With thousands of Goans having lost Indian citizenship after acquiring Portuguese passports, the MEA’s clarification has now revived questions over surrender rules
External Affairs Ministry’s statement that an Indian Passport is not proof of citizenship has opened a can of worms, at a time when India is passing through a trust deficit time due to the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) conducted by the Election Commission of India. In SIR exercise, electoral rolls are revised through citizenship verification process. In Bihar and West Bengal there have been disturbing questions over independence of EC which have remained unanswered. In Goa due to a privilege available to Goans to obtain Portuguese Citizenship and passports thousands of Goans who opted for Portuguese citizenship lost Indian citizenship as India rejects dual citizenship. Goans who have obtained Portuguese passport and, in the process, lost Indian citizenship are raising question of double standards over EA Ministry’s claim. The question raised is, if passport is only a travel document why the Goans need to surrender Indian passport on attaining a Portuguese one. The Ministry of External Affairs has triggered an unnecessary confusion and only provided fuel to the political narratives in the country with polarised polity.
This controversy is due to India not having a universal citizenship card, when even neighbours like Bangladesh and Pakistan have national identity card. Indians have Aadhaar card as residence proof, PAN Card for tax purposes, driving license as permission to drive vehicles, EPIC card as giving right to vote, ration card for civil supplies. No law confirms and provides any specific document to establish Indian citizenship. The status of citizenship is under Arts 5 to 11 of the constitution and Indian Citizenship Act 1955 while the issuance of passports is under the Indian passports Act 1967.
Normally a passport is issued to citizens after a detailed and rigorous statutory inquiry under the passports Act. The police enquiry and verification of documents include Aadhaar Card, EPIC card, PAN card and a driving license and/or birth certificate; each of which are not proof of citizenship. The inquiry is over proof of residence, birth date parentage and antecedents. A passport may be refused if the person is not the citizen of a country sec 6 (2) (a) of the Passports Act. But a passport/travel document could be issued to non-citizens under Section 20 of the passports Act in public interest. Such privilege is availed by Tibetan refugees in times of need. That crucial Section 20 makes all the difference though normally passport is issued to citizens only. The passport Act also does not state that the holder of a passport is a citizen of India.
Passports are issued for travel out of the country and outside the country, which has issued a visa for entry, that passport would also be proof of Indian citizenship ie an Indian Passport is certainly a document to establish citizenship before foreign immigration authorities. In India an Indian passport would have only a rebuttable presumption of citizenship; which could come into question only in case of a challenge. That is exactly what the Ministry of External Affairs meant that the passport is not conclusive proof of citizenship and a standalone document, but the statement is at a wrong time when trust deficit in authorities is very high. Passport is certainly a strong proof in case of dispute as it is the most authoritative document issued in the name of the Indian Republic.
There are various ways of getting Indian citizenship, it could be by naturalisation or registration. Citizenship through registration and naturalisation provide for citizenship certificate. But there are only miniscule such cases. In case of citizenship by descent – those born outside India before December 10, 1982 and if his/her father has Indian citizenship. In case of birth there those born after January 26, 1950 but before July 1, 1987 are deemed to be Indian citizens irrespective of their parents’ nationality. Those born after July 1, 1987 are Indian citizen if one parent is an Indian and after December 3, 2024, if one parent is an Indian citizen and the other is not an illegal immigrant. There is also citizenship by incorporation of territory like Goa, Pondicherry and Sikkim. For us in Goa we have 1962 Goa Daman and Diu Citizenship order granting Indian citizenship to anyone born in the former Portuguese territory of Goa or those with parents/grandparents born here prior to December 1961. In 2004 Buddhists, Jains, Parsis and Christians from Pakistan, Bangladesh and Afghanistan have been granted citizenship in cases when he/she entered India before December 31, 2004. Since there are so many ways of conferring Indian citizenship the issue of when a person is born or the status of his/her parents require determination. A country which is document scarce and with very poor registration record cannot place the burden of proof on Indians to bring proof.
The recent SIR exercise by the Election Commission particularly in Bihar and West Bengal, even the Supreme Court accepted Passport as proof of citizenship but EPIC card not to be proof of citizenship, though right to vote is given only to citizens.
The debate after the External Affairs Ministry’s statement has generated a lot of heat with no light on the issue. That light can come only when universal citizenship cards are issued under the 2003 rules which had become politically contentious when the Assam NRC was rolled out. Our country must earn the confidence and trust of citizens that their status would be decided by a fair and impartial manner.
For Goans who opted for Portuguese passports, the Ministry’s claim has no bearing. Technically the ministry is legally correct but has only provided fodder for a demand for dual citizenship in Goa and among NRIs. There are enough good and sound reasons to move in that direction in the global world.
(Cleofato Almeida Coutinho is a Senior Advocate who has taught constitutional laws for over three decades)
