Article 9 of Indian Constitution 360° Comprehensive Analysis

Article 9 of Indian Constitution establishes a clear prohibition against dual citizenship for individuals who have voluntarily acquired foreign citizenship. Let me provide a comprehensive analysis of this significant constitutional provision.

Article Bifurcation & Textual Analysis Article 9 of Indian Constitution

Article 9 states: “No person shall be a citizen of India by virtue of article 5, or be deemed to be a citizen of India by virtue of article 6 or article 8, if he has voluntarily acquired the citizenship of any foreign State.”

This provision can be bifurcated into two key components:

1. Scope of Application: Article 9 applies to individuals who would otherwise qualify for Indian citizenship under Articles 5, 6, or 8. These articles cover:
   • Article 5: General citizenship at the commencement of the Constitution
   • Article 6: Migrants from Pakistan to India
   • Article 8: Persons of Indian origin residing outside India
2. Disqualifying Condition: The disqualifying factor is the “voluntary acquisition” of citizenship of any foreign state. The emphasis on “voluntarily acquired” indicates that only deliberate actions to obtain foreign citizenship would disqualify someone from Indian citizenship.

The phrase “shall not be a citizen of India” establishes an automatic disqualification from citizenship, without requiring any additional administrative action or declaration.

Landmark Judicial Interpretations

State of U.P. vs. Shah Mohd. (1969)

In this landmark case, the Supreme Court elaborated on the implications of Article 9. The Court emphasized that if an individual had voluntarily acquired foreign citizenship before the commencement of the Constitution, they cannot claim Indian citizenship based on Articles 5, 6, or 8. This interpretation clarifies that Article 9 addresses situations where Indian citizens had obtained foreign citizenship before the Constitution came into effect, ensuring the exclusivity of Indian citizenship.

Bhagwati Prasad v. Rajeev Gandhi (1986)

This case established that the power to determine questions related to Section 9 of the Citizenship Act (which implements Article 9) is conferred to the central government rather than the high court. This reinforces the executive’s authority in citizenship determination matters.

Madhya Pradesh v. Peer Mohd. & Anr. (1963) and Hari Shankar v. Sonia Gandhi (2001)

These cases embraced the same ratio decidendi regarding Section 9 of the Citizenship Act, consistently upholding the principle that voluntary acquisition of foreign citizenship automatically results in the loss of Indian citizenship.

Historical Context & Evolution

Article 9 was extensively debated in the Constituent Assembly on August 10, 11, and 12, 1949. Initially, it was not a separate article but was discussed as a proviso to Draft Article 5 (which later became Article 5 of the Constitution). During the revision stages, the Drafting Committee decided that the prohibition on dual citizenship should be established as a general principle rather than being restricted to the conditions under Article 5.

During these debates, one member advocated for dual citizenship, suggesting it should be limited to countries that extend the same privilege to Indians. However, the Assembly swiftly rejected this proposal without extensive discussion, and Article 9 was adopted in its current form. This decision reflects the Assembly’s commitment to maintaining singular national allegiance, particularly important in the socio-political context of post-partition India.

Practical Applications & Contemporary Relevance

Article 9 has significant practical implications for Indian citizens:

1. Citizenship Determination: It provides clear criteria for determining citizenship status for individuals who might otherwise qualify under Articles 5, 6, or 8 but have acquired foreign citizenship.
2. Overseas Indians: It affects millions of people of Indian origin who have migrated to other countries and obtained citizenship there, preventing them from simultaneously holding Indian citizenship. According to the UN World Migration Report 2018, over 15.5 million Indians reside outside India.
3. Legal Status: Those who have voluntarily acquired foreign citizenship lose their status as Indian citizens and are treated as foreigners under Indian law, requiring visas for entry and residence in India.
4. Alternative Mechanisms: While prohibiting dual citizenship, India has created alternative mechanisms like the Overseas Citizenship of India (OCI) scheme to maintain connections with its diaspora without granting full citizenship rights.

Critical Evaluation

Strengths:

• Ensures undivided allegiance to India, potentially reducing conflicts of interest in matters of national security and foreign policy
• Creates clarity in citizenship determination, avoiding ambiguities that might arise from dual loyalties
• Reflects the constitutional vision of a unified national identity in a newly independent nation

Limitations:

• Creates challenges for the Indian diaspora who wish to maintain formal ties with their ancestral homeland while integrating into their adopted countries
• Many Indians living abroad find it easy to obtain foreign citizenship but are reluctant to forfeit their Indian citizenship, which they hold dear for cultural and emotional reasons
• Does not accommodate the increasingly globalized nature of citizenship and identity in the modern world

A growing community of Indians who have taken up foreign citizenship argue that the current provisions of Article 9 limit their scope and participation in India’s democratic process. This has led to increasing pleas for amendments to Article 9, advocating for the legal recognition of dual citizenship.

Examination & Advocacy Strategy

For UPSC and Judiciary Examinations:

1. Distinguish Between Article 9 and Other Citizenship Provisions: Clearly articulate that Article 9 creates an exception to the citizenship rights established in Articles 5, 6, and 8 for those who have voluntarily acquired foreign citizenship.
2. Emphasize the Voluntary Nature: Highlight that only voluntary acquisition of foreign citizenship triggers the disqualification under Article 9, not involuntary or automatic acquisition.
3. Connect with Constitutional Values: Discuss how Article 9 reflects the constitutional values of national unity and undivided allegiance in the post-independence context.

For Legal Advocacy:

1. Challenging Citizenship Denial: When representing clients denied citizenship under Article 9, focus on whether their acquisition of foreign citizenship was truly voluntary or was necessitated by circumstances.
2. Legislative Reform Arguments: When advocating for changes to citizenship laws, address the growing global trend toward accepting dual citizenship and the potential benefits of maintaining connections with the Indian diaspora.

Article 9 embodies India’s approach to citizenship as requiring singular allegiance, reflecting the constitutional framers’ vision of a unified nation with undivided loyalty from its citizens. While it has created challenges for the Indian diaspora, it continues to shape India’s citizenship framework and national identity.