Conversion
brings a drive to learn. – Henry B. Eyring
India is the world’s second-most populous country in the world. And the country known for its unity in diversity. India is the home of people with different caste, color, religion etc. In spite of a rich tradition and legal framework supportive of freedom of conscience and the right to practice, profess, and promote the religion of one’s choice, religious minorities in India find themselves frequent victims of religiously motivated violence. The Preamble of the Indian Constitution says that India is a secular country. The Constitution of India further provides the freedom of practicing any religion peacefully and harmoniously without hurting the religious sentiments of the people of other religion as a fundamental right. This is the reason why India is well known for its “Unity in Diversity”. People are allowed to select the religion of their choice in the nation. People are allowed to opt for religion in which they are not born. The Indian Constitution provides for freedom of religion, and the supporters of anti-conversion laws believe that they help to promote religious freedom by protecting people from forced conversion. Those against anti-conversion laws believe that the laws infringe on the fundamental rights to freedom of religion because they prevent people from being able to convert to a religion of their choice.
There are various reasons for which people do convert their religion like:
1. Voluntary Conversions i.e. conversions by free choice or because of change of beliefs.
2. Forceful Conversions i.e. conversions by coercion, undue influence or inducement.
3. Marital Conversions i.e. conversions due to marriage.
4. Conversion for convenience.
Anti-conversion
laws have a long history in India. Many princely states enacted
them in the early 1930s. In the 1980s some states enforced anti-conversion laws
primarily against Muslims. Since the late 1990s these states have begun to
enforce these laws against Christians. Anti-conversion laws have arisen from a
long history of religious activity in India. These laws were first seen during
British colonial period, although the government did not promulgate any
anti-conversion laws. However, Hindu princely states enacted them during the
British missionaries. Many states, during the colonial period, enacted such
laws in order to stop people from changing their religion from Hindu to some
other religion like Christianity. The attempt was to increase the population of
Hindu followers in India.
Since
decades the Country had faced various issues of forceful conversion. Ex. - The
Portuguese practiced religious persecution in Goa, India in the 16th and 17th
centuries. The natives of Goa, most of them Hindus, were subjected to severe
torture and oppression by the zealous Portuguese rulers and missionaries, and
forcibly converted to Christianity[1]. In an invasion of the Kashmir valley (1015),
Mahmud of Ghazni plundered the valley, took many prisoners, and carried out
conversions to Islam.[2] In
his later campaigns, in Mathura, Baran, and Kanauj, again, many conversions took
place. Those soldiers who surrendered to him were converted to Islam. In Bara
(Bulandshahr) alone 10,000 persons were converted to Islam including the king[3]. And
recently in the year 2016, the Ghar Wapsi of the Musahars (rat eaters) for
conversion was arranged by senior BJP leader and BJP member of Lok Sabha from
Buxar, Ashwini Kumar Chaubey.
The acute attention to the issue of religious freedom
in India was brought by the newly elected government in the year 2014. The PM
suggested that the creation of national law could help prevent forcible
religious conversions, according to a national spokesman of the BJP.
Currently, the laws are in force in eight of our twenty-eight states: Odisha
(1967), Madhya Pradesh (1968), Himachal
Pradesh (2006), Arunachal Pradesh (1978),
Chhattisgarh (2000), Gujarat
(2003), Jharkhand (2017)
and Uttrakhand (2018).There are variations between
the laws in the Indian states also they are very similar in their structure and
content. The main aim of the loss is to
prevent a person from converting or attempting to convert either directly or
indirectly, through forcible or
fraudulent means or allurement or inducement. This also includes the threat of
divine displeasure or social
ex-communication. The key difference between Gujarat and Chhattisgarh is that a person wishing to convert must seek permission
from the district magistrate at least thirty days before the date of the intended conversion. Where in Himachal Pradesh,
a person who wants to convert must notify
the magistrate thirty days in advance that they intend to do so. In Odisha and
Madhya Pradesh the laws were enacted in
the 1960s, almost four decades before the other states. And no prior permission on the notification is required, in
Madhya Pradesh the magistrate must be informed once the conversion has taken place. The requirement to tell a magistrate
about the intention to convert is divisive. The
BJP in 2014 favored this requirement and said that it reduces the likelihood of
voluntary converts changing this story
down the line to say that they were forced. GVL Narasimha Rao national spokesperson for the BJP said that, this is
what happened in wrestling conversions in Agra where a group of Muslims said they had been forced to profess Hinduism.
