PROMPT-Nationality does or does not assure its citizens a certain measure of

equality

The right to nationality is critical towards the fulfilment of other fundamental human rights.
Adoption of a nationality confers diplomatic security to the place of origin and is sometimes
a legal or practical necessity for exercising fundamental rights. In general discourse within
the Indian context, the two terms nationality and citizenship are used interchangeably. The
Constitution of India, 1950 is applicable to Indian citizens/nationals and by no stretch of
imagination can it be applied to anyone who is not a citizen/national of India. Article 14 of
the Indian Constitution reads verbatim “The State shall not deny to any person equality
before the law or the equal protection of the laws within the territory of India. “The article
also implies that the Indian state shall treat everyone as equal and should not discriminate
against the citizens on the basis of their caste, religion, language, gender, and place of birth.
Hence, there is a law in place in India to ensure equality taking into account the
nationality/citizenship of an individual.

However, the application of this article is challenged quite often. Author, Niraja Gopal Jayal
in her article analyses the Indian situation and puts forth that the legal status of nationality
and its connection with Article 14 of Indian Constitution gets challenged often if religious
differences are drawn in. The concept of nationality fails to assure equality if these religious
differences further lead to violence. She outlines examples of routine violence against
minorities and lower castes and puts forth how the concept of equality is undermined by these
acts of violence in India. She goes on to discuss the cases of Love Jihad and regular violence
against Muslims and Dalits in the Indian society. Though these sections of the society have
been conferred nationality status however still they feel discriminated, are attacked, and fall
under a second-class category of nationals based on their caste and religious identity. This
type of violence is a feature of identity-based inequality.

Further, Prof. Swati Chawla in her co-authored article “Who is a Citizen in Contemporary
India?” points out the violation of Article 14 through the Citizenship Amendment Act. She
states that legal experts believe that there is exclusion of minorities on the basis of their
religious affiliation in the aforesaid legislation. Even though an individual is an Indian
national he/she may still undergo discrimination and marginalisation and face inequality on
the basis of sexual orientation. This is also seen in cases of violence reported against queer
groups in India.

Minority groups have been either barred from gaining the nationality of the nation in which
they live or unfairly stripped of their nationality in some situations. A recent example of this
situation may be seen in Sudan, where the government has indeed been encouraged to assure
that Sudanese people of southern background do not lose their Sudanese citizenship if they do
not become citizens of the new South Sudan. Similar worries about statelessness have
developed in recent decades in Burma, Syria, Iraq, and Kuwait. Thus the current tendency of
securitizing nationality policy has, maybe belatedly, attracted attention to the discriminatory
implications of this discrepancy. It has also contributed to raising awareness of the broader
context of resurgent xenophobic and racist views and policies rooted in ethno-nationalism
that not only harm non-citizens of any given nation but also make formal citizens who are
ethnic, racial, or religious minorities vulnerable to discriminatory practices and intolerance.