Patna: JD-U national president and Bihar chief minister Nitish Kumar on Friday evening indicated that the National Register for Citizens will not be implemented in Bihar, thereby adding to the mounting woes of the BJP which is facing large-scale protests on the two citizenship exercises – the CAA and the NCR.
"Kahe ka NRC (What NRC)?" Initially, this was Nitish’s seemingly cryptic response to a journalist's query, which revealed his mind on the subject.
Later, he was more forthcoming and said, ‘‘Bilkul nahi hoga" (absolutely not). He was asked whether NRC would be implemented in Bihar. He has, of course, contradicted his party's leader in the Rajya Sabha, RCP Singh, who had claimed the NRC would be implemented in the state.
But much water has flowed down the bridge since then. Party vice-presidents Prashant Kishore and Pawan Kumar Verma have advised Nitish against implementing the NRC, as it was against the party constitution and ideology. More important, it is likely to alienate the Muslim voters which Kishore is keen to wean away from the RJD-Cong combine.
KC Tyagi, party secretary general, also said NRC was not on the agenda of the JD-U and the party was not expected to adhere to the BJP pledge.
At least, three top Muslim leaders of the JD-U have opposed the NRC and the CAA thus far. Sources said the public outcry against the citizenship law and the NRC may have set Kumar thinking. That explains the change of heart.
TEN REBEL STATES
With 10 non-BJP chief ministers stating categorically that they would not allow the implementation of the Citizenship Amendment Act or the National Register of Citizens in their states, dissent has spread to 274 of Lok Sabha’s seats 543 or one out of every two parliamentary constituencies in the country.
Of these, the largest states, in terms of their representation in the lower House, are Maharashtra and West Bengal. The Shiv Sena voted in favour of the Bill in the Lok Sabha and walked out in the Rajya Sabha but Chief Minister Uddhav Thackeray has said the party would wait for the outcome of the petitions filed in the Supreme Court against the amended Act before deciding on the implementation in Maharashtra.
