instance, admit there is religious persecution?"

https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com...loz9tpYkIuH0gdwzYyxs2z66FnqjVyVtZ2xaoUjdcifmY

 

[masterchief_mirza]

He pointed out that the Citizenship (Amendment) Act has no provision for granting Indian nationality to a person on grounds of religious persecution because there was no way of proving an applicant faced such an ordeal before fleeing any of the three countries of origin.

Exactly what I was pointing out to various Ganges-clowns recently. Migrants sitting in the refugee camps can simply claim "religious persecution" - whether true or not is totally irrelevant. If CAA/NRC was truly designed to protect the "persecuted", there is no way of proving this practically. This minister is inadvertently revealing the TRUE NATURE OF NRC/CAA.

It isn't even remotely designed to protect non-Muslims from religious persecution, not one iota. It is a simple, blatant, amateur attempt at religious demographic engineering.

Amateur comedy hour again at Hindutva hq. Must think we were born yesterday.

Would be great to hear some gangustani responses....but I doubt they'll bother trying to dress it up any more as an attempt to "help persecuted religions".

 

[Nityam]

Exactly what I was pointing out to various Ganges-clowns recently. Migrants sitting in the refugee camps can simply claim "religious persecution" - whether true or not is totally irrelevant. If CAA/NRC was truly designed to protect the "persecuted", there is no way of proving this practically. This minister is inadvertently revealing the TRUE NATURE OF NRC/CAA

It isn't even remotely designed to protect non-Muslims from religious persecution, not one iota. It is a simple, blatant, amateur attempt at religious demographic engineering.

Amateur comedy hour again at Hindutva hq. Must think we were born yesterday.

Would be great to hear some gangustani responses....but I doubt they'll bother trying to dress it up any more as an attempt to "help persecuted religions".

If non muslim migrants from BD or pakistan "simply sitting" in refugee camp claim "religious persecution", then it should be good enough for everyone considering the history of religious persecution in Indian subcontinent and history of partition.

There is no need for additional proof.

If you are so keen to maintain the "religious demographics" of pakistan or BD, then ask your minorities to stay back. Stop whining to India for offering them support.

 

[masterchief_mirza]

If non muslim migrants from BD or pakistan "simply sitting" in refugee camp claim "religious persecution", then it should be good enough for everyone considering the history of religious persecution in Indian subcontinent and history of partition.

There is no need for additional proof.

If you are so keen to maintain the "religious demographics" of pakistan or BD, then ask your minorities to stay back. Stop whining to India for offering them support.

But there's no need for proof at all, circumstantial or otherwise, according to the above statement. The distinguished member of parliament above has stated clearly

"Religious persecution is not a criterion,"

Furthermore, we're not discussing pk or bd demographics. We're discussing India's, of which there is ample actual evidence historically around partition in particular of attempts to manipulate said demographics by violence, intimidation and state-sponsored pogroms.

The parliamentarian has simply admitted that India is engaged in an extension of those pogroms by more subtle means.

Again:

"Religious persecution is not a criterion,"

 

[Nityam]

But there's no need for proof at all, circumstantial or otherwise, according to the above statement. The distinguished member of parliament above has stated clearly

"Religious persecution is not a criterion,"

Furthermore, we're not discussing pk or bd demographics. We're discussing India's, of which there is ample actual evidence historically around partition in particular of attempts to manipulate said demographics by violence, intimidation and state-sponsored pogroms.

The parliamentarian has simply admitted that India is engaged in an extension of those pogroms by more subtle means.

Again:

"Religious persecution is not a criterion,"

Yes, religious persecution is not a criterion. Even non persecuted minorities who fear persecution in these ISLAMIC state is eligible.

Where is the confusion ?

Any change in demographics is due to actions by these Islamic states. If you are so concerned, STOP being islamic states. As simple as that. Else STFU.

 

[Doctor Strange]

The 2014 cut off date seems wrong. The Hindus stayed back in BD may regret this. Can the date extended to 2021, so that rest can also migrate?

 

[Nityam]

The 2014 cut off date seems wrong. The Hindus stayed back in BD may regret this. Can the date extended to 2021, so that rest can also migrate?

2014 date is for those already in India. Migrants post 2014 is eligible as per the new modified citizenship act.

 

[masterchief_mirza]

Even non persecuted minorities who fear persecution in these ISLAMIC state is eligible.

So how do you prove "fear of persecution" if the assamese minister has already confirmed for you that religious persecution itself cannot be proven?

A Hindu just has to put his hand up in the refugee camp: "sir I'm afraid of persecution in Pakistan".

