A new law in Uttar Pradesh seeks to create onerous burdens on inter-faith marriages
by Utkarsh 4 February 2021
On November 28, 2020, one of India’s largest and most populated states named Uttar Pradesh, ensconced communalism in the state by activating Uttar Pradesh Prohibition of Unlawful conversion Religion Ordinance 2020, so-called the anti-conversion law. This new law seeks to prohibit the conversion from one religion to another by force, fraud, misrepresentation, undue influence, coercion, allurement, or marriage. The state government claims that the purpose of bringing this law is to check the unlawful religious conversions and interfaith marriages with the sole intention of changing the girl’s religion. But on closer introspection, it becomes clear that the Uttar Pradesh ordinance is much more noxious. Though eight states in India already have anti-conversion laws, perhaps in the habiliment of modesty, they are less venomous. They have chosen the name of their act, ironically the freedom of religion act. The new law is just like a many-headed tentacle. It vitiates the basic principles of constitutional democracy of India that grant individuals freedom of choice and religion.
According to the new law, a person desiring to convert to another religion needs to inform the district magistrate or additional magistrate at least 60 days in advance and submit the declaration that the decision is free from any pressure or allurement the individual. On paper, it is claimed that it is aimed to prevent forced conversions; however, in response to a request made under the Right to Information Act of India, the National Commission for Women, which is a statutory body of the Government of India, revealed that it does not have data on love-jihad cases.
Further highlighting the huge scope of injustice and human rights violation of the new conversion law, In Moradabad, a small town in U.P, a Muslim man and his brother were arrested on October 6th, 2020 22-year-old Hindu women tried to get their marriage registered. In her statement, the woman said that she willingly got married five months ago, which barred the police from invoking the new law; still, her husband was not released. The woman was two months pregnant at the time of her husband’s arrest and was sent to shelter homes. Later the women’s mother-in-law alleged that her daughter-in-law suffered a miscarriage at the shelter home. The incident clearly showed why the new law of Uttar Pradesh is against the basic tenets of justice. It resists against the fundamental human right to love and to choose a partner. At the heart of this ordinance is deep-rooted opposition to inter-faith marriages. One of the most questionable quintessence on which these laws rest is the Brahminical patriarchal treatment of women as property.
International law violations
Freedom of religion attributes in various international documents like the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, Declaration on Elimination Based on Religion, American Convention of Human Rights, European Convention of Human Rights, and the African Charter. The Indian government has acceded to various covenants, including the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights the International Convention on Elimination of Racial Discrimination in 1968, which the new ordinance of 2020 flouts.
Scope of the constitutional protection to the right to freedom of religion in India is guaranteed by Article 25 of the Indian constitution, which is parallel to Article 18 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Art 18 of the UDHR states that “the right to freedom of thought consciences and religion includes freedom to change one’s religion or beliefs.
The International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) recognizes both the right to convert and the right not to be forced to convert. Article 18(1) states that “Everyone shall have the right to freedom of thought, conscience, and religion. This right shall include freedom to have or to adopt a religion or belief of his choice. Art 18(2) states that No one shall be subjected to coercion that would impair their freedom to have or to adopt a religion or belief of his choice.
Section 3 of the act makes the religious conversion, in particular, to get married punishable by imprisonment extending up to 5 years, including a fine of 15000 rupees with stringent iniquitous provisions if the person converted is minor, women, or a member of Scheduled tribes or Scheduled Caste. The section was legally untenable. It connotes that conversion for marriage is unlawful; it violates the Art 18 of the UDHR and Art 18(1) of the ICCPR, which guarantees freedom to adopt religion or belief of his choice. The section arbitrarily impairs the free choice of the person who, in good faith, choose to change his/her religion.
The Human Rights Committee in General comment No 22 clearly explained that Art 18 of the ICCPR does not permit any limitations on the freedom of thought and conscience or on the freedom to have or adopt a religion or belief of one’s choice. These freedoms are protected unconditionally, as the right to hold opinions without interference in Article 19. As per Art 18 and 17, no one can be compelled to reveal his thoughts or adherence to religion or belief. However, reasonable restrictions can be imposed upon the external phenomenon of thoughts, consciences, or beliefs, and that restrictions must be line with ICCPR Art 18(3), which states restrictions must be prescribed by law and necessary to protect public order, safety, health or fundamental rights of others. General comment No 22 also elaborate on the right to convert; it states that freedom to have or to adopt a religion or belief necessarily elicits the freedom of choosing religion or belief, including the right of replacing one’s current religion or belief with another or to adopt atheistic views as well as right to retain one’s religion or belief.
Section 6 of the Act empowers the courts to declare null and void any marriage conducted for the sole purpose of changing religion by a man of one religion with the women of another. These provisions substantively discriminate between men and women with no reasonable cause and explanation. It attempts to reduce women to unequal partners’ status in marriage and presumes all women to be unsophisticated and impressionable to conversions. It undermines the free choice of adult women by referring to terms like allurement. Section 8 of the act states that one’s who desires to convert his religion must declare it before the local district magistrate; failing to abide by this is punishable with imprisonment up to 3 years, including a fine. The section confers unlimited powers to the state, which gives them complete liberty to interfere with citizen privacy and personal liberty.
The 1981 Declaration on the Elimination of All Forms of Intolerance and Discrimination based on religion and belief entails the freedom to have a religion or whatever belief of his choice in Art 1(1) and correspondingly in Art 1(2), that no one shall be subjected to coercion which would impair his freedom to have religion or belief of his choice. It is said that the human minds are a riddle. It is hard to read and harder to understand. It is not possible for anyone to, let alone state, curb or put restraints on human thoughts, and any act attempting the same is a grave violation of individual freedom. It is said person cannot choose life. He doesn’t know what choice is open to him. This strictly applies to religion also.
Reasons for implementing such laws
A United Nations Special Rapporteur on freedom of religion or belief, a report prepared by Heiner Bielefeldt from 2010 to 2016, highlighted the different perpetrators and motives for such violations. The report highlighted that the abuse is effectuated in the name of religious or ideological claims, in the interest of promoting national identity or protecting societal homogeneity.
It’s believed that the current Indian government under the leadership of Prime Minister Narendra Modi and ruling Hindu Supremacist Bharatiya Janata Party (B.J.P) is doing the same by crumbling the liberal principles of the Indian Constitution and increasingly converting the country into tyrannical democracy. The minority population of India, mostly Muslims, has gone through hard times in recent years at the ruling party’s hands and supremacists forces. They have faced lethal riots, lynchings, and social and political subjugation. The law is the latest in a series of measures that have consistently marginalized its Muslim population. One of the main proponents of anti-conversion law is a Hindu monk who is the chief minister of Uttar Pradesh State and a ruling party member. Similar bills have been considered in other states controlled by the ruling party, including Haryana, Karnataka, Assam, and Madhya Pradesh.
Conclusion
The true danger with this new anti-conversion law lies in its ambiguity. Although the scope has been cleverly restricted within the constitutional margins, the law immerses the use of open textured phrases. The subjective assessment and appreciation of these dubious phrases decode the real danger. Faith is not a matter of spectacular conversion; it is the most personal commitment one has with the belief. Love is an act of ultimate freedom. It does not know religion, race, or region. It cannot be mean to anything; love is an end in itself. The new ordinance sees love as a tactic of war in the process of dehumanising a particular community.