Kerala CM: CAA amendment legalizes RSS’s ideology of hatred.
Vijayan stated that the Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA) is both anti-constitutional and anti-human. He emphasized that Kerala will not implement the act, asserting the state’s stance against it. The Chief Minister’s remarks underline Kerala’s firm opposition to the CAA, which he views as a threat to constitutional values and humanity. Vijayan’s statement reflects the state government’s commitment to uphold principles of equality and justice, resisting what he perceives as a discriminatory and unconstitutional law.
Kollam: Kerala Chief Minister Pinarayi Vijayan launched a blistering critique of the BJP-led Centre’s approach to the Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA), asserting that the amendment aims to institutionalize the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh’s (RSS) ideology of hatred.
Speaking at a public gathering in Kollam, Vijayan expressed, “We are all well aware of the RSS ideology, which is rooted in hatred. Citizenship based on religion stands in direct opposition to our constitutional values and the essence of democracy.”
He continued, “We must view this as a violation of our core principles. No government possesses the authority to enact laws that trample upon the fundamental rights of citizens. The Supreme Court has previously ruled on this matter. The CAA blatantly infringes upon constitutional rights. Our constitution guarantees equal treatment before the law for every citizen, explicitly forbidding the granting of special privileges. Discrimination based on religion finds no place in our constitution.”
Describing the implementation of the CAA as a direct challenge to the foundational principles of India, Vijayan asserted, “What is the current scenario? A segment of our population is being compelled to migrate due to the intricacies of the country’s policies. People are being categorized as Muslims and non-Muslims. This categorization must be vehemently opposed. The Sangh Parivar has consistently engaged in discriminatory practices based on religion. The CAA has been introduced to legitimize this discriminatory ideology of the Sangh Parivar.
Vijayan’s remarks reflect Kerala’s staunch opposition to the CAA, with the Chief Minister denouncing it as an affront to the principles of equality, secularism, and democratic values. The state’s government stands resolute in its commitment to uphold the constitutional rights of its citizens, vehemently opposing any legislation that undermines these fundamental principles.
Kerala Chief Minister Pinarayi Vijayan emphasized the distinctiveness between the National Population Register (NPR) and the national register for citizenship, clarifying that the NPR serves as the initial stage in the preparation of the latter. Amidst the amended Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA), he highlighted the misrepresentation that the census and the national citizenship register were synonymous, emphasizing their separate functions.
Both are different,” Vijayan elucidated.
Furthermore, Vijayan reiterated his stance on the CAA, condemning it as both anti-constitutional and anti-human. He made it clear that the act would not find implementation in Kerala, aligning with the state’s strong opposition to the legislation.
“The CAA stands in direct opposition to the constitution and human values,” Vijayan affirmed, underlining Kerala’s firm resolve against its enforcement. The Chief Minister’s statement reflects the state government’s unwavering commitment to uphold constitutional principles of equality and non-discrimination.
By delineating the distinctions between the NPR and the national citizenship register, Vijayan aimed to dispel any confusion surrounding the two processes amidst the ongoing discourse on the CAA. Kerala continues to assert its position against the act, standing as a bastion for the protection of constitutional rights and values.
Kerala Chief Minister Pinarayi Vijayan criticized the statements made by India’s Home Minister, Amit Shah, regarding the Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA), highlighting the exclusion of Muslims from its provisions. Vijayan emphasized Shah’s repeated assertions that citizenship would be granted to all refugees except Muslims, indicating a targeted agenda.
“Multiple times, the Home Minister has stated that after the CAA’s implementation, citizenship will be extended to all refugees, except Muslims. This discriminatory stance was made clear by him in Parliament on several occasions, leaving no doubt about their intentions,” Vijayan remarked.
He went on to mention Kerala House’s vocal opposition to the CAA, describing how the state has adamantly declared its refusal to implement the “anti-constitutional and anti-human” agenda within its borders.
“In Thiruvananthapuram, a public protest was held with broad participation, including members of the opposition. We unequivocally stated that the CAA will not be accepted or implemented here,” he affirmed.
Vijayan highlighted Kerala’s proactive approach against the CAA, detailing the steps taken to oppose it. The state held all-party meetings and convened a special assembly session where a resolution against the act was unanimously passed.
“Our Chief Minister has also reached out to the Chief Ministers of non-BJP ruling states, urging collective opposition to the CAA. Kerala took the lead among states in opposing this discriminatory legislation,” he added.
Looking ahead, Vijayan pointed out the upcoming centenary of the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS), noting the organization’s extremist communal agenda. He suggested that the CAA fits into this broader agenda, aligning with the RSS’s divisive ideologies.
The Chief Minister’s statements reflect Kerala’s steadfast resistance to the CAA, portraying the state’s firm commitment to protecting constitutional values and ensuring equal rights for all its citizens.
Vijayan criticized the Congress, alleging that they withdrew from a joint protest against the CAA after initially joining.
There must be a strong reason for a state leadership of a national party to make such a decision. We did nothing wrong. So, what could be the reason? It’s evident. They were questioned about their participation in the protest. Who questioned them? The national leadership of Congress. How else could this happen?” he questioned.