Any scientific basis for accepting such testimony?

Is it plausible that economic incentives might be offered to Hindus from pakistan or Bangladesh, either by the state or NGOs to convince them to stay even when there are no real cases of persecution?

In any case, such testimony is not needed. Your statement is in contradiction to the finance minister's.

"Religious persecution is not a criterion,"

Hence, it doesn't need to be mentioned, proven, speculated upon or even presumed in the absence of evidence.

The Hindu refugee simply puts his hand up and says: "I am Hindu, from Pakistan, refugee in India since 2013". Job done.

 

[Nityam]

So how do you prove "fear of persecution" if the assamese minister has already confirmed for you that religious persecution itself cannot be proven?

A Hindu just has to put his hand up in the refugee camp: "sir I'm afraid of persecution in Pakistan".

Any scientific basis for accepting such testimony?

Is it plausible that economic incentives might be offered to Hindus from pakistan or Bangladesh, either by the state or NGOs to convince them to stay even when there are no real cases of persecution?

In any case, such testimony is not needed. Your statement is in contradiction to the finance minister's.

"Religious persecution is not a criterion,"

Hence, it doesn't need to be mentioned, proven, speculated upon or even presumed in the absence of evidence.

The Hindu refugee simply puts his hand up and says: "I am Hindu, from Pakistan, refugee in India since 2013". Job done.

No proof is required. They can sign and affidavit saying the same. Its called self verification.

An affidavit is statement of facts which is sworn to (or affirmed) before an officer who has authority to administer an oath (e.g. a notary)

Its standard practice all over the world. Nothing "unscientific" about it.

Conspiracy theories OTOH has no scientific basis or value even in a debate.

I have already explained how religious persecution is not a criterion. Why keep repeating the same thing ?

 

[masterchief_mirza]

No proof is required. They can sign and affidavit saying the same. Its called self verification.

An affidavit is statement of facts which is sworn to (or affirmed) before an officer who has authority to administer an oath (e.g. a notary)

Its standard practice all over the world. Nothing "unscientific" about it.

Conspiracy theories OTOH has no scientific basis or value even in a debate.

I have already explained how religious persecution is not a criterion. Why keep repeating the same thing ?

You didn't explain that religious persecution is not a criterion. The honourable member of Indian government sat in Assam did that:

"Religious persecution is not a criterion,"

The problem you immediately encountered is that this contradicts Modi Jee's supreme counsel and the official state narrative.

"The Citizenship (Amendment) Act, 2019 was passed by theParliament of India on 11 December 2019. It amended theCitizenship Act of 1955 by providing a path to Indian citizenship for members of Hindu, Sikh, Buddhist, Jain, Parsi, and Christian religious minorities, who had fled persecution from Pakistan, Bangladesh andAfghanistan before December 2014.[3] Muslims were not given such eligibility.[4][5] The act was the first instance of religion being overtly used as a criterion for citizenship under Indian nationality law.["

Hindustanis dressed CAA up ostensibly as a noble deed, countering "persecution" in other nations. But a dumb assamese guy let the cat out the bag.

You're simply tying yourself in knots by trying to make both the official narrative and the assamese minister's statements true simultaneously.

Here's a tip: it can't be done.

So enjoy the rest of your day.

 

[Nityam]

You didn't explain that religious persecution is not a criterion. The honourable member of Indian government sat in Assam did that:

"Religious persecution is not a criterion,"

The problem you immediately encountered is that this contradicts Modi Jee's supreme counsel and the official state narrative.

"The Citizenship (Amendment) Act, 2019 was passed by theParliament of India on 11 December 2019. It amended theCitizenship Act of 1955 by providing a path to Indian citizenship for members of Hindu, Sikh, Buddhist, Jain, Parsi, and Christian religious minorities, who had fled persecution from Pakistan, Bangladesh andAfghanistan before December 2014.[3] Muslims were not given such eligibility.[4][5] The act was the first instance of religion being overtly used as a criterion for citizenship under Indian nationality law.["

Hindustanis dressed CAA up ostensibly as a noble deed, countering "persecution" in other nations. But a dumb assamese guy let the cat out the bag.

You're simply tying yourself in knots by trying to make both the official narrative and the assamese minister's statements true simultaneously.

Here's a tip: it can't be done.

So enjoy the rest of your day.

Its does not matter what anybody says, you can read the text of the law to find out what it says.

That should put an end to the debate.

 

[masterchief_mirza]

Its does not matter what anybody says, you can read the text of the law to find out what it says.

That should put an end to the debate.

