With New OCI Notification, India has Ended
its Experiment with Dual Citizenship
The
notification introduces a series of restrictions that dramatically curtails the
rights and liberties of OCIs in India.
In a stunning development for Overseas Citizens of India,
the Ministry of Home Affairs issued a notification
on March 4 dramatically altering the compact
between OCIs and the Indian state. This notification, which is issued under Section 7B of the Citizenship Act, 1955, supersedes three earlier notifications issued on April
11, 2005, January
5, 2007, and January
5, 2009, which laid down the rights
of the OCIs.
Apart from humiliating and illegally classifying OCIs as “foreign
nationals”, the new notification introduces a series of new restrictions that dramatically
curtails the rights and liberties of OCIs in India. These restrictions include a
requirement for OCIs to secure a special permit to undertake “any research”, to
undertake any “missionary” or “Tablighi” or “journalistic
activities” or to visit any area in India notified as “protected”,
“restricted” or “prohibited”.
In addition, the notification now equates OCIs to “foreign
nationals” in respect of “all other economic, financial and educational fields”
for the purposes of the Foreign Exchange Management Act, 2003 although past circulars
by the Reserve Bank of India under FEMA will hold ground. This reverses the position
that has held for the last 16 years wherein
OCIs were equated to Non-Resident Indians
rather than “foreign nationals” for the purposes of their economic, financial and
educational rights.
OCIs can however continue to purchase land (other than agricultural
land), pursue the profession of medicine, law, architecture and accountancy and
seek parity with Indian citizens with regard to airfares and entry fee to monuments
and parks. OCIs can also continue to seek enrolment in Indian educational institutions
on par with NRIs but not for seats reserved exclusively for Indian citizens.
Judicial defeats
Most of these new restrictions have likely been inspired by
the defeats suffered by the government in various cases filed by OCIs before the
judiciary. Take for example, the new requirement for OCIs to apply for a special
permit to undertake any missionary activities. This restriction has been introduced
to undercut a judgment by Justice Vibhu
Bakru of the Delhi High Court wherein he came down heavily on the Ministry of Home Affairs
for cancelling the OCI card of an American-Indian doctor on the grounds that he
was engaged in “evangelical and subversive activities” while offering free medical
services to the needy and the poor in Bihar.
In that judgment, Justice Bakru
made it clear that there was no restriction preventing OCIs from engaging in religious
activities.
Similarly, the restrictions on OCIs competing for seats reserved
for Indian citizens is meant to undercut a judgment of the Karnataka High Court by Justices BV Nagarathna and NS
Sanjay Gowda declaring that OCI students will be treated as Indian citizens for
the purposes of admission to professional courses.
Lastly, the Ministry of Home Affair’s assertion that OCIs
are foreign nationals and not Indian citizens is most likely inspired by ongoing litigation
before the Delhi High Court wherein an OCI has sought a declaration from the court
that OCIs enjoy fundamental rights just like Indian citizens.
The requirement for OCIs to take a special permit to engage
in journalistic activities has likely been motivated by right-wing ideologues like
Subramaniam Swamy who has been targeting journalists like The Wire’s Siddharth Vardarajan because of their foreign citizenship. There are several
other next generation OCIs who work as journalists in India and whose future will
now be under a cloud if the Ministry of Home Affairs decides to deny them the required
permit to continue working as journalists in India.
Long-term visa programme
This notification by the Ministry of Home Affairs is not surprising.
For some time now, the Ministry of Home Affairs has dedicated its efforts to reduce
the concept of OCIs to a glorified long-term visa programme
rather than implement it as a dual citizenship programme,
as was the intent of Parliament when then Home Minister LK Advani
piloted the Citizenship (Amendment) Act, 2003, through Parliament.
The “Statement of Objects & Reasons” accompanying this Bill, which
lays down the intent of the government at the time of introducing a bill in Parliament
and which can legitimately be used by the judiciary to discern the legislative intent,
stated the following:
“Subsequently, the
High Level Committee on Indian Diaspora constituted by the Central Government, inter alia, recommended
the amendment of this Act to provide for the grant of dual citizenship to persons
of Indian origin belonging to certain specified countries. The Central Government
has accordingly decided to make provisions for the grant of dual citizenship.”
Advani in his introductory speech had clarified once again that
the entire purpose of the Bill was to introduce dual citizenship for the Indian
diaspora. It is therefore disingenuous for the Ministry of Home Affairs to now claim
through a recent notification the claim that OCIs are foreign nationals. This argument
is all the more absurd when viewed in light of the fact that the phrase OCI literally
has the phrase “Indian citizen” in its title.
Lastly, it bears noting that the entire concept of OCIs was
brought through the Citizenship Act, 1955, which is a legislation specifically meant
to regulate the concept of Indian citizenship. There are separate laws like the
Foreigners Act, 1946 and the Foreign Exchange Management Act, 2003, which deal exclusively
with foreigners and their rights in India.
The fact that Parliament sought to locate OCIs in the Citizenship
Act and not the Foreigners Act or FEMA is sufficient proof that Parliament wanted
OCIs to be Indian citizens.
Correct conceptualisation
Rather than declaring OCIs as foreign nationals, the Ministry
of Home Affairs should recognise OCIs as a new class of
Indian citizens who enjoy a different set of rights from Indian citizens holding
Indian passports. The rights to which OCIs are not entitled are mentioned in the
Citizenship Act. This list includes the right to hold public office or voting –
the idea being that OCIs are excluded entirely from the political sphere of citizenship.
Unfortunately, Parliament delegated to the government of India
via Section 7 B of the Citizenship Act, the power to decide the remaining rights
of OCIs through notifications. While the legality of such delegation is suspect,
there is also no doubt that no government can deprive any class of citizens of their
fundamental rights.
To argue against such a basic proposition by declaring an
entire class of citizens as foreign nationals, as has been done by the Ministry
of Home in this present case, is quite simple wrong in law. Parliament can lay down
the criteria for citizenship but once it decides to bestow citizenship on any category
of persons, not even Parliament can proceed to deprive that class of citizens of
their fundamental rights.
The very idea of fundamental rights in India is that every
person is born with these rights and the Constitution merely recognises such rights.
If the Home Ministry fails to withdraw its most recent notification,
it may just be the end of India’s short-lived experiment with dual-citizenship.
It will be difficult if not impossible for the Narendra Modi government to reclaim
the trust of OCIs after this latest notification unless it acts swiftly.