For a lot of in India, and notably in Gujarat, 26 March will at all times be remembered as a black day. On that day in 2003, in line with an election promise, Narendra Modi, the then Chief Minister of Gujarat, launched the draconian ‘Gujarat Freedom of Faith Act’. Earlier that morning, Haren Pandya, a former House Minister of Gujarat and Modi’s bête noire, was discovered assassinated in mysterious circumstances. To this present day, the reality about Pandya’s demise—who killed him and why—has not been formally revealed. Pandya’s father, the late Vitthalbhai Pandya (who died in January 2011), was fairly satisfied of who was behind the killing of his son and he went from pillar to publish (proper as much as the Supreme Courtroom) hoping that the complete fact of Haren’s homicide could be revealed. A number of non-partisan political analysts have additionally written volumes on this homicide. The 2-part BBC documentary The Modi Query, launched in January 2023 (however banned in India), highlights the homicide of Pandya and why he was a stumbling block to Modi’s ascendancy to energy!

As for the ‘Gujarat Freedom of Faith Act, 2003’, it’s simply one of the vital draconian legal guidelines within the historical past of any democracy on this planet. Modi piloted this invoice! Throughout his election marketing campaign in 2002, he ranted and raved in opposition to Muslims and Christians and promised to herald an anti-conversion legislation. True to his promise, he did so just a few months later. At the moment, all the Opposition, in protest in opposition to the invoice, walked out of the Gujarat Meeting! It then took a full 5 years, till 2008, for the Gujarat Authorities to border the required guidelines for the implementation of that legislation!

In February 2006, in line with the letter and spirit of his anti-constitutional legislation, at a Shabri Kumbh programme (a mass gathering of Hindus) within the Dangs (supported by the Gujarat Authorities), Modi warned the Christian neighborhood, “It’s my constitutional responsibility to forestall conversions.  Our Structure disapproves of them, and but some individuals flip a blind eye.” Morari Bapu accused the Christians of bringing in planeloads of missionaries from the Vatican, “who come right here to hold out conversion actions however once we organise a ‘ghar wapsi’ why ought to it’s termed as dangerous?”  Each Modi and Morari Bapu unequivocally endorsed the ‘ghar wapsi’ programmes, which have been a part of that Kumbh! In 2009, the ‘Gujarat United Christian Discussion board for Human Rights’ and a number of other different eminent residents challenged the constitutional validity of the Gujarat Freedom of Faith Legislation within the Gujarat Excessive Courtroom. A discover was despatched by the Courtroom to the Authorities to reply; it didn’t accomplish that (clearly, it couldn’t). The petitioners later withdrew their petition with the intention of strengthening it. In August 2021, the Gujarat Excessive Courtroom didn’t enable the Gujarat Authorities to make amendments to the already draconian legislation.

The bogey of ‘compelled’ conversion and the introduction of anti-conversion legal guidelines (unusually known as ‘Freedom of Faith’) are a part of a well-oiled technique of the ‘Sangh Parivar’. These legal guidelines are blatantly unconstitutional. The states of Arunachal Pradesh, Chhattisgarh, Gujarat, Haryana, Himachal Pradesh, Jharkhand, Karnataka, Madhya Pradesh, Odisha, Rajasthan, Uttarakhand, and Uttar Pradesh have already got these legal guidelines in place. On 5 March, Maharashtra grew to become the 13^th state to take action, when the Authorities of Maharashtra accepted a draft anti-conversion invoice requiring prior permission from a delegated authority for non secular conversion. The proposed legislation, known as the Dharma Swatantrya Adhiniyam 2026 (Spiritual Freedom Act 2026), particularly goals to forestall people or organizations from finishing up compelled or illegal non secular conversions. It seeks to guard people’ freedom of faith by prohibiting coercive or misleading practices and imposing stringent penalties for violations.

On 11 March, led by the Individuals’s Union for Civil Liberties (PUCL), Residents for Justice and Peace (CJP) and the Bombay Catholic Sabha (BCS), greater than thirty civil society and human rights organisations held a well-attended media convention on the Press Membership in Mumbai. On the convention, a number of well-known residents lambasted the Maharashtra Authorities for introducing this draconian laws with out due course of. In an in depth assertion, the signatories stated, “the textual content of the draft legislation has not but been made public, elevating severe considerations about transparency, democratic course of, and the potential implications of the laws for elementary rights. The taking part civil society organisations emphasise that laws with far-reaching implications for non secular freedom, privateness, and private liberty can’t be drafted and launched with out public session, scrutiny, and debate. There’s a rising sample of anti-conversion legal guidelines framed round “love jihad”. The proposed Maharashtra legislation seems to comply with the sample of anti-conversion laws already enacted in a number of states beneath the banner of “freedom of faith” legal guidelines. Whereas framed as measures to forestall coercion or fraudulent non secular conversions, these statutes have continuously been justified politically by the narrative of ‘love jihad’—a conspiracy idea alleging that Muslim males systematically lure Hindu girls into marriage so as to convert them. This declare has no authorized foundation.”