Mr. Rao said “If anyone voluntarily wants
to convert, what is the problem with giving intimation to the magistrate?” The
problem in this situation is that some
magistrates under pressure from hardline Hindu groups might prohibit any conversions from Hinduism but be unlikely to
act as against radical groups who are forcing non-Hindus to convert to Hinduism.
India
is an officially secular nation; it has a long tradition of religious
tolerance. Which is with periodic and sometimes with serious lapses that is
protected under the constitution of India. The constitutionality of anti-conversion laws cannot be decided on
Article 25 only. Article 25 provides freedom of conscience and free profession, practice and propagation
of religion. Article 25 can be interpreted to allow and disallow the anti-conversion law.
In
the leading case of Rev. Stainislaus v. State of Madhya Pradesh[4], a
Catholic priest (Father Stanislaus), who had been convicted of forcible
conversion, challenged the Madhya Pradesh anti-conversion law on the basis that
it was unconstitutional as the state legislature did not have the competence to
pass the law. The High Court (hereinafter HC) of Madhya Pradesh found the
anti-conversion law unconstitutional. The case went to the Supreme Court
(hereinafter SC) in an appeal and the Court observed that “It has to be
remembered that Article 25(1) guarantees freedom of conscience to every
citizen, and not merely followers of one particular religion and that, in turn,
postulates that there is no fundamental right to convert another person to
one’s own religion because if a person purposely undertakes the conversion of
another person to his religion, as distinguished from his effort to transmit or
spread the tenets of his religion, that would impinge on the freedom of conscience
guaranteed to all the citizens of the country alike.”
The court relied on Ratilal v. State of Bombay[5]
for a distinction between conversion and propagation simply for the
edification of others. It was observed that “Whatever else might be said about
these bills and their treatment by the SC, they at least present a constriction
upon religion as constitutionally understood.[6]”
Heiner Bielefeldt, the United Nations Special
Rapporteur on freedom of religion or belief from 2010 to 2016, devoted a report
to the issue of conversion because violations of the right to convert have
“become a human rights problem of great concern[7].”
State BJP parties and other nationalist
groups, such as Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS), continue to tout anti-conversion
laws, which in India are called “Freedom of Religion” Acts. Hindu nationalists’ the stated rationale for anti-conversion laws is that Christians and Muslims are
using coercion to convert vulnerable Hindus in the lowest castes, also known as
Dalits or Untouchables. Nationalists also have cited the need to “protect the
cultural identity of tribal communities of the country.”
Despite this recognition of freedom of
religion, India has been plagued by religious violence and intolerance,
especially since the late 1990s. Christian groups have documented numerous
attacks against Christians. One group estimates there is nearly one case of
anti-Christian violence every day[8].Another
has determined that 133 cases
of targeted violence occurred in the first half of 2016, as compared to 147 and
177 cases in 2014 and 2015, respectively. In the state of Odisha (formerly
known as Orissa) in 2008, radical Hindus instigated riots against the Christian
minority that resulted in the deaths of 100 people, the destruction of 300
churches and 6,000 homes, and the displacement of 50,000 people. In U.P a boy named Raju Prasad was bitten by
Bajrang Dal workers on suspicion of conversion in the Kashiram Colony of
Kanpur.
According to a 31 pages report prepared by
Human Rights Commission in the year 1999 titled Politics by Other Means: Attacks Against Christians in India it was
contended that the Indian Government had failed to control the attacks on the
Christians and is exploiting communal tensions for political ends. This was
after the victory of BJP in 1999. Attacks against Christians throughout the country have increased
significantly since the BJP began its rule at the center in March 1998. They
include the killings of priests, the raping of nuns, and the physical
destruction of Christian institutions, schools, churches, colleges, and
cemeteries. Thousands of Christians have also been forced to convert to
Hinduism. The report concludes that as with attacks against Muslims in 1992 and
1993, attacks against Christians are part of a concerted campaign of right-wing
Hindu organizations, collectively called the Sangh Parivar, to promote and
exploit communal clashes to increase their political power ends. "Christians are
the new scapegoat in India's political battles," said Smita Narula, author
of the report and researcher for the Asia division of Human Rights Watch.
"Without immediate and decisive action by the government, communal
tensions will continue to be exploited for political and economic ends[9].
