Post 9prcz1qeS0IULdXiT2 by manuvichar@mastodon.social
(DIR) More posts by manuvichar@mastodon.social
(DIR) Post #9prcz1qeS0IULdXiT2 by manuvichar@mastodon.social
2019-12-11T18:30:25Z
0 likes, 1 repeats
The supporters of the communal #CAB are feeling energized by the supportive comments of Harish Salve. After all, if one of the costliest lawyers in India supports the bill, everything should be fine, right?But one who is not a devotee cannot think like that.(1/n)
(DIR) Post #9prcz27fQjuNCPVIzQ by manuvichar@mastodon.social
2019-12-11T18:30:25Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
So what's Salve saying? It's basically not much different from what Amit Shah said in Parliament.Article 14 permits unequal treatment of unequals; and, under-inclusion is not unconstitutional - this is the essence of Salve's(Shah's) argument.So how does it operate?(2/n)
(DIR) Post #9prcz2SaAydeFHI0ae by manuvichar@mastodon.social
2019-12-11T18:30:26Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
As per the #CAB, a Bangladeshi Hindu who entered India before the cut off date will not be treated as an illegal migrant, and will be eligible for Indian Citizenship. But a Rohingya Muslim will be barred and liable to be deported or detained in a detention centre.(3/n)
(DIR) Post #9prcz2pGocmpNdu7xA by manuvichar@mastodon.social
2019-12-11T18:30:27Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
For the defenders of the bill, both these persons are unequal and hence can be treated unequally. Why unequal? Because their religions and nationality are different.(4/n)#CitizenshipAmmendmentBill2019
(DIR) Post #9prcz34rsdGOA1CaGW by manuvichar@mastodon.social
2019-12-11T18:30:28Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
But for a person who believes in humanity, both these persons are equal. Both belong to the same class of persons who seek asylum due to persecution on the basis of identity.(5/n)
(DIR) Post #9prcz3PQeBi5Bmp0JU by manuvichar@mastodon.social
2019-12-11T18:30:29Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
Only a bigoted person can see them as different and unequal, based on their identities. A bigot won't be seeing the similarities of their sufferings, but the differences in their religions.The core unjustness of the Bill is that it legalizes such bigoted thinking.(6/n)
(DIR) Post #9prcz3jzPk9mDYRQMS by manuvichar@mastodon.social
2019-12-11T18:34:48Z
0 likes, 1 repeats
On under-inclusion : its permissible only on limited grounds, say a resource crunch. If you are excluding persons on the basis of religion, that's unjust and inhuman. If you don't see any problem with that, then I'm sorry to say you are a miserable, narrow minded bigot.(7/n)
(DIR) Post #9prcz46g3OIxLv3Xiy by manuvichar@mastodon.social
2019-12-11T18:34:49Z
0 likes, 1 repeats
For a detailed critique of the arguments against #CAB2019 using constitutional vocabulary, please read an article shared in the link).(8/n)#CitizenshipAmmendmentBill2019https://www.livelaw.in/columns/the-citizenship-amendment-bill-is-unconstitutional-150496
(DIR) Post #9psmrARBpEGXN1U1hI by obscurosaur@mastodon.social
2019-12-11T19:10:43Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
Brilliant take!https://www.livelaw.in/columns/the-citizenship-amendment-bill-is-unconstitutional-150496@manuvichar
(DIR) Post #9psmrAlkamiEOn6RkG by obscurosaur@mastodon.social
2019-12-11T19:34:46Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
Resource crunch to justify under inclusiveness when govt is freeing up resources by weeding out people (NRC)Exclusion to be under inclusive ..@manuvichar
(DIR) Post #9psmrB85FkZpW3YHYW by obscurosaur@mastodon.social
2019-12-11T19:44:08Z
0 likes, 1 repeats
Article 15 lists out grounds of impermissible discrimination.. Article 15 applies only to citizens.Isn’t it incongruent when citizenship is done on these grounds? Doesn’t Article 15 alone necessitate that discrimination isn’t to be done on these ground while conferring citizenship? Should come as a corollary..Said it before: What is the point of right to equality when you get to cherrypick people who are to be granted that right ?@manuvichar