Explained: What will change after the historic decision of the Supreme Court on the Citizenship Act, understand each and every thing.

New Delhi: The Supreme Court has set March 25, 1971 as the deadline for citizenship in Assam. The court has upheld Section 6A of the Citizenship Act of 1955. This decision brings to an end the long-running debate on the issue of identity and citizenship of illegal immigrants in Assam. This decision has been pronounced keeping in mind the Assam Accord of 1985. The agreement came after a six-year-long student agitation against illegal infiltration from Bangladesh into Assam. However, a bench of four judges has given this decision despite one judge expressing disagreement. Let us know some big things on this issue-What is the matter?
The petitioners in the case, which include Assam Public Works and Assam Sammilita Mahasangh, argued that Section 6A was discriminatory because it provided a different cut-off date for citizenship for immigrants entering Assam. There was also a push from some sections to bring back the cut-off in Assam to 1951. The petitioners argued that Section 6A has led to demographic changes in the state, threatening the rights and culture of the people living there.

What is in the Supreme Court’s decision?
A three-judge bench of Justice Surya Kant, Justice MM Sundaresh and Justice Manoj Mishra said in its decision that the situation of migrants in Assam is different as compared to the rest of the country. he/she said enacting a law to specifically address this issue would not violate the right to equality under Article 14 of the Constitution. CJI DY Chandrachud, in his/her separate but concurring opinion, said the use of Section 6A was justified given the magnitude of the migration issue in Assam, even though other states in India have larger borders with Bangladesh and, in some cases, more migrants. Inflow has been observed. Furthermore, CJI Chandrachud found the deadline of March 25, 1971 appropriate because on that day the Pakistani Army launched Operation Searchlight to crush the Bengali nationalist movement in the then East Pakistan.

What will be the impact of this decision?
The decision has settled once and for all the debate regarding the cut-off date for detecting illegal immigrants in Assam. This has also ended efforts to push this date back to 1951. Note that the Government of Assam had recently accepted 1951 as the cut-off year for implementing some of the recommendations of the Justice Biplab Sharma Committee under Clause 6 of the Assam Accord. The committee was set up in the wake of widespread protests against the CAA in 2019 to protect the interests of the people of the state. It now remains to be seen how the Assam government aligns its policies with the Supreme Court’s decision to preserve the “cultural and linguistic heritage” of the Assamese people.

What will happen to CAA?
Anti-CAA groups have demanded the abolition of CAA citing the Supreme Court’s decision. The All Assam Students Union, which led the anti-illegal migration movement in the 1970s and 80s, welcomed the decision, saying it paved the way for full implementation of the Assam Accord. Does this mean that the citizenship deadline of December 20, 2014 provided by the CAA for non-Muslim immigrants from Pakistan, Bangladesh and Afghanistan is now in potential conflict with the Supreme Court-backed Section 6A deadline of March 25, 1971? Is?

It is true that the Supreme Court did not consider the CAA in detail in this judgment, but it clearly rejected the argument that allowing people with a different culture to live in Assam would dilute the Assamese culture. This has implications for the legal challenge against CAA pending before the Supreme Court.

What will happen at the ground level?
It is an important question what effect this decision will have on the ground level. In the NRC exercise, papers have already been given to 31 lakh people. CAA is being implemented. In such a situation, identifying, tracking and deporting illegal immigrants as per the deadline of March 25, 1971 – which will now be monitored by the Supreme Court – is practically impossible. This will likely trigger another round of political turmoil and give rise to more legal challenges and questions.

What could be the political consequences?
This decision is certainly a major victory for the opposition and anti-CAA groups in Assam and a blow to Assam Chief Minister Himanta Biswa Sarma. The latter will now have to do political maneuvering on the one hand over CAA and on the other hand over the demand to go back to the 1951 timeline, which stemmed from dissatisfaction with the NRC exercise among the ‘indigenous’ groups of Assam. BJP considered CAA a boon for its politics. Himanta will have to fulfill local expectations to remain in office. But this Supreme Court decision, while maintaining a clear timeline for citizenship in Assam, may trouble both Himanta and his/her party in different ways.