In
2020 report of US Commission for International Religious Freedom (USCIRF) has
downgraded India to the lowest ranking and has put India into the list of
“Country of particular concern”. India was categorized as a Tier-II country in
the last year’s listing but this year the position of India had degraded to be
placed in this category since 2004 due to the various movements in the country
since the last year. This report may also affect the relationship between India
and the US[10].
The countries were significant religious freedom violations occur are added in
the Tier 2 country list.
A decline in religious freedom came about with religiously divisive campaigning
during the 2014 general election season, and with the national victory of the
Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), which was already in power in several states. The
BJP has as its official ideology “Hindutva,” or Hindu nationalism, with the
goal of India as a Hindu state with Hindu values. As a result, there has been a
significant increase in administrative restrictions and curtailing of civil
liberties, and religious minorities have suffered further attacks and forced
conversions by Hindu nationalists. With the BJP in power, minority religious
communities have seen a decrease in their ability to practice their religions
freely.
Any person can convert his or her religion with
good faith. A mere declaration whether oral or in writing does not amount to
conversion. Credible evidence of the intention to convert followed by definite
overt acts to give effect to that intention is necessary[11].
At the time of drafting the constitution there were extensive debates regarding the
personal law. Country like India where there is hundreds of religion it was a
big step to even think about making one law for whole nation. Unlike CrPC, CPC,
IPC and other laws the idea of making single law on personal laws is not easy.
But does that mean the state is taking away the guaranteed rights of Article
25? Or this is anti-conversion law?
A
long debate is still going on.
Certainly
the founding fathers of our nation never wanted that anyone’s right to be taken
at any cost. But the formula for bringing up Uniform Civil Code (UCC) is far
different and it does not even relate to anti-conversion law. Under
UCC the idea to change someone’s religion is not present but because of certain
uncodified/codified law it is necessary that we must have some clear basics of
rights which are not present in personal law or customs also. The landmark
example of one nation one law is section 125 of CrPC which deals with
maintenance. Before this provision in the Muslim personal law there was no
provision for maintenance after the dissolution of marriage and it has affected
so many women, children, and dependent parents.
So the question is does that provision made anyone change their religion? The answer is no but it rightly gave the idea to not follow such customs and practices which may harm someone’s life or right.
Conversion of religion forcefully is a criminal practice but UCC is to keep everyone equal so that no one faces any type of inequality because of their personal laws. The idea of two, therefore, is far more different from each other. And it’s time that we do not use UCC as a source of destruction in the process of anti-conversion. Where religion is at topmost the Humanity should not lack behind in the name of religion.
by----
Shubham Singh and Surbhi Kumari, 2nd-year law students at the Institute of Chartered Financial Analysts of India University(ICFAI), Dehradun, both are currently pursuing B.A.LL.B.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
REFERENCES:
[1] The Goa Inquisition, Being a Quatercentenary Commemoration Study of the Inquisition in India by Anant Priolkar, Bombay University Press
[2] Ramesh Chandra Majumdar
(1951). The History and Culture of the Indian People: The struggle for empire.
p. 12
[3] Catherine B. Asher. India 2001: Reference Encyclopedia, Volume 1.
South Asia Publications. p. 29.
[4] A.I.R. 1977 S.C. 908.
[5] A.I.R. 1954 S.C. 391
[6] Robert D. Baird,
Traditional Values, Governmental Values, and Religious Conflict in
Contemporary
India, 1998 BYU L. Rev. 337, 349-50 (1998).
[7] Heiner Bielefeldt (Special Rapporteur on freedom of religion or
belief),
Interim report of the Special
Rapporteur on freedom of religion or belief, ¶ 15, U.N. Doc.
A/67/303 (Aug. 13, 2012) [hereinafter
Bielefeldt, Right to convert].
[8] Anto Akkara, In India, one case of anti-Christian violence a day,
WORLD WATCH MONITOR (Jan. 21, 2016), https://www.worldwatchmonitor.org/2016
/01/4257104/; see also India – Not Safe to be Christian?, CATHOLIC FORUM REPORT
[9] Anti-Christian Violence on the Rise in India". Human Rights
Watch. 29 September 1999. Archived from the original on 11 February 2009.
[10] https://www.thehindu.com/news/national/uscirf-downgrades-india-in-2020-list/article31457624.ece
[11] 235th Law Commission Report on Conversion/ Reconversion to Another
Religion.
0 Comments