PHL_roadwarrior

How is this being enforced? (need to produce renunciation cert for visa renewal/entry to India....???)

I guess the issue here is not about the GoI suddenly wanting to start enforcing (retroactively) an old law, but more that of process (or lack thereof). For example a few OCI cards were processed in the last 2 months for some in my family. As part of the application, given the rather unclear "renunciation" instructions on the consulate's website, renunciation forms were duly filled in and sent in along with the original indian passports. One passport showed up with a "cancelled" stamp on it and another showed up without the cancelled stamp on it . One renunciation form just came back (no seal/sign/annotations....just the form as was sent in) and the other renunciation form didn't make it back at all!!!

That said, I wonder if the whole thing is a hoax given the disclaimer (at least on CG New York's website (http://www.indiacgny.org/): "Disclaimer: Consulate General of India, New York does not guarantee the accuracy and assumes no responsibility for the use of information available at this World Wide Web (WWW) site." !!!

oliver2002

The GoI is free to do whatever it wants as a sovereign country. Many gave their lives to make this possible.

However you can't make up rules retroactively and set up a framework that you know from experience the enforcing bodies will abuse and make life miserable for the majority. Most of these are just VFR tourists bringing in money to the country with no intention to abuse any privileges indian citizens enjoy (PIO and OCI took care of that).

The energy should be better spent in reforming the BoI and FRRO agencies that use MHA directive(s) only when it suits them. The capital India looses by dealing so casually with the topic is definitely worth saving.

rsh913

Pray tell why? The government is democratically elected and may do so what it judges to be best for the security of its borders and citizens. Secondly why is the government making the life miserable for a majority if indeed the majority is those who fail to read instructions on their passport and get them cancelled when pledging allegiance to a new country.


Perhaps most. But Not all. But security rules are never meant for the convenience of majority. It is always for the isolated idiot that we worry about.

All of us still take of our shoes when we go through a airport security line because of one idiot who was trying to show his IQ or lack there of.

rsh913

If you read the law it asks for more severe penalties.

"It is a punishable offence to obtain or hold an Indian Passport suppressing information about his/her nationality or hold Indian Passport or travel document after aquiring foreign citizenship. The violator shall be punishable by imprisonment up to 5 years and with fine up to US$ 1250/- under Passports Act 1967. The Penalty for each such travel to India on Indian Passport after acquiring foreign nationality is US$ 250/-. Please see the provisions in the Passports Act 1967."

http://chicago.indianconsulate.com/P..._13May2010.pdf

oliver2002

I seriously doubt anyone is travelling to india with an indian passport that should have been cancelled at the time they acquired the new citizenship.

@rsh913: I seriously doubt the new enforcement of the old rules is for the security of the country. If someone wants to enter the country that way, they will use a forged document with a clean background (or come via the sea and not even bother with the finer points of immigration)

Post 9/11 only the US went the extra mile to outdo itself with complicating immigration.

rsh913

Can you guarantee 100% compliance?

In any what GOI is saying is that while it is correct passport needs to be cancelled once the holder applies for a new citizenship if one wants a surrender certificate they need to pay the fee.

They also need to pay the fee if someone wants to use of a consular / visa service at a Indian Consular Mission.

If you never want to travel to india or more importantly you dont think you'd need access to a consular service for any visa etc. you are not being obliged to pay the fee much less get the surrender certificate.

GUWonder

The GOI cannot guarantee 100% compliance, and its the failure of the GOI in this regard that created this problem and is pushing the cost for failure upon the parties least responsible for the situation. The GOI have not even gotten all its involved MEA, MHA and BOI employees to place their ducks in an order to quack the same way for so long (and even today in many cases) -- that is why the retroactive changes in practice are so deserving of criticism.

... this would result in an extra-judicial, regulatory taking of property from citizens and/or former citizens and their families in many cases. I see no reason to defend such action regardless of who perpetrates such denial of the exercise of property rights.

Anyone not interested in furthering this petition is of course free to ignore the petition or even start up their own advocating for this retroactive change to remain. Certainly, the GOI is free to ignore this current petition as it wishes. I do suspect that there are many at senior levels of the Indian government who want to protect the property/inheritance rights of their own relatives and others looking forward to seizing the property and/or undermining the inheritance rights of other relatives. Other than that -- if even that -- this does nothing to secure India from violators of serious laws that more directly infringe upon the rights of others to be secure in their persons, property and effects.

GUWonder

Land and sea crossings continue to be pretty much an open door for the desperate who travel without passports and don't care much if at all about laws related to such. This retroactive change doesn't apply to them.

This is a money/property grab and unnecessary headache creator that really secures little to nothing beside a money/property grab.

oliver2002

While the topic of the petition is certainly worth submitting, I seriously doubt getting x thousand online 'signatures' on it will do anything to further the cause. I'm certain the GoI is not really bothered about the finer points of social media.

A decent approach would be to use the lobbying channels that produced the POI/OCI etc process.

abhilife2001

Its in the news now..
http://publication.samachar.com/pub_...41&nextIndex=2

oliver2002

Lol! It seems the 'correspondent' visited the consulate in NYC and extrapolated that this must be happening everywhere. Loved the 'irate hordes' comment

abhilife2001

But frankly.. the only problem I see is that GoI did not implement this strictly till now.. Rules were already there since ages, but they started strictly implementing it now..This does not mean IMHO we can say tht they cannot start doing it now, its not retrospective IMO since they saying if u want to travel in the future (prospectively), show me XXX...
Havent we seen rules in other much more developed countries being implemented more strictly after the happenning of some event related or unrelated to it ??

Just a example.. I know of someone who had a green card, was in the US till md 1980's.. came bak voluntarily to india, got married here , lives in india since that time.. had 2 back to back 10 yr multiple entry visas for US on which he travelled there on businss and pleasure multiple times without any violation.. the 2nd 10 yr visa expired last yr, when he went to apply for renewal , the US embassy in india rejected his application saying that he had done a xxx crime in US while he was there in the early 1980's ( he had a Green card then ) !!! Ofcourse they overlooked, that he was there for multiple times after voluntarily returning to India, travelled world over etc.. So can he shout or start online petition for this.. IMHO NO...

GUWonder

If he wants to start a petition, all the more power to him.

These current rules -- the rules causing the headaches that motivated people to further this petition now -- were not already there since ages.

Check the MEA and MHA archives. I'll bet that no one here or anywhere else can present evidence that these rules are rather old. They are new, they are not consistent and they are creating a mess. Only the law is not rather new, but the "rules" are not "ages" old.

abhilife2001

wht i understand from this thread and also what I read on the net is that the rules or the law were quite old, but only being strictly implemented now..

GUWonder

The laws applicable with regard to citizenship of India are nothing new (as they've been around for "ages"), but what is new are the rules in play now applicable to former citizens of India and the relatively growing consistency of the newer rules in play now.

This new way is part of what India gets when the MEA and -- more so -- MHA (and the other "security" related Indian government entities -- start considering the word from the US government to be sacrosanct gospel.