[ad_1]
The possible repeal of the Karnataka Freedom of Religion Act, 2021, enacted under the BJP-led Basavaraj Bommai government, has created a political firestorm. Repeal of the law was part of the congressional statement in the recently concluded House elections. Amidst the intense political rhetoric between Congress and the BJP, the complex issue of religious conversions in India has never found the serious attention it deserves.
It would be reckless to say that the religious conversion debate is paranoia created by the BJP or other right-wing organisations. This issue may be politically exploited, but it is not newly created. A cursory glance at the history of India is enough to prove the existence of this puzzling issue before and after independence.
Indeed, the issue of religious conversion throughout the world dominated the nineteenth and twentieth centuries. For example, the colonial government in British India enacted various laws to facilitate the conversion of Hindus to Islam or Christianity. While it was a crime to deny the “truth of Christianity” in England, you could easily deny the truth of any other religion in India and it would not be a crime.
During the colonial era, missionaries were given easy access and fault lines were deepened in Hindu society to aid religious conversion. The conflict is evident from Mahatma Gandhi’s statement when he said, “If I had the power and could legislate, the first thing I would ban were conversions.” Or Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel’s statement that it was known “that there were mass conversions, conversions by force, conversions by coercion and undue influence”.
After India gained freedom, a series of legislative measures ensured the “regulation” of religious conversions. SC/ST communities lose their reservation and special status once they convert to another religion. The anti-conversion laws enacted by the various state governments serve as a much harsher deterrent. Madhya Pradesh and Odisha were the first few states to enact such laws.
The issue of religious conversion is further complicated by the lack of a unified civil law. The moment a person converts, they are governed by a set of personal laws that may be uncodified or customary in nature. There is much debate and ambiguity about the formalities required for religious conversions in India.
Anti-conversion laws: misplaced priorities
The new anti-conversion laws suffer from serious problems. A person can be a plaintiff, a disproportionate burden on the accused to deny forced conversions or posit marriage as an incentive to conversion, unless proven otherwise—all of these aspects of the new anti-conversion laws make them an instrument of harassment.
The platform will fail to achieve the goal it was set out to achieve in the first place. Much like the Dowry Prohibition Act, which despite good intentions failed to achieve the social objective. With a broken mechanism overburdened, it is questionable how far welfare-driven legislation can achieve its goals.
The absence of empirical data or any study of religious conversions, the lack of broad guidelines on the issue and the vagueness of the formalities required for conversions make the issue a fertile ground for political opportunism.
The current Union government has taken a strong position on the issue of religious shifts in the political narrative but has failed to form any adequate study for collecting empirical data. There was a request for a law at the national level on this issue, but the request did not find the required political momentum.
Constituent Assembly and Religious Conversions
The Constituent Assembly debated whether an anti-conversion clause should be included in the Constitution. She seriously considered banning religious conversions through fraudulent means, including physical inducements, and the use of schools and hospitals to aid the process. After much discussion and debate, the issue was left to the legislature. Conversions or forced religious conversions through inducements would not be allowed in independent India it was clear to the framers of the constitution.
The new anti-conversion laws that emerged from various state governments in the 1960s were not without context. Rather, there is a constitutional history that led to these laws. Any state government may decide to repeal or enact such laws, but the issue of religious conversion is not of the making of modern times.
In the absence of a national law, differences and anomalies appear in the laws published by the states. Like in Karnataka, a change of government may also lead to the repeal of these laws.
Political immaturity and stark societal tones have made it impossible for us to have a reasoned discussion about religious conversions. The absence of national law and any empirical data only adds to the absurdity.
[ad_2]
