Tharoor attacks Centre over passport clarification
Congress MP Shashi Tharoor on Friday sharply criticised the Central Government over its recent clarification that an Indian passport is not conclusive proof of citizenship, calling the situation an 'absurd legal paradox' and urging a 'common-sense legislative overhaul' to resolve the ambiguity. In a detailed post on social media platform X, Tharoor described the ongoing debate as 'fatuous' and said it leaves ordinary citizens in a state of bewilderment.
The controversy erupted after the Ministry of External Affairs (MEA), during a briefing on Passport Seva Divas, stated that an Indian passport is primarily a travel document and should not be considered definitive proof of citizenship. The government later clarified that this position is not new, citing Section 20 of the Passports Act, 1967, which allows the issuance of passports to non-citizens. It also referred to a 2013 Bombay High Court judgment that ruled possession of a passport does not establish citizenship.
Tharoor highlights 'absurd legal paradox'
Tharoor argued that for decades, Indian passports have been regarded as the highest standard of official identity, obtained only after extensive police verification and document scrutiny. 'To turn around and declare that the very document born from this rigorous vetting does not actually prove citizenship creates an absurd legal paradox. If a passport does not establish domestic citizenship, then what does?' he asked.
He further noted that the Supreme Court has already ruled that Aadhaar is merely proof of identity and residence, not citizenship. This, he said, leaves millions of Indians in a 'bizarre administrative limbo' where they possess world-class biometric and state-issued documents, yet none are legally deemed 'conclusive' proof of their nationality within their own borders.
Tharoor proposes dual-document solution
To resolve what he termed a 'fatuous controversy', Tharoor proposed amending the legal framework to recognise both passports and Aadhaar cards as conclusive proof of Indian citizenship unless explicitly cancelled or withdrawn by the government. He suggested that the Unique Identification Authority of India (UIDAI) issue a visually distinct Aadhaar card for non-citizen residents, arguing that such a distinction would enable the government to designate a standard Aadhaar card or a valid Indian passport as sufficient proof of citizenship.
According to Tharoor, such reforms would streamline domestic verification processes, reduce bureaucratic disputes during exercises such as electoral roll revisions, and provide citizens with greater legal certainty regarding their identity. 'By clearly demarcating the two categories, the state can safely mandate that carrying either a standard citizen's Aadhaar or a valid passport is compulsory and sufficient proof of citizenship for all Indian nationals at all times. This dual-document policy would immediately streamline domestic verification, eliminate arbitrary bureaucratic challenges during electoral revisions, and provide every Indian with absolute, unquestionable legal certainty regarding their identity. End of story!' the Congress MP added.
Government's stance and legal basis
The government's clarification referenced Section 20 of the Passports Act, 1967, which states: 'Notwithstanding anything contained in the foregoing provisions relating to issue of a passport or travel document, the Central Government may issue, or cause to be issued, a passport or travel document to a person who is not a citizen of India if that Government is of the opinion that it is necessary so to do in the public interest.' The government also pointed to the Bombay High Court judgment from 2013 that made it clear that possession of a passport does not establish citizenship.
Tharoor's remarks come a day after the MEA clarified that a passport has never been considered proof of citizenship and that no such decision was taken either recently or in the last 12 years. The Congress MP's call for a legislative overhaul has added fuel to the political debate over citizenship documentation in India.
