Overview · Why Citizenship Matters

In the world today, the state to which we belong gives us a collective political identity — we think of ourselves as Indians, Japanese, or Germans, depending on the state of which we are members. From that state we expect rights and protection wherever we travel. But the importance of full membership becomes most visible in its absence: think of the thousands of refugees^? and illegal migrants in the world who have the bad fortune to be denied membership of any state. They are not guaranteed rights, often live in precarious camps, and treat full membership of a state of their choice as a goal worth struggling for — as Palestinian refugees in the Middle East have done for decades. Citizenship, then, is not a small administrative detail; it is the door through which a person can claim almost every other right in the modern world.

6.1 Introduction — The Meaning of Citizenship

Citizenship^? has been defined as full and equal membership of a political community. In the contemporary world, states provide a collective political identity to their members as well as certain rights. Citizens, therefore, expect from their state a bundle of guarantees — and they expect help and protection wherever they may travel. The bundle differs from country to country, but in most democratic states today it includes a few political rights like the right to vote, a few civil rights like the freedom of speech or belief, and a set of socio-economic rights which could include the right to a minimum wage or the right to education. Equality of rights and status is the most basic right of citizenship.

6.1.1 The Importance of Membership — and Its Denial

The importance of full membership of a state can be appreciated only when we look at the condition of those who have been denied it. Across the world today, thousands of people are forced to live as refugees or illegal migrants because no state is willing to grant them membership. They have lost — or never had — the protection that membership ordinarily confers. They cannot legally work, educate their children, own property, vote, or even travel freely. For them, full membership of some state of their choice is a goal for which they are willing to struggle. The Palestinian refugees in the Middle East, displaced for generations, are perhaps the best-known example, but the world has many others — refugees in the Darfur region of Sudan, Burmese refugees, Bangladeshi refugees, refugees from civil wars in Asia and Africa.

6.1.2 Citizenship Is Won by Struggle, Not Granted as a Gift

Each of the rights now enjoyed by citizens has been won after struggle. Some of the earliest struggles were fought by people to assert their independence and rights against powerful monarchies. Many European countries witnessed such struggles, some of them violent — like the French Revolution in 1789. In the colonies of Asia and Africa, demands for equal citizenship became part of the struggle for independence from colonial rule. In South Africa, the black African population had to undertake a long struggle against the ruling white minority for equal citizenship — a struggle that continued until the early 1990s. And struggles for full membership and equal rights continue even now in many parts of the world. In India, the women's movement and the dalit movement^? have sought to change public opinion by drawing attention to needs and to influence government policy so that equal rights and opportunities become a lived reality, not just words on paper.

6.1.3 Citizen-to-Citizen Obligations

Citizenship is, however, about much more than the relationship between states and their members. It is also about citizen-to-citizen relations — and it involves certain obligations of citizens to each other and to the society. These would include not just the legal obligations imposed by states (paying taxes, obeying laws) but also a moral obligation to participate in, and to contribute to, the shared life of the community. Citizens are also considered to be the inheritors and trustees of the culture and natural resources of the country — the next generation will inherit what we hand on, for good or ill.

6.2 Full and Equal Membership — Insiders and Outsiders

What does full and equal membership really mean? If you have ever travelled in a crowded railway compartment or bus, you will know how those who fought one another to enter, once inside, suddenly discover a shared interest in keeping others out! A division quickly develops between "insiders" and "outsiders", with outsiders being seen as a threat. Similar processes take place from time to time in cities, regions, and even at the level of the nation as a whole.

If jobs, facilities like medical care or education, and natural resources like land or water are limited, demands may be made to restrict entry to outsiders even though they may be fellow citizens. You may remember the slogan "Mumbai for Mumbaikars" which expressed exactly this feeling. Many similar struggles have taken place in different parts of India and the world. So we must ask: Does full and equal membership mean that citizens should enjoy equal rights and opportunities wherever in the country they may decide to live, study or work? Does it mean that all citizens, rich or poor, should enjoy certain basic rights and facilities? In this section we focus on the first question.

6.2.1 Freedom of Movement and Migration

One of the rights granted to citizens in our country, and in many others, is freedom of movement. This right is of particular importance for workers. Labour tends to migrate in search of jobs when opportunities are not available near home. Some people may even travel outside the country in search of work. Markets for skilled and unskilled workers have developed in different parts of India. I.T. workers may flock to towns like Bangalore. Nurses from Kerala may be found all over the country. The booming building industry in cities attracts workers from different parts of the country, as do infrastructure projects like road-making.

