India has long prided itself on being the world’s largest democracy, a diverse and pluralistic nation where secularism is enshrined in the Constitution. Yet, with the passing of the Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA) in December 2019, India’s commitment to secularism has been called into question domestically and internationally. The CAA offers a fast-track path to citizenship for non-Muslim refugees from Afghanistan, Pakistan, and Bangladesh, specifically targeting Hindus, Sikhs, Buddhists, Jains, Parsis, and Christians. The CAA distinguishes itself by excluding Muslims from this provision. Critics contend that the rule appears to be in direct opposition to India’s core secular values, which guarantee equal treatment for all Indians, irrespective of their religious beliefs.
India’s Constitution, adopted in 1950, defines the nation as a secular republic, where “secularism” implies that the state does not favor any religion. Articles 14, 15, and 21 safeguard individual rights, promising equality before the law and protection against religious discrimination. By granting preferential treatment to non-Muslim refugees, the CAA has raised concerns about the erosion of these constitutional values. This shift in India’s approach to citizenship has drawn sharp criticism from legal scholars, political leaders, and civil rights organizations. India’s Constitution does not make provisions for religious criteria in citizenship matters, which makes the CAA’s religiously exclusive framework stand out. The law’s critics argue that it turns the very concept of Indian secularism on its head, making religion a factor in determining one’s citizenship status.
The CAA is not an isolated incident in India’s growing trend of religious polarization. Concerns regarding the ever increasing oppression of Muslims, the largest minority group in India, have existed for years. Fears among India’s Muslim community have been increased by the Muzaffarnagar riots (2013), which saw a great deal of violence between Muslims and Hindus, and the 2019 revocation of Article 370, which eliminated Jammu and Kashmir’s unique status. India’s reputation is still damaged by the Gujarat riots, which took place under the tenure of Narendra Modi. The state is accused by international human rights organizations of being complicit in the violence against Muslims.
While the Indian government insists that these laws are designed to protect persecuted minorities, especially religious minorities in neighboring countries, critics argue that the CAA is part of a broader agenda to foster a Hindu Rashtra (Hindu Nation). This agenda is closely associated with the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS) ideology, the ideological parent of the ruling Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP). The RSS has long advocated for an India defined by Hindu values, and the CAA is seen by many as a tool to achieve this vision at the expense of the country’s secular framework.
The international community has not remained silent on the matter. The United Nations has expressed concern that the CAA could lead to the disenfranchisement of millions of Muslims in India, potentially violating international human rights law. Countries like Canada, the United States, and members of the European Union have criticized the law, with some even calling for it to be rescinded. The U.S. State Department issued a statement highlighting concerns over the CAA, expressing apprehension about its potential to “undermine the principles of equality and non-discrimination.” Similarly, Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch have raised alarm over the law, calling it discriminatory and warning that it could set a dangerous precedent for minority rights in India. Even within India, the law has sparked massive protests. These protests began in December 2019 and saw thousands of students and civil society activists nationwide come out to demand the law’s repeal. While the demonstrations were largely peaceful, many were met with violent crackdowns by the police. The Uttar Pradesh Police used excessive force to disperse demonstrators, resulting in fatalities and scores of injuries, particularly among Muslim protesters.
The real fear surrounding the CAA lies in its potential interaction with the National Register of Citizens (NRC), a database of Indian citizens. In the state of Assam, where the NRC process was carried out in 2019, hundreds of thousands of people were excluded from the list, many of whom were Muslims from marginalized communities. Critics argue that if the CAA and NRC are implemented nationwide, it could lead to Muslim citizens being disproportionately excluded from the national register. By offering expedited citizenship to non-Muslim refugees while leaving Muslims to prove their legal status, the combination of the CAA and NRC has been seen as a potentially devastating tool for the marginalization of Muslims. The fear is that many Muslims, particularly those from disadvantaged or rural communities, will find it impossible to meet the bureaucratic requirements of the NRC, leaving them vulnerable to detention or deportation.
Describing laws like the CAA increasingly challenges India’s identity as a secular democracy. Supporters of the law claim that it is a humanitarian measure to protect religious minorities fleeing persecution in neighboring countries. However, the law’s selective application raises significant concerns about whether it violates the country’s foundational principles of equality before the law and religious freedom. India’s Muslim population—which constitutes around 200 million—has expressed concern that the law sends a message that they are not equal citizens in their own country. With the CAA now in place, it remains to be seen how future laws and policies might treat religious minorities, especially in light of growing calls for a uniform civil code and national population registers that could further marginalize vulnerable communities. While India remains a vibrant democracy with an active civil society, the rise of religious nationalism under the current government has cast a long shadow over its secular values. The CAA may be positioned as a step towards protecting persecuted religious minorities. Still, its exclusionary nature raises the question of whether India can truly claim to be a secular republic when its laws appear to favor one religion over others.
The Citizenship Amendment Act may have been passed to grant refuge to persecuted minorities in neighboring countries, but its exclusion of Muslims has deepened divides in India. As protests continue and international scrutiny intensifies, it becomes clear that the law is not just a domestic issue but a reflection of India’s broader struggle with its identity as a secular democracy. Whether India can reconcile its diverse religious fabric with policies that contradict its secular ideals remains to be seen. Until then, the CAA stands as a symbol of the growing tension between the principles of secularism and religious nationalism in India.
