Recently, as the government announced the implementation of the contentious Citizenship (Amendment) Act, 2019 for granting citizenship to undocumented non-Muslim migrants from Pakistan, Bangladesh and Afghanistan who came to India before December 31, 2014, another video surfaced online. A video of CJI DY Chandrachud’s son Abhinav Chandrachud talking about how CAA is unconstitutional.

CAA, Abhinav Chandrachud
Credit: YouTube

According to a video shared by Brut, Chandrachud has pointed out the loopholes in the act. In one instance, he said ‘The residence requirement in India has been reduced by the Citizenship Amendment Act. So anyone else who wants to apply to be a citizen by naturalisation has to reside in India for 11 years. But for somebody who falls under the Citizenship Amendment Act, the residency requirement is only five years.’ By saying this, he has questioned the logical basis of the act and of course this has had reactions from people online.

Mr. Abhinav has also asked why the act exlcludes athiests, agnostic people or Jews? Some people have argued that Jewish people have their own country, to which the advocate has replied by saying that Christians and Buddhists do too (technically). Implying that the omissions and specifications of the Act are clearly aiming to convey something in specific.

What are your opinions of his speech?