You and I may wish to end it but Hindus across India refuse to do so. After the assamese finance minister's revelation, more outbursts have come.

Here is another parliamentarian who is bored of pretending religious persecution in India's neighbours is the stimulus that led to CAA being enacted.

Dilip of Bengal has now said this (referring to people opposed to CAA):

"They are against the idea of India; that is why they are opposing Hindu refugees getting citizenship,"


So, is CAA there to counter religious persecution as you suggest and as it is sold to the world's media, or is it to enable India's "identity" as defined above by Dilip of Bengal?

How can a Hindu in a refugee camp putting his hand up and claiming "religious persecution" provide sufficient weight of proof to allow that person to become an Indian citizen?

The answer is of course - it can't do such a thing because such an action provides ZERO proof of said allegation.

Of course, accepting refugees who claim religious persecution is in theory a noble deed.

Nations who genuinely admit refugees on the basis of religious persecution do so REGARDLESS OF THEIR RELIGION. BJP has amateurishly decided to persecute a religious group in the process of admitting refugees for religious persecution. It's so funny you can't make it up. A six year old would do better than this clown. No wonder politicians all over the country are so excited they can't keep a lid on the truth.

CAA is sold to westerners as a counterstrategy to religious persecution, but it's sold to mobs of cheering Hindutva as the means to fulfil India's true identity.

Feel free to drop the charade yourself. You'll feel a weight lifting off your shoulders, guaranteed.

 

[Nityam]

You and I may wish to end it but Hindus across India refuse to do so. After the assamese finance minister's revelation, more outbursts have come.

Here is another parliamentarian who is bored of pretending religious persecution in India's neighbours is the stimulus that led to CAA being enacted.

Dilip of Bengal has now said this (referring to people opposed to CAA):

"They are against the idea of India; that is why they are opposing Hindu refugees getting citizenship,"

Its called "Politics" and "vote bank".

And pretty much every Indian knows that.

So, is CAA there to counter religious persecution as you suggest and as it is sold to the world's media, or is it to enable India's "identity" as defined above by Dilip of Bengal?

How does it what "why" CAA exist ? The only relevant question is "What" it says.

How can a Hindu in a refugee camp putting his hand up and claiming "religious persecution" provide sufficient weight of proof to allow that person to become an Indian citizen?

The answer is of course - it can't do such a thing because such an action provides ZERO proof of said allegation.

Of course, accepting refugees who claim religious persecution is in theory a noble deed.

Already answered that. Not going to repeat myself.

Nations who genuinely admit refugees on the basis of religious persecution do so REGARDLESS OF THEIR RELIGION. BJP has amateurishly decided to persecute a religious group in the process of admitting refugees for religious persecution. It's so funny you can't make it up. A six year old would do better than this clown. No wonder politicians all over the country are so excited they can't keep a lid on the truth.

CAA is sold to westerners as a counterstrategy to religious persecution, but it's sold to mobs of cheering Hindutva as the means to fulfil India's true identity.

Feel free to drop the charade yourself. You'll feel a weight lifting off your shoulders, guaranteed.

I couldn't care less "why" you think CAA was introduced.

India's true identity is already established by the Constitution. And there is no confusion anywhere regarding it.

 

[masterchief_mirza]

The only relevant question is "What" it says.

What matters is how it's manipulated, as is the case with any law, directive or instruction.

If two senior officials are already flatly denying it has anything to do with religious persecution, then they will use it as they see fit - to create their version of Hindustan.

The whole problem with the law is as I have already outlined - it relies on testimony of a refugee who doesn't need to prove anything they say regarding "persecution".

Do you think the refugees who are Hindu from Pakistan are going to say they were not persecuted and go back to Pakistan if they're simply economic migrants?

They're not dumb as you think.

 

[Nityam]

What matters is how it's manipulated, as is the case with any law, directive or instruction.

If two senior officials are already flatly denying it has anything to do with religious persecution, then they will use it as they see fit - to create their version of Hindustan.

The whole problem with the law is as I have already outlined - it relies on testimony of a refugee who doesn't need to prove anything they say regarding "persecution".

Do you think the refugees who are Hindu from Pakistan are going to say they were not persecuted and go back to Pakistan if they're simply economic migrants?

They're not dumb as you think.

Everybody in India is free to use Laws to maximize Benefit for their own purpose.

That is the purpose of Laws.

Providing a legal framework to help you acheive your goals.

If Hindu from pakistan is going to claim persecution it is incumbent on Govt. of India to take his claim seriously. I fail to see why his claim should be disregarded. Especially considering the history of partition and ground realities.