New Delhi, Jan 20 (IANS) The Congress party has categorically rejected the claims that they are opposing the Citizenship (Amendment) Act (CAA) in toto but say that they have only objected to the exclusion of a community in the amended Act.
Senior party spokesperson Abhishek Singhvi said on Sunday that the Congress is not opposed to granting citizenship to Hindus.
Singhvi said: “The Congress is a party which always wanted, welcomed and supported the grant of citizenship to Hindus and other communities. What we are opposed to is why should we deny citizenship to a particular community – that is my question as a political party.”
He also attacked the Centre for misleading people on the issue.
“The question the civil society across the country is asking spontaneously is not answered by the government, which is giving misleading statements. Why it has neglected and ignored Hindus of Sri Lanka, Nepal and Myanmar,” said Singhvi.
Singvi said that the motive of the government is evident. “It only wants to beat a political horse to try and divide the society for cheap political gains,” he added.
The Congress leader defended the states opposing the CAA. “All that some states have done or immediately proposing to do, is to have filed or going to file substantive comprehensive petitions in the Supreme Court. Those petitions have challenged the new law under Article 131,” he said.
Replying to questions on Kapil Sibal who had said on Saturday that the CAA cannot be opposed by the states, Singhvi said that Sibal has already clarified on the issue.
“There are attempts to create chaos and confusion and government would be happy to get off the hook by creating of all types of misinterpretations I don’t have to reply to. Sibal has already tweeted,” Singhvi said.
Sibal had said in one of his tweets: “I believe the CAA is unconstitutional. Every state assembly has the constitutional right to pass a resolution and seek its withdrawal. When and if the law is declared to be constitutional by the Supreme Court then it will be problematic to oppose it. The fight must go on!”