The Hindu: Published on 10th Jan 2025:
Why in News?
The debate on dual citizenship for Indians abroad has been revived after remarks by External Affairs Minister S. Jaishankar, who stated that while India faces challenges in granting dual citizenship, the conversation is “still alive.” This has led to discussions among experts about the implications of dual citizenship in India’s socio-political and legal framework.
Key Stakeholders and Perspectives:
a. Vivek Katju (Former Diplomat):
Position: Opposes dual citizenship.
Rationale:
Citizenship inherently involves political rights, and granting dual citizenship could dilute political loyalty.
India's system demands that individuals relinquish Indian citizenship upon acquiring another.
Flexibility in citizenship could lead to divided loyalties, undermining the state's sovereignty.
b. Amitabh Mattoo (Academic and Commentator):
Position: Strongly against dual citizenship.
Rationale:
Dual citizenship could result in individuals with split political loyalties participating in India’s political process, a prospect deemed "dangerous."
Emphasizes historical and constitutional context, highlighting that Indian citizenship entails full and undivided political loyalty.
Notes the risks of populism driving this debate and warns against creating a "comprador class" acting as foreign agents in India.
c. Diaspora’s Role:
While the Indian diaspora has played a crucial role in fostering bilateral relations and economic investment, allowing dual citizenship risks empowering them politically, potentially interfering with India’s domestic political landscape.
Contextual Background:
Indian Legal Framework:
The Constitution of India and the Citizenship Act do not allow dual citizenship.
The Overseas Citizen of India (OCI) scheme offers certain privileges to individuals of Indian origin but explicitly avoids conferring political rights.
Global Practices:
Countries like the U.S. and the U.K. allow dual citizenship. However, India’s legal and constitutional philosophy has remained distinct, emphasizing undivided national loyalty.
Historical Precedents:
Prominent figures like Mother Teresa and Jean Drèze relinquished their foreign citizenship to fully integrate into Indian society.
Potential Implications of Dual Citizenship:
a. Positive Outcomes:
Enhanced ties between India and its diaspora, potentially attracting investments and fostering goodwill.
Could facilitate ease of movement and cultural exchange for diasporic communities.
b. Negative Consequences:
Risk of divided political loyalties leading to external influence in Indian governance.
Potential misuse by individuals seeking political leverage without full allegiance to India.
Could create administrative complexities and constitutional conflicts.
Broader Implications and Concerns:
National Sovereignty: Granting dual citizenship could undermine India’s political integrity by allowing individuals with external allegiances to influence domestic matters.
Populism vs. Pragmatism: There is a risk of populist pressures driving the debate, overshadowing critical considerations of sovereignty and constitutional values.
Diaspora’s Role: While the diaspora serves as an economic and diplomatic bridge, extending political rights risks crossing a "lakshman rekha" of undue influence.
Conclusion:
India’s stance on dual citizenship reflects a careful balancing act between engaging with its diaspora and preserving its sovereignty. The debate underscores the importance of undivided political loyalty, with experts like Vivek Katju and Amitabh Mattoo strongly cautioning against adopting dual citizenship. While discussions may continue, the legal, constitutional, and cultural framework suggests that India is unlikely to embrace dual citizenship in the near future.
