CAA and the Constitution – Why N. Ram Is Comic Like No One

        -- RVR

We all know that N. Ram of The Hindu opposes the new Citizenship Amendment Act, stands for freedom of expression and democratic rights and defends Constitutional values - and he would love to be remembered for all that. That's okay and that's good, in a democracy. But something in N. Ram is surely not okay and not good in a democracy, and it showed recently. Does he know that?

Like N. Ram, we are all aware that the Supreme Court is looking into the Constitutional validity of the CAA. That means, the court may uphold the CAA when the new law will have undoubted force. Or, if the court strikes down the CAA that is the end of it - then N. Ram can write that his views against that law have been approved by the highest court on legalities, and the central government will close all files on the CAA. This is a natural consequence in an orderly democracy, but India is not that. Here, N. Ram too feels a proud part of our grand disorder. For proof, look through N. Ram's newspaper, The Hindu, of 28th Feb. 2020 which quotes his recent speech at an anti-CAA conference at Chennai.

"It has gone to the Supreme Court and what I expect from the court is that it will strike down the CAA. It is violative of Article 14 of the Constitution."

N. Ram has a right to hold his expectation from the Supreme Court. That's how those who went to court on the issue feel. The central government’s expectation is, the Supreme Court will uphold the law. Both sides may keep their expectations till the court hands down its verdict. So far, so good.

What do you expect the central government to do If the Supreme Court declares the CAA unconstitutional? Just accept the verdict as binding and move on, isn't it? Then, what would anyone think N. Ram should do if the Supreme Court upholds the CAA? Take it as binding, maybe with a comment that the Supreme Court is wrong, and move on, isn't it? But N. Ram is different, and he uttered some more words at the anti-CAA conference.

Hold your breath and listen further to N. Ram, as The Hindu reports: "Even if the Supreme Court fails to strike down the CAA as unconstitutional, we must still oppose it. It goes against the basic structure of the Constitution." Coming from someone in the position and stature of N. Ram, this is tragic. This is fanning disorder in a democracy. What does N. Ram mean? Does he say that if the Supreme Court clears the CAA and some thousands of immigrants are granted citizenship through that law, another party coming to power must repeal the CAA? And declare those new citizens as non-citizens, so they go back to camps for illegal immigrants? If not that, what else does N. Ram mean by saying, “We must still oppose it?” Just oppose, agitate and protest but let the CAA prevail, and enact comic scenes in the public sphere all through?

This is clear. By saying that any Supreme Court verdict in favour of the CAA will be “against the basic structure of the Constitution”, N. Ram puts himself above the Supreme Court - as if such a stance is "not against the basic structure of the Constitution". What will be his reaction if the central government says, "Even if the Supreme Court strikes down the CAA, we will still work for that law because, in our opinion, the CAA conforms to the basic structure of the Constitution"? But N. Ram won't worry on that prospect, since he knows that no one can match his comic madness on the CAA.

* * * * *

Copyright © R. Veera Raghavan 2020