INTRODUCTION
As a fundamental human right, religious freedom is the cornerstone of democratic values around the world. The difficult balance between individual liberty and governmental involvement is being scrutinized in India, a country recognised for its unique religious tapestry, mainly because of the presence of anti-conversion legislation. These state-by-state disparate legal systems purport to prohibit forced or fraudulent religious conversions. But these rules’ effects on the inalienable freedom to practice and spread one’s religion have provoked heated discussions. The legal environment has changed since the first anti-conversion law was passed in Odisha in 1967, and several states have since passed their own versions of this kind of legislation. These regulations, which are rooted in worries about preserving social peace and defending the weak, walk a tightrope between defending religious liberty and averting alleged risks to social order. Legal uncertainties and issues have arisen from the complex interaction between the state’s need to prohibit false conversions and constitutional guarantees of religious freedom.
HISTORICAL BACKGROUND
India’s anti-conversion laws have their origins in historical worries about religious conversions, especially those that are thought to be forced or fraudulent. Since the state of Odisha passed the first anti-conversion law in 1967, other states have done the same, each passing a different version of the legislation. These rules are supposed to protect vulnerable people, stop forced conversions, and uphold social harmony.
LEGAL FRAMEWORK:
Article 25 of the Indian Constitution ensures the freedom of its citizens to freely profess, practice, and propagate their religion. This right is subject to reasonable limitations and is not unqualified. Anti-conversion legislation is frequently constructed to fall within the bounds of these justifiable constraints, aiming to reconcile the defense of religious liberty with the avoidance of harmful conversions. Anti-conversion laws generally prohibit religious conversions that are achieved by coercion, deception, or seduction. These clauses shield people against being forced against their will to convert to a different religion by focusing on actions deemed to be exploitative or forceful. Concerns concerning possible abuse and interference with lawful religious activity have been brought up by the interpretation and application of these regulations.
In the case of Lata Singh v. State of Uttar Pradesh, the Supreme Court affirmed people’s freedom to marry anybody they choose, regardless of their social standing, caste, or religion. It proclaimed as a violation of the right to freedom of choice any interference with this right by the government or others.
CHALLENGES TO RELIGIOUS FREEDOM:
Anti-conversion laws, according to their detractors, restrict the freedom to proselytize and foster a climate of distrust surrounding religious activity, so endangering religious freedom. Certain statutes’ ambiguous phrasing lends itself to arbitrary interpretations by law enforcement, which can result in arbitrary acts. This could hinder the free flow of ideas and discourage religious pluralism. The meaning of “force,” “fraud,” and “inducement” in relation to religious conversions is one major area of legal difficulty. It is difficult to discern between acts that can be considered coercive and true religious outreach because there are no clear standards. The impact of this ambiguity on religious minorities is disproportionate because it allows for abuse and selective targeting. The concept of consent is one of the main topics covered by anti-conversion legislation. Although people are free to convert at will, regulations are frequently passed to forbid forced conversions. The onus of proof rests on the parties in question when attempting to draw a boundary between coercion and free will.
In the case of S. Pushpabai v. C.T. Selvaraj, the Supreme Court upheld people’s freedom to convert to any other faith as long as it is sincere and voluntary. It was underlined that religious freedom is violated by any kind of compulsion or deception related to religious conversions.
STATE VARIATIONS:
Different states in India may have varying approaches to anti-conversion laws, and the legal landscape can be complex. Some states have enacted legislation to regulate or restrict religious conversions, while others do not have specific laws on this matter. States in India which have different anti-conversion legislation, which adds even more complexity. While some states have more permissive laws, others have harsher rules. These laws’ constitutionality is called into doubt by their lack of uniformity, and it is possible that they will infringe upon the right to equality protected by Article 14 of the Constitution.
LEGAL CHALLENGES:
Anti-conversion laws have been the target of multiple judicial challenges that cast doubt on their constitutionality. The freedom of speech and expression includes the right to propagate religion, which the Supreme Court of India has upheld in a number of judgments. The judiciary has acknowledged the state’s right to control religious conversions in order to protect the public interest and avoid exploitation, nonetheless. International attention has been focused on India’s anti-conversion laws after human rights organisations voiced concerns about possible breaches of religious freedom. In order to bring domestic legislation into compliance with international standards, India must carefully balance its commitment to international human rights standards, such as the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR).
SUGGESTIONS FOR THE WAY FORWARD:
A more unified set of anti-conversion laws should be established across state lines to allay worries about their constitutionality and possible violations of the right to equality. This could be accomplished by enacting extensive national law that upholds a uniform legal framework while respecting the diversity of religious practices. One crucial area that has to be improved is the meanings of phrases like “force,” “fraud,” and “inducement.” By doing so, discriminatory targeting and possible misuse would be avoided and arbitrary interpretations would be lessened, ensuring a more equitable execution of the law. When deciding instances involving anti-conversion laws, the judiciary ought to exercise caution and take into account the subtleties of religious liberty as well as the possible effects on communities of colour. This entails defending the concepts of choice and expression freedom consistently. The International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) and other international human rights agreements should be complied with by India in terms of anti-conversion laws.
CONCLUSION
The controversy surrounding India’s anti-conversion laws illustrates the nuanced relationship between religious liberty and governmental control. It’s critical to strike a balance between addressing justifiable worries about forceful conversions and protecting individual liberties. A more complex and equitable approach can be facilitated by respect to international human rights standards, consistency in state legislation, and clarity in legal terminology. Maintaining the constitutional values that are the cornerstone of India’s democracy is crucial as it negotiates this complex terrain.
REFRENCES:
- https://www.nextias.com/blog/anti-conversion-laws/#What_is_the_Need_for_Anti-Conversion_Laws
- https://www.uscirf.gov/publications/indias-state-level-anti-conversion-laws
- A Study of Compatibility of Anti-Conversion Laws with Right to Freedom of Religion in India, By: Furquan Ahmad, Vishnu Konoorayar ,Puneeth P, K.N.ChandrasekharanPillai, Available at: https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2359250
- Sarah Claerhout, and Jakob De Roover. “The Question of Conversion in India.” Economic and Political Weekly 40, no. 28 (2005): 3048–55. http://www.jstor.org/stable/4416875.
- https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3876022
