2021 STATELESSNESS AND THE CITIZENSHIP AMENDMENT ACT, 2019 161 tions which run contrary to the “conventional wisdom”24 that plurality in India has flourished – what does it mean to be Indian? What binds India together as a nation?25 This paper explores the conceptual framework of Indian citizenship law and its conflation with the immigration regime in recent years. In particular, it finds that the category of “illegal migrant” in citizenship and immigration law has been the most contentious development, since it infuses a jus sanguinis character in Indian citizenship, and either exacerbates statelessness or prevents stateless persons like Sri Lankan Tamils from accessing Indian citizenship. In this backdrop, this paper finds that formal citizenship continues to remain the determinative tool in accessing rights for Sri Lankan Tamils in Indian refugee camps, echoing Hannah Arendt’s prophecy of citizenship being the “right to have rights”. With the significance of formal citizenship in mind, this paper explores pathways to Indian citizenship for Sri Lankan Tamils, and also provides a forward-looking conception of Indian citizenship. The first section has a twofold intent: it provides a conceptual backdrop to statelessness and links it with Hannah Arendt’s ‘right to rights’; and studies the history behind Sri Lankan Tamils’ exodus from Sri Lanka and into India to seek refuge. The second section provides a framework of Indian citizenship laws, and investigates the tension between the jus soli and jus sanguinis bases of Indian citizenship. In particular, this tension is explored through amendments that make Indian citizenship contingent on the fact that the applicant is not an “illegal migrant”. Next, this section tries to scrutinise if the influence of jus sanguinis in Indian citizenship law has caused the right to have rights to become true for Sri Lankan Tamil refugees. 24 25 com/2020/04/the-idea-of-india-and-a-transition-toward-violent-exclusionary-nationalism/> accessed 28 July 2021. Gurharpal Singh, ‘Reassessing “Conventional Wisdom”: Ethnicity, Ethnic Conflict, and India as an Ethnic Democracy’ in Sanjib Baruah (ed), Ethnic Conflict in India (OUP 2012). Bhatia and others (n 1); Jayal (n 23); Sunil Khilnani, The Idea of India (Penguin India 1997); Pratap Bhanu Mehta, The Burden of Democracy (Penguin Random House 2017); Pranab Bardhan, ‘Attempts are Being made to Dismantle the Pluralistic Ideas of India that are a Legacy of Gandhi and Tagore’ (The Indian Express, 12 October 2019) <https://indianexpress.com/article/opinion/columns/un-civic-nationalism-identity-politics-society-development-hindu-rashtra-ambedkar-6064961/> accessed 28 July 2021; Swati Chawla and others, ‘Who is a Citizen in Contemporary India?’ (EpiCenter, 11 February 2020) <https://epicenter. wcfia.harvard.edu/blog/who-citizen-contemporary-india> accessed 28 July 2021; Manash Firaq Bhattacharjee, ‘India is Losing the Promise of Inclusivity’ (The Indian Express, 13 December 2019) <https://indianexpress.com/article/opinion/columns/indian-citizenship-amendment-bill-nrc-6164215/> accessed 28 July 2021; Niraja Gopal Jayal, ‘The 2016 Citizenship Amendment Bill Consolidates a Trend Towards a Majoritarian and Exclusionary Concept of Indian Citizenship’ (The Caravan, 20 February 2017) <https://caravanmagazine.in/vantage/2016-citizenship-amendment-bill-majoritarian-exclusionary> accessed 28 July 2021.