However, resistance often builds up among local people against jobs going to people from outside the area, sometimes at lower wages. Demands may develop to restrict certain jobs to those who belong to the state, or those who know the local language. Political parties may take up the issue. Resistance can even take the form of organised violence against "outsiders". Almost every region of India has experienced such movements. The chapter asks pointedly: Are such movements ever justified?

We become indignant if Indian workers in other countries are ill-treated by the local population. Some of us may also feel that skilled and educated workers have the right to migrate. States may even be proud of their ability to attract such workers. But if jobs are scarce in a region, local residents may resent competition from outsiders. Does the right to freedom of movement include the right to live or work in any part of the country? Another factor: there may be a difference between our response to poor migrants and to skilled migrants. We may not always be as welcoming to poor migrants who move into our areas as we may be to skilled and affluent workers. This raises a sharp question — should poor and unskilled workers have the same right to live and work anywhere as do skilled workers?

6.2.2 Resolving Disputes — The Right to Protest

Disputes may arise even in democratic societies. How should they be resolved? The right to protest is an aspect of the freedom of expression guaranteed to citizens in our Constitution — provided protest does not harm the life or property of other people or the state. Citizens are free to try and influence public opinion and government policy by forming groups, holding demonstrations, using the media, appealing to political parties, or approaching the courts. The courts may give a decision on the matter, or may urge the government to address the issue. It may be a slow process, but varying degrees of success are sometimes possible.

If the guiding principle of providing full and equal membership to all citizens is kept in mind, it should be possible to arrive at an acceptable solution. A basic principle of democracy is that such disputes should be settled by negotiation and discussion rather than by force. This is one of the obligations of citizenship.

6.3 Equal Rights — Citizenship, Equality and the Urban Poor

Are political rights enough? Or does full and equal membership mean that all citizens, rich or poor, should be guaranteed certain basic rights and a minimum standard of living by the state? To explore this question the chapter focuses on one set of citizens: the urban poor. Dealing with the problem of the poor in towns is one of the most urgent challenges before any government today.

6.3.1 Slum-Dwellers and the City

There is a large population of slum-dwellers and squatters in every Indian city. Although they may do necessary and useful work, often at low wages, they are often viewed as unwelcome visitors by the rest of the town population. They may be blamed for straining city resources, or for spreading crime and disease. Conditions in slums are often shocking — many people may be crammed into small rooms with no private toilets, running water or sanitation. Life and property are insecure in a slum.

And yet slum-dwellers make a significant contribution to the urban economy through their labour. They may be hawkers, petty traders, scavengers, domestic workers, plumbers or mechanics. Small businesses such as cane-weaving, textile printing, or tailoring also develop in slums. The city probably spends relatively little on providing slum-dwellers with services such as sanitation or water supply. Awareness of the condition of the urban poor is growing — among governments, NGOs, and among the slum-dwellers themselves. A national policy on urban street vendors was framed in January 2004: there are lakhs of street vendors in our cities, and they often face harassment from police and town authorities. The policy was intended to provide recognition and regulation, so that vendors could continue their profession without harassment provided they obeyed government regulations.

6.3.2 T. H. Marshall — Citizenship, Equality and Three Kinds of Rights

Citizenship is not merely a legal concept. It is also closely tied to the larger ideas of equality and rights. A widely accepted formulation of this relationship was provided by the British sociologist T. H. Marshall (1893–1981). In his book Citizenship and Social Class (1950), Marshall defined citizenship as "a status bestowed on those who are full members of a community. All who possess the status are equal with respect to the rights and duties with which the status is endowed." The key concept in his formulation is equality, and it implies two things: (i) the quality of the rights and duties improves over time, and (ii) the quantity of people upon whom they are bestowed grows.

Marshall saw social class as a "system of inequality". Citizenship, he argued, ensures equality by countering the divisive effects of class hierarchy. It thus facilitates the creation of a better-integrated and more harmonious community. The point matters for the urban poor: even when a slum-dweller possesses a voter's identity card and a constitutional right to vote, the absence of social rights — basic shelter, sanitation, schooling — can hollow out his political rights. Marshall's lesson is that civil, political and social rights together are needed to make equal citizenship real.

6.3.3 Marginalised Groups — Tribal People and Forest Dwellers

Slum-dwellers are also becoming aware of their rights and are beginning to organise to demand them. They have sometimes even approached the courts. Even a basic political right like the right to vote can be difficult for them to exercise — to be included in the list of voters a fixed address is required, and squatters and pavement-dwellers may find it difficult to provide this.

Among other groups becoming marginalised^? in our society are tribal people and forest dwellers. These people depend on access to forests and other natural resources to maintain their way of life. Many of them face threats because of the pressure of growing populations and the search for land and resources to maintain them. Pressures from commercial interests wanting to mine the resources in forests or coasts pose another threat to their way of life and livelihood, as does the tourist industry. Governments are struggling with the question of how to protect these people and their habitat without endangering the development of the country. This is an issue that affects all citizens, not just tribal people.

