offered to those communities who have historically been forcibly (and unlawfully) expelled from their ‘country of origin’. 71 When one considers the history of the Indian partition that the ‘Statement of Objects’ seeks to associate the CAA with, Muslims of ‘Indian Origin’ were the largest population group to be forcibly expelled (on account of large-scale ethno-religious violence or threats thereof) from Indian territory into the territories of present day Pakistan and Bangladesh. 72 Furthermore, it is notable that subsequent attempts by Muslims of ‘Indian Origin’ to return home in the aftermath of said partition violence were obstructed by the promulgation of legislation, including The Immigrants (Expulsion from Assam) Act, 1950. 73 D Legitimate End? Rationale/Justification: Minorities Protection? 46. From the ‘Statement of Objects’ one also gleans an additional justification in terms of the CAA operating as legislation to protect religious minorities in India’s neighboring countries. 74 One finds that it is specifically the protection of religious minorities, as against those identifying as belonging to the majority religious denomination (which happens to be Islam, in the case of Pakistan, Afghanistan, and Bangladesh), that grounds the distinction made in terms of limiting the CAA’s beneficiaries from including Muslims. 47. In this regard, much like how this measure for protection is under-protective when it comes to refugee protection, it is also under-protective when it comes to minority protection, in that it leaves out very significant populations who may fear persecution as religious minorities in these named states (for example Ahmadis, who, while they are categorized as Muslims in India, as per constitutional amendments in Pakistan, are defined as not being Muslims, and are not permitted to self-refer as Muslims). 75 48. Furthermore, when it comes to international minority protection, international law has consistently emphasized the need to prevent international conflict and preserve international peace and security through ensuring the protection of minority 71 See Long, The Point of No Return (n 67). While, on the other hand, Hindus and Sikhs were similarly forcibly expelled into the territory of India from Pakistan. See Vazira Fazila-Yacoobali Zamindar, The Long Partition and the making of Modern South Asia: Refugees, Boundaries, Histories, (Columbia University Press, 2007); Yasmin Khan, The Great Partition: The Making of India and Pakistan, (Yale University Press, New Edition, 2017). 73 It is notable that said legislation was cited as a supportive historical precedent by lawmakers seeking the passage of the CAA in the Indian parliament. See Ram Madhav, ‘Citizenship Amendment Bill continues the long tradition of welcoming persecuted minorities’, Indian Express, (online, 12 December 2019) <https://indianexpress.com/article/opinion/columns/a-law-that-includes-citizenship-amendment-bill6160580/>. 74 The ‘Statement of Objects’ (n 44) formulates said need for protection in terms of a response to purported violations of rights of minorities protected under Article 27 of the ICCPR (without actually citing said Article). 75 Constitution (Second Amendment) Act 1974 (Constitution of Pakistan). See Naveeda Khan, ‘Inheriting Iqbal: The Law and the Ahmadi Question’, in Naveeda Khan, Muslim Becoming: Aspiration and Scepticism in Pakistan (Duke University Press, 2012) 91. This practice of religious persecution prominently also includes other minority sects deemed to be ‘deviant’, including the Shi’a. See Zaman, ‘Religious Minorites and the Anxieties of an Islamic Identity’, in Muhammad Qasim Zaman, Islam in Pakistan: A History (Princeton University Press, 2018) 164. 72 15