UN Human Rights Commission intends to intervene in a Supreme Court Case against CAA.

UN Human Rights Commission intends to intervene in a Supreme Court Case against CAA.

UN Human Rights Commission intends to file intervention application in the supreme court of india seeking to intervene in writ petition (Civil) no 1474 of 2019 and praying that it be allowed to make submissions.

On what ground is a UN body seeking to intervene in a case regarding a domestic Indian low?

• The office of the High commissioner for human Rights is the leading UN entity on human rights.
• The UN general assembly entrusted both the high commissioner and her office with a unique mandate to promote and protect all human rights for all people.
• As the principal united nations office mandated to promote and protect human rights for all, OHCHR leads global human rights efforts speaks out objectively in the face of human rights violations worldwide.
• This resolution, adopted by the UNGA in 1994, created the post of the UN high commissioner for human rights.

What does the intervention application say?

• The OHCHR has welcomed as commendable the CAA’s stated purpose, “namely the protection of some persons from persecution on religious grounds.
• It also “acknowledges the history of openness and welcome that india has exhibited to persons seeking to find a safer, more dignified life within its borders”
• However the examination of the CAA raises important issues with respect to international human rights law and its application to migrants, including refugees,says the OHCHR.
• The CAA, it says, raises “important human rights issues, including its compatibility in relation to the right to equality before the law and nondiscrimination on nationality grounds under india’s human rights obligations”
• The application acknowledge that “the issue of nondiscrimination on nationality grounds falls outside the scope of this intervention” but insists that “this is no way implies that there are not human rights concerns in this respect”

Is there a specific basis on which the OHCHR has faulted the CAA?

The application flags some central principles of international human rights law:

1   1) The impact of the CAA on some migrants.

2  2)The enjoyment of human rights by all migrants and the rights of all migrants(non citizens) to equality before the law

     3)The principle of non refoulment, which prohibits the forcible return of refugees and asylum seekers to a country where they are likely to be persecuted

India’s Stance:.

• The citizenship amendment act is an internal matter of india and concerns the sovereign right of the Indian parliament to make laws.
• MEA spokesperson insisted that no foreign party has any locus standi on issues pertaining to india’s sovereignty.
• The CAA was “constitutionally valid and complies with all requirements of constitutional values” and “is reflective of our long standing national commitment in respect of human rights issues arising from the tragedy of the partition of india”