The anti-conversion bill passed by the BJP
govt in Rajasthan may pose a threat to minorities.
The Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) government in Rajasthan introduced and
passed a new anti-conversion bill on March 20. While the move can send
chills down the spine of religious minorities and secularists, there
are reasons to have a positive outlook.
The state government introduced the Rajasthan Dharam Swatantrya
(Religious Freedom) Bill of 2008 to supersede the bill of 2006, which
was objected to by the state Governor and is now pending before the
President. Though not declared, it is common knowledge that the
proposed law targets Christians despite the fact that there are only
72,660 Christians out of the total population of more than 56 million
in Rajasthan (2001 Census), and there is no proven case of conversion
by unfair means. After all, such a law helps the BJP reinforce its
unfounded propaganda that Christian missionaries use money and force to
convert people and the party can “save” Hinduism and Hindus.
Wait and watch
What must be done to counter the divisive move? The answer is simple.
Wait for the BJP to have its way in implementing it.
Courts cannot admit a plea challenging the legitimacy of a bill until
it is given assent to by the Governor and its rules are framed and
notified. The sooner it becomes a law the better it is. For,
apprehensions will continue to loom large as long as it remains dormant
– which is the case in Gujarat and Arunachal Pradesh.
The proposed law is likely to fall flat on its face. For, certain
clauses of the fresh bill are clearly arbitrary. For instance, Section
4(2) states that even if a society or trust is found to be
“contemplating” the use of money for “conversion,” its registration
shall be liable to be cancelled. Since the word “contemplate” is not
defined in the bill, it is deemed to take the dictionary meaning.
The Oxford dictionary says it means “to look at thoughtfully” or “think
about”. Now, how can a court decide if an organisation is “thinking”
about conversion? However, it’s a safe bet that numerous complaints
will be lodged against christian organisations since it is left to the
discretion of the state government.
It was not long ago that the Vasundhara Raje government targeted the
Emmanuel Missions International (EMI) in Kota district. Besides
arresting several people connected with the EMI, the local
administration cancelled all its registered societies, including an
orphanage home, and froze their bank accounts in 2006. In fact,
Rajasthan does not need a special law to curb “conversions,” but to
protect the minuscule community, which also witnessed with horror a
brutal attack on priest Walter Masih on April 29 last year.
Another new insertion, Section 5(1), is equally elusive. It makes it
mandatory for anyone “intending” to convert to send a notice of the
“intention” at least 30 days in advance, failing which the person can
be fined up to Rs 1,000. This clause raises the question – without
answering it – if conversion can be planned. Conversion is defined in
the bill as “renouncing one’s own religion and adopting another”.
Last laugh
Now, what is religion? In Ratilal Parachand Gandhi vs State of Bombay
(AIR 1958 Bombay), the judge opined that “religion is that which binds
a man with his creator…” which means it is a personal and inner matter.
Then why can’t a religious belief be accepted and internalised
progressively over a period of time? When exactly one goes across to
the other side of faith is not always tangible.
Section 5(1) adds that a person who wishes to revert to her or his
“original religion” shall not come under its purview. The term “own” or
“original” religion is not acceptable in the first place. For, the
religion of an adult cannot be determined as per descent. The
Constitution say one can choose any religion or reject all. Besides,
the exemption of “reconversion” from the bill’s ambit is based on an
unfounded assumption that a person who renounces a religion always does
so out of some pressure or financial benefit. This is why local
authorities will do an inquiry only in a case of conversion out of
one’s “original religion”.
Once the legislation is struck down in one state, other states will
follow the suite. The secularists and minorities should patiently wait;
they are most likely to get a change to have the last laugh this time.
http://www.deccanherald.com/Content/Apr12008/editpage2008033160409.asp
