The Debate on NRC and CAB: Are They Useless or Useful?

The current debate surrounding the National Register of Citizens (NRC) and the Citizenship Amendment Bill (CAB) has ignited numerous discussions and concerns. While some argue that both measures are redundant, others believe they serve specific purposes and can be beneficial if implemented effectively. This article examines the validity of these claims and explores the potential impacts and implications of these policies.

The Argument Against NRC and CAB

One of the main arguments against the NRC and CAB is that they are both useless and would only cause unnecessary burdens. Critics argue that:

Resource and Financial Constraints: Both the NRC and CAB require significant financial and human resources. For example, the NRC process in Assam required a substantial amount of funding, yet only managed to register a small fraction of the estimated illegal immigrants. This suggests that the resources spent are not proportionate to the outcomes achieved. Corruption and Clarity: There are concerns about corruption, lack of transparency, and procedural irregularities that can undermine the credibility of these measures. Without proper oversight and accountability, these policies could exacerbate existing issues rather than solving them. Unresolved Legal and Humanitarian Issues: There is a legitimate concern about the fate of those not included in the NRC. If they are not recognized as Indian citizens, they will face legal and humanitarian challenges. Holding them in detention camps could amount to significant financial expenditure, which is unsustainable in the long run.

The Argument for NRC and CAB

While some believe NRC and CAB are ineffective, others argue that they are not entirely useless and can serve specific purposes:

Purposes of NRC and CAB: The primary purpose of NRC is to compile a list of recognized citizens, while CAB aims to provide citizenship to persecuted minority groups from neighboring countries. These policies, when implemented together, can provide a more comprehensive framework for internal and external citizenship management. Combining NRC and CAB: In theory, the effectiveness of CAB can be enhanced by integrating NRC. This ensures that only those who are recognized as genuine citizens receive the benefits of the CAB, thereby addressing potential abuses and legal complications. Alternative Outcomes: Those not included in the NRC could be treated as illegal immigrants. Diplomatic efforts through the UNO could help resolve their status, but this approach would be more complex and time-consuming.

Conclusion: A Balanced Approach

While both NRC and CAB have their challenges, it is not accurate to declare them totally useless. However, their partial utility should not be understated. The NRC, in itself, serves to identify and record citizens, which is a crucial step in any democratic nation. The CAB, on the other hand, can provide a ray of hope to persecuted minorities, although its implementation without NRC could lead to uncertainties and legal challenges.

It is essential to adopt a balanced approach and address the financial, logistical, and legal complexities associated with these policies. By doing so, we can ensure that these measures contribute positively to the welfare and security of the nation without causing undue harm.