Claim passport only travel document serious mistake and govt should apologize: Justice Madan Lokur

Claim passport only travel document serious mistake and government should apologize: Justice Madan Lokur, former Supreme Court Judge, to Karan Thapar for The Wire.

.........................................

One of India’s most highly regarded former Judges of the Supreme Court, who is presently Chairperson of the United Nations Internal Justice Council, says that the statement made by the government that an Indian passport is “only a travel document” and not proof of citizenship is “a serious mistake” and the government should apologize or, at least, clarify that this was an error.

Justice Lokur points out that The Passports Act of 1967 repeatedly refers to passports and travel documents thus clearly indicating that passports and travel documents are not the same thing but two different entities. He says that “passports are accepted (by the receiving country) because they embody the issuing state’s assertion that the bearer is one of its own nationals … when the Republic places its seal upon a passport it’s doing more than permitting international travel. It’s formally vouching for one of its own citizens before the world.” That’s the critical message an Indian passport embodies and conveys.

Justice Lokur also points out that if the government does not treat the Indian passport as proof of citizenship it could lead foreign embassies to deny visas to Indians until they can find some other way of proving their citizenship. This could create a major problem for Indian travellers and for those members of the Indian diaspora who retain Indian citizenship.

Finally, Justice Lokur points out that Section 20 of The Passports Act, which permits the government to issue a passport to a person who is not a citizen of India if that is deemed to be in the public interest, does not weaken the argument that passports are intended for citizens but actually strengthens it. As he says, this is the exception that proves the rule.

Justice Lokur also raises the question that if passports are deemed to be only travel documents then where does that leave diplomatic and official passports issued to ministers, government officials, ambassadors and, even, the Chief Justice of India and the Prime Minister of India? Are they just travel documents bearing a different colour and nothing more? If they are, on what grounds can ambassadors claim diplomatic immunity?