38.6c New Delhi, India, Wednesday, August 06, 2025
Top Stories Supreme Court
Political NEWS Legislative Corner Celebstreet International Videos
Subscribe Contact Us
close
International

UN High Commissioner For Human Rights Files Intervention Plea In Supreme Court Over CAA

By LawStreet News Network      03 March, 2020 03:03 PM      0 Comments
Intervention Plea In Supreme Court Over CAA Michelle Bachelet

In the evening of March 2, 2020 (Monday) United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights, Michelle Bachelet, informed India's Permanent Mission in Geneva that it has filed application for intervention in Supreme Court of India against Citizenship (Amendment) Act, 2019 (CAA).

Responding to notice of United Nations Human Rights Council (UNHRC), Ministry of External Affairs (MEA) spokesperson, Raveesh Kumar, said, The CAA is an internal matter of India and concerns the sovereign right of the Indian Parliament to make laws. We strongly believe that no foreign party has any locus standi on issues pertaining to Indias sovereignty.

He added, We are clear that the CAA is constitutionally valid and complies with all requirements of our constitutional values. It is reflective of our long-standing national commitment in respect of human rights issues arising from the tragedy of the Partition of India.

Kumar further said India is a democracy governed by the rule of law. We all have utmost respect for and full trust in our independent judiciary. We are confident that our sound and legally sustainable position would be vindicated by the Supreme Court, he said.

Last week, Bachelet had expressed serious concern at the CAA and riots in Northeast Delhi and called on Indias leadership to prevent further violence.

Immediately after the Act was passed by the Parliament on December 12, 2020, the UNHRC had issued a statement against it saying that it was "fundamentally discriminatory in nature".

"We are concerned that India's new Citizenship (Amendment) Act 2019 is fundamentally discriminatory in nature", said the statement issued by Jeremy Laurence the Spokesperson of UN High Commissioner for Human Rights.

"The amended law would appear to undermine the commitment to equality before the law enshrined in India's constitution and India's obligations under the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and the Convention for the Elimination of Racial Discrimination, to which Indian is a State party, which prohibit discrimination based on racial, ethnic or religious grounds. Although India's broader naturalization laws remain in place, these amendments will have a discriminatory effect on people's access to nationality".

It called for providing protection to all persecuted groups without discrimination based on identity:

"While the goal of protecting persecuted groups is welcome, this should be done through a robust national asylum system that is premised on the principle of equality and non-discrimination, and which applies to all people in need of protection from persecution and other human rights violations, with no distinction as to race, religion, national origin or other prohibited grounds".

The CAA introduced and passed by Parliament on December 12, 2020 sparked protests across the country. The citizenship law seeks to grant citizenship to Hindus, Sikhs, Buddhists, Christians, Jains and Parsis, except Muslims, who entered the country from Pakistan, Bangladesh and Afghanistan until December 31, 2014. Various states in India including Bengal, Bihar, Punjab, Kerala have passed resolutions against CAA. Violent clashes over the law also broke out in Delhi last week, killing 47 people and injuring over 250.

As many as 140 petitions have been filed in the Supreme Court challenging the constitutional validity of the Act. On January 22, 2020, the Supreme Court had asked the Central Government to reply to the petitions within four weeks. The State of Kerala has filed an original suit against the Act.

Author Satwik Sharma



Share this article:

User Avatar
About:


Leave a feedback about this
TRENDING NEWS

sc-to-hear-plea-on-august-8-seeking-time-bound-restoration-of-statehood-to-jammu-and-kashmir
Trending Judiciary
SC to Hear Plea on August 8 Seeking Time-Bound Restoration of Statehood to Jammu & Kashmir

SC to hear plea on Aug 8 seeking time-bound restoration of statehood to J&K, citing violation of federalism and delay despite govt assurance.

05 August, 2025 01:45 PM
sc-cancels-bail-of-ex-dhfl-promoter-dheeraj-wadhawan-in-42000-crore-bank-fraud-case
Trending Judiciary
SC Cancels Bail of Ex-DHFL Promoter Dheeraj Wadhawan in ₹42,000 Crore Bank Fraud Case

SC cancels bail of ex-DHFL promoter Dheeraj Wadhawan in ₹42,000 cr bank loan scam case; directs him to surrender within 2 weeks despite medical plea.

05 August, 2025 05:34 PM

TOP STORIES

sc-directs-telangana-speaker-to-decide-disqualification-petitions
Trending Judiciary
SC directs Telangana Speaker to decide disqualification petitions against 10 rebel BRS MLAs within 3 months [Read Order]

SC orders Telangana Speaker to decide disqualification pleas against 10 rebel BRS MLAs within 3 months, stressing swift action on political defections.

31 July, 2025 04:58 PM
sc-to-first-consider-maintainability-of-review-against-2022-judgment-on-eds-powers-under-pmla
Trending Judiciary
SC to first consider maintainability of review against 2022 judgment on ED's powers under PMLA

SC to first decide if review pleas on ED powers under PMLA are maintainable; hearing on Karti Chidambaram’s plea set for August 6.

01 August, 2025 10:58 AM
sc-recalls-may-2-judgment-scrapping-jsw-steels-resolution-plan-for-bhushan-power-and-steel-ltd
Trending Business
SC recalls May 2 judgment scrapping JSW Steel's resolution plan for Bhushan Power and Steel Ltd

SC recalls its May 2 verdict cancelling JSW Steel’s ₹19,300 Cr resolution plan for Bhushan Power; matter to be heard afresh on August 7.

01 August, 2025 11:13 AM
electronic-communication-not-valid-mode-of-service-of-notice-under-section-35-bnss-sc
Trending Judiciary
Electronic communication not valid mode of service of notice under Section 35 BNSS: SC [Read Order]

SC holds WhatsApp or email not valid for notice under Section 35 BNSS due to arrest risk; personal service required to safeguard liberty.

01 August, 2025 11:25 AM

ADVERTISEMENT


Join Group

Signup for Our Newsletter

Get Exclusive access to members only content by email