To ensure equal rights and opportunities for all citizens cannot be a simple matter for any government. Different groups may have different needs and problems, and the rights of one group may sometimes conflict with the rights of another. Equal rights for citizens need not mean uniform policies for all people — since different groups have different needs. If the purpose is not just to make policies that apply in the same way to all, but to make people more equal, the different needs and claims of people would have to be taken into account when framing policies. Changes in the world situation, the economy, and society demand new interpretations of the meaning and rights of citizenship. The formal laws regarding citizenship are only the starting point — the interpretation of laws is constantly evolving.

6.4 Citizen and Nation — The Indian Constitution and Inclusive Citizenship

The concept of the nation state^? evolved in the modern period. One of the earliest assertions about the sovereignty^? of the nation state and the democratic rights of citizens was made by the revolutionaries in France in 1789. Nation states claim that their boundaries define not just a territory but also a unique culture and shared history. The national identity may be expressed through symbols like a flag, national anthem, national language, or certain ceremonial practices.

6.4.1 Inclusive vs Exclusive National Identities

Most modern states include people of different religions, languages, and cultural traditions. The national identity of a democratic state is supposed to provide citizens with a political identity that can be shared by all members of the state. Democratic states usually try to define their identity to be as inclusive as possible — that is, to allow all citizens to identify themselves as part of the nation. But in practice, most countries tend to define their identity in a way that makes it easier for some citizens to identify with the state than others. It may also make it easier for the state to extend citizenship to some people and not to others. This would be as true of the United States, which prides itself on being a country of immigrants, as it is of any other country.

France, for instance, claims to be both secular and inclusive. It includes not only people of European origin but also citizens who originally came from other areas such as North Africa. Culture and language are important features of its national identity, and all citizens are expected to assimilate into it in the public aspects of their lives. They may, however, retain their personal beliefs and practices in their private lives. This may seem reasonable, but it is not always simple to define what is public and what is private — this has given rise to controversies. Religious belief is supposed to belong to the private sphere, but sometimes religious symbols and practices may enter public life. You may have heard of demands by Sikh school boys in France to wear the turban to school, and of Muslim girls to wear the head-scarf with their school uniforms. These were disallowed by some schools on the ground that they involved bringing religious symbols into the public sphere of state education. Those whose religions did not demand such practices naturally did not face the same problem. Assimilation into the national culture would be easier for some groups than for others.

6.4.2 Criteria for Granting Citizenship — Variety Across States

The criteria for granting citizenship to new applicants varies from country to country. In countries such as Israel or Germany, factors like religion or ethnic origin may be given priority when granting citizenship. In Germany there has been a persistent demand from Turkish workers — who were at one time encouraged to come and work in Germany — that their children, born and brought up in Germany, should automatically be granted citizenship. This is still being debated. These are only a few examples of the kinds of restrictions that may be placed on citizenship even in democratic countries that pride themselves on being inclusive.

6.4.3 The Indian Constitution — A Unique Experiment in Inclusion

India defines itself as a secular, democratic, nation state. The movement for independence was a broad-based one, and deliberate attempts were made to bind together people of different religions, regions and cultures. The Partition of the country in 1947, when differences with the Muslim League could not be resolved, only strengthened the resolve of Indian leaders to maintain the secular and inclusive character of the nation state they were committed to build. This resolve was embodied in the Constitution.

The Indian Constitution attempted to accommodate a remarkably diverse society. It attempted to provide full and equal citizenship to groups as different as the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes, many women who had not previously enjoyed equal rights, some remote communities in the Andaman and Nicobar islands who had had little contact with modern civilisation, and many others. It also tried to find a place for the different languages, religions and practices found in different parts of the country. It had to provide equal rights to all without forcing anyone to give up their personal beliefs, languages or cultural practices. This was therefore a unique experiment, undertaken through the Constitution. The Republic Day parade in Delhi symbolises the attempt of the state to include people of different regions, cultures and religions.

6.4.4 Citizenship as a Project, Not a Finished Fact

Even such inclusive provisions have given rise to struggles and controversies. The women's movement, the dalit movement, and the struggles of people displaced by development projects represent only a few of the struggles being waged by people who feel they are being denied full rights of citizenship. The experience of India indicates that democratic citizenship in any country is a project, an ideal to work towards. New issues are constantly raised as societies change, and new demands are made by groups who feel they are being marginalised. In a democratic state these demands have to be negotiated. Citizenship, in other words, is an ongoing achievement — never quite finished.