Additional, the assertion stated, “The Maharashtra proposal additionally comes at a time when the constitutional validity of comparable anti-conversion legal guidelines throughout a number of states is already beneath problem earlier than the Supreme Courtroom of India. A batch of writ petitions—first filed by Residents for Justice and Peace (CJP), Mumbai, the lead petitioner within the Supreme Courtroom—has been pending earlier than the Supreme Courtroom since 2020, elevating elementary constitutional questions concerning the scope of freedom of conscience, private liberty, equality earlier than the legislation, and the bounds of State energy in regulating non secular conversion and interfaith relationships. Hearings within the matter have been held intermittently. Additional hearings are additionally scheduled for as we speak, and CJP has pressed for an interim keep on probably the most egregious provisions.”

The ‘bogey’ of compelled conversion is as soon as once more being was a difficulty! There’s completely no proof to substantiate this frivolous declare. It’s a manipulative ploy, utilized by the Sanghis to divert consideration from the actual points that grip the nation. India has proven itself to have a spineless authorities, actually being held to ransom by the USA. We’ve got misplaced our long-cherished identification as a non-aligned nation. The strange citizen is struggling because of a horrible shortage of LPG (Smriti Irani appears to have executed the disappearing trick as a substitute of protesting). The Epstein information have revealed names of some outstanding Indians—a fantastic disgrace to the nation. The Election Fee has proved to be a ‘caged parrot’ of the ruling regime! Corruption is within the DNA of the federal government that has abdicated its duty to manipulate. Costs are skyrocketing, even because the poor turn out to be poorer and the crony capitalist associates of the regime proceed to amass scandalous quantities of wealth. The widespread individual is denied the respectable proper to ‘roti–kapda–makaan’, and Adivasis are denied their proper to ‘jal–jungle–jameen’. The nation is within the doldrums as by no means earlier than! In addition to, the ‘Hindutvadis’ are a frightened group: they’re conscious that their so-called model of ‘religiosity’ goes in opposition to human nature and in opposition to the rights and freedoms which can be inalienable to each citizen. Due to this fact, the ‘compelled conversion’ gimmick is a handy option to change the narrative and deflect from burning points that actually throttle the nation as we speak!

On 14 November 2022, the two-judge bench of the Supreme Courtroom consisting of Justice M.R. Shah and Justice Hima Kohli noticed that compelled conversions might “in the end have an effect on the safety of the nation and the liberty of faith and conscience of residents.” The bench directed the Central Authorities to tell the Apex Courtroom what steps it intends to take to curb deceitful or obligatory non secular conversions. The bench was listening to a PIL by Ashwini Kumar Upadhyay, who has been submitting a number of petitions of this sort up to now. Upadhyay desires a legislation in opposition to fraudulent non secular conversion and conversion by intimidation, threats, or misleading inducement by presents and financial advantages, because it offends Articles 14, 21, and 25.

Considerably, in April 2021, a three-judge bench of Justices Rohinton F Nariman, B.R. Gavai and Hrishikesh Roy had dismissed an identical petition by Upadhyay himself and had even threatened to impose heavy prices if he endured with the petition. The bench at the moment had opined that any non secular conversion legislation could be violative of the Structure because it clearly permits an individual to undertake any faith of his or her selection and that’s the reason the phrase “propagate” is within the Structure. The bench termed “very dangerous” the petition that known as for a strict central legislation to test non secular conversion and noticed that adults are free to decide on their religion. The bench additionally cautioned senior advocate Gopal Sankaranarayan, who represented Upadhyay within the matter. “What sort of a petition is that this? This can be a very dangerous petition. If you will argue this, we’re going to impose a heavy price on you,” stated Nariman. He added, “There’s a cause why the phrase ‘propagate’ is there within the Structure. You must have some which means for that phrase. There is no such thing as a cause why someone above 18 can’t select his or her personal faith or someone else’s faith.” The petition was instantly withdrawn!

The purpose, due to this fact, isn’t whether or not one has the precise ‘to transform one other’ however whether or not a citizen of India has the precise to decide on a faith freely. Article 25 of the Structure of India unequivocally “ensures the liberty of conscience, the liberty to profess, follow and propagate faith to all residents”. In addition to, Article 18 of the Common Declaration of Human Rights asserts that “Everybody has the precise to freedom of thought, conscience and faith; this proper contains freedom to vary his faith or perception, and freedom, both alone or in neighborhood with others and in public or personal, to manifest his faith or perception in educating, follow, worship and observance”.

As early as 1935, Dr. B. R. Ambedkar made probably the most daring and path-breaking speech of his profession, asserting that, due to the intransigence of caste Hindus and the failure of a decade of nonviolent protests, he had determined to desert Hinduism and to hunt one other religion. He urged the leaders on the Yeola Depressed Courses convention to contemplate their non secular identification to be a selection, not a reality of future. In a extremely emotional voice he stated, “If you wish to achieve self-respect, change your faith. If you wish to create a cooperating society, change your faith. If you need energy, change your faith. If you need equality, change your faith. If you need independence, change your faith. If you wish to make the world wherein you reside pleased, change your faith.” About twenty years later, on 14 October 1956 (apparently the date on which King Ashoka grew to become a Buddhist), Ambedkar collectively along with his spouse and a minimum of 365,000 of his followers, primarily Dalits, determined to exit Hinduism and embrace Buddhism.

Is, then, an grownup citizen of India free to decide on their faith? The Supreme Courtroom has to behave with alacrity, maintain that these draconian legal guidelines are unconstitutional, and strike them down in toto as soon as and for all. Will it have the braveness to tackle the ‘Hindutva’ brigade? That maybe is one other matter!

[Fr Cedric Prakash SJ is a human rights, reconciliation & peace activist and writer.]