Political parties should endorse dual citizenship

Mine is a simple and selfish one but I’m not the only person who would benefit if it was granted. Millions of others would too. India should accept the right of its citizens to have dual nationality. After all, if someone has secured this right, by parentage or residence, why should it not be permitted?

Citizenship is not just a privilege conferred by birth. It can also be a reflection of multinational parentage as well as an expression of self-identification. For example, children of British and Indian parents have a right to be both British and Indian and it’s unfair to insist that if they want to be Indian, they must forsake the right to the other citizenship. Similarly, Indians who have lived abroad and come to identify with their new country have a right to accept its citizenship without forgoing their own. As things stand, neither is permitted by Indian law.

Let me, however, admit there are many highly regarded democracies that don’t permit dual citizenship. India is by no means alone. The list includes Austria, Japan, the Netherlands and Norway. So, clearly, not allowing dual citizenship is not considered undemocratic in many leading democracies.

But look at the countries that do permit it. This list includes some of the most highly regarded democracies: Australia, Belgium, Canada, Denmark, France, Ireland, Sweden, the United Kingdom, and the United States. Why does India, a country that frequently boasts it’s the world’s largest democracy, not want to be part of this category?

In fact, several of our neighbours permit dual nationality. Bangladesh does, Sri Lanka and even Pakistan. China, Burma and Nepal don’t. But are they examples to emulate?

Let’s now look at some of the reasons why dual citizenship is disallowed. One of the lesser ones is that it would permit citizens of countries inimical to India’s interests to qualify as Indian citizens. But this is easily tackled. Rather than bar dual citizenship altogether India could have a small list of countries with whom it’s not permitted. Pakistan does. It only permits dual citizenship with 16 specified countries. India isn’t one of them.

A more important reason for barring dual citizenship is the claim it will dilute the meaning of Indian citizenship. I’m afraid this is nonsense. Those who do not want to retain Indian citizenship — and can acquire another one — can give it up whenever they want. Dual citizenship is for those who have the right to be citizens of other countries as well. And just because a person can also be British or American doesn’t make him less Indian.

Now, some would argue that only a minority would fall into this category so why should there be a law just for them. My answer is, why not?

No doubt many are part of the diaspora and successive governments have repeatedly reached out to them with Persons of Indian Origin and Overseas Citizens of India (OCI) cards. They permit everything except ownership of agricultural land, voting rights, and public office. So, what does dual citizenship offer that OCI status does not?

Very simply, it makes international travel exceptionally easy. For example, Pakistanis with British or American citizenship can visit most of Europe without visas. An Indian passport holder cannot. Instead, Indian citizens have a hellish time getting visas. It also permits you to retain your Indian citizenship. For many that matters.

So, as 2025 starts, I’m hoping either Mr Modi or Mr Gandhi will rethink their party’s narrow-minded position on dual citizenship and permit Indian citizens who are able to acquire a second citizenship to do so. This would be a gain for those who can without any loss for anyone else. It’s also fair and makes sense.

Karan Thapar is the author of Devil’s Advocate: The Untold Story.The views expressed are personal

Get Current Updates on…

See more