Tripura Rajya Upajati Ganamukti Parishad (TRUGP), state's oldest tribal based party and frontal organisation of Communist Party of India-Marxist and All India Chakma Social Forum (AICSF) on Monday announced to file petition before the Supreme Court against the contentious Citizenship (Amendment) Act (CAA), 2019.
Former Tripura Congress chief Pradyot Bikram Manikya Deb Barman, on Monday, told that he has already filed the case against the CAA in the Supreme Court.
"Either veteran lawyer Kapil Sibal or Abhishek Manu Singhvi is expected to deal my petition in the Supreme Court." Said Deb Barman, who also met Union Home Minister Amit Shah on December 12 and requested him to keep Tripura out of the purview of the CAA.
Before leaving for New Delhi, TRUGP President and former Tripura Tribal Welfare Minister Jitendra Chaudhury said the enactment of the CAA is entirely against the very principles of the Constitution and idea of Indian nationhood.
"After the Partition in 1947 and the subsequent developments, influx of crores of people during the past several decades had already flooded the eastern part of the country, causing multiple problems in the social, cultural, political and economic life of eastern India," Chaudhury, also a senior CPI-M tribal leader, told .
He said that not only within the country, many other countries officially or un-officially expressed their opposition against the CAA.
"Bangladesh Hindu, Buddhist, Christian, Maitry Sangsad while expressing their strong opposition to the CAA said that life and security of the minorities of that country would be further endangered due to this Act. Atrocities on the 1.75 crore minorities in Bangladesh by the Muslim fundamentalists would be increased," Chaudhury apprehend and said that to remain in power the BJP is utilising the CAA as a tool.
All India Chakma Social Forum (AICSF) in a press release said that Chakmas will also challenge constitutional validity of the CAA, 2019 in the Supreme Court.
"The exemptions in CAA given to some northeastern states are unconstitutional as the Supreme Court in the case of the National Human Rights Commission versus State of Arunachal Pradesh, on the Chakmas of Arunachal Pradesh had held that Inner Line Regulation does not apply for submitting citizenship applications," said Suhas Chakma, Advisor to the AICSF.
The AICSF said that there is no provision in the Constitution of India to exempt certain states from the Citizenship Act and India's laws did not apply only to erstwhile Jammu and Kashmir as it had separate constitutional provision under Article 35A and Article 370 of the Constitution, which have since been repealed on August 5, 2019.
Suhas Chakma also asked, "Why exemption has only be given to Tribal Autonomous District Council areas under the 6th schedule of the Constitution, why the same cannot be extended to 5th schedule areas? In fact, if despite entire Manipur not being tribal areas can be declared as Inner Line Area, Assam and Tripura too can be fully covered."
"The Citizenship Amendment Act was a violation of the Instrument of Accession signed by the regent Maharani Kanchan Prabha Devi and the Indian Governor General," Deb Barman claimed.
At the end of the 1,355-year-rule by 184 kings, on October 15, 1949, the erstwhile princely state of Tripura came under the control of the Indian government after a merger agreement was signed between regent Maharani and then Governor General.
( With inputs from IANS )