page_title: Citizenship (Amendment) Act, 2003
section_title: Legislative history
hierarchical_section_title: Citizenship (Amendment) Act, 2003 / Legislative history
caption_attribution_description: English: Advani
context_page_description: The Citizenship (Amendment) Act, 2003 was passed by the Parliament of India in December 2003, and received presidential assent in January 2004. It is labelled "Act 6 of 2004".
  The Act amended The Citizenship Act, 1955 by:
  introducing and defining a notion of "illegal migrant", who could be jailed or deported.
  making illegal immigrants ineligible for citizenship by registration or by naturalisation,
  disallowing citizenship by birth for children born in India if either parent is an illegal immigrant, and
  introducing a notion of Overseas Citizen of India for citizens of other countries who are of Indian origin.
  The Act also mandated the Government of India to construct and maintain a National Register of Citizens.
  Scholar Anupama Roy described this amendment as a "hinge point" from which emerged the two contradictory tendencies represented by the Citizenship Amendment Bill 2016 and the National Register of Citizens. These two developments gave rise to large-scale protests all over India in December 2019.
context_section_description: The bill was introduced in the Parliament by L. K. Advani, the Home Minister, on 7 May 2003 during its Budget session. It was sent to the parliamentary standing committee on home affairs, and came back to both the houses of the Parliament towards December 2003. It was passed unanimously by Rajya Sabha on 18 December and passed "without any acrimony" in the Lok Sabha on 22 December. The Congress, AIADMK, Rashtriya Janata Dal and some other opposition parties supported the bill.
  The bill was branded as a "dual citizenship bill", a reference to the provision for Overseas Citizen of India. All the other changes to the citizenship law, some of the most radical ones since 1955, were passed without any comment. More than a decade later, in 2019, a comment made by Manmohan Singh, the leader of opposition in the Rajya Sabha, got circulated. Singh said, in connection with the legislation of "illegal immigrants", that the minorities of Bangladesh who had faced persecution in the country had to be treated more liberally:
  After the partition of our country, the minorities in countries like Bangladesh have faced persecution, and it is our moral obligation that if circumstances force people, these unfortunate people, to seek refuge in our country, our approach to granting citizenship to these unfortunate persons should be more liberal.
  The deputy chairman of the Rajya Sabha, Najma Heptullah added that minorities in Pakistan also faced persecution. The Home minister L. K. Advani endorsed the view and made a distinction between an "illegal immigrant" and a "bona fide refugee":
  We always say that a person who has to flee because of religious persecution is a refugee, bona fide refugee, and he cannot be regarded on par with the illegal immigrant who may have come for any reason, even for economic reasons. If he is an illegal immigrant, he is an illegal immigrant. So, I take note of what has been said and endorse it.
  But no changes in the bill are visible to address these concerns.
caption: L. K. Advani, Home minister and Deputy Prime Minister
exif: {}