Following a petition filed by a BJP lawyer, the judges said forced conversions undermine religious freedom and asked the central government what steps it intends to take to prevent them. Hindu nationalists have long been pushing for the adoption of national anti-conversion laws. The Bishop of Lucknow told : “The current regulations are enough. In this way, hatred and violence are fostered.”
New Delhi () – The Supreme Court of India bows its head to the rhetoric of Hindu nationalists on the issue of what are called forced conversions. The judges described the issue as “very serious” and asked the federal government to decide “what other measures the Union can take” to curb the phenomenon.
The pronouncement came as a result of a petition filed by lawyer Ashwini Kumar Upadhyay, a leading member of the BJP. The Court asked the Modi government to officially present its position, postponing the issue to a new hearing set for November 28. There are currently 10 (out of 36) Indian states or territories where so-called anti-conversion laws are in force. The position expressed by the Court would seem to suggest the need for federal legislation, an issue on which Hindu nationalists have been lobbying for a long time.
“Conversion – the judges affirm – is legal according to the Constitution, but not forced conversion.” Adherence to a religious denomination as a result of economic benefits or fraud would be “a very serious matter that may ultimately affect the security of the nation and the freedom of religion and conscience of citizens.” Lawyer Tushar Mehta, who is representing the Indian Union in the lawsuit, said the phenomenon is “out of control” in the tribal areas. For this reason, the Court asked what measures New Delhi intends to take in this regard.
In a dialogue with , Msgr. Gerald Mathias, Bishop of Lucknow, in the state of Uttar Pradesh (one of the last to adopt the laws against conversion), commented: “The Supreme Court’s statement is disproportionate. The government or lawyer Upadhyaya should provide facts and figures that show that forced conversions are rampant in the country. Most of the accusations have turned out to be unfounded. The provisions that the Constitution already contains are sufficient to counteract any aberration. There is absolutely no need for new legislation. Individual state laws against conversion have only encouraged fundamentalists to provoke hatred and violence.”
Father Anand Mathew coordinator of the Sajha Sanskriti Manch – a Varanasi-based alliance of social activists – adds: “Since 1967, when an anti-conversion law was first adopted in Orissa, similar measures have been enacted in many other states. In Uttar Pradesh, where this law came into force on September 27, 2020, we have had a lot of problems. Every year there are about 200 cases of violence against Christians. Some people have been jailed on these types of charges, but none have been conclusively convicted. They were all acquitted. Therefore, it is a myth that has been invented about forced conversions, and it is very unfortunate that the Supreme Court, the highest institution in the country, has fallen victim to this prejudice.”
“No person with common sense can think of a forced conversion – continues Fr. Matthew -. Here in Uttar Pradesh there have been many cases in the villages of very poor people such as washermen and shoemakers being accused of paying sums of money to upper caste village chiefs to attract them to Christianity. Pointless accusations. These falsehoods must be challenged. This month we have had meetings with the deputy director general of the police and other authorities to talk about the need to stop these kinds of stories. Most of the media, both print and electronic, are also creating and disseminating these fictitious stories. We have argued that there should be controls. Let them bring the evidence, the bills or checks they were given, and let the police arrest the people who accepted the money and those who gave it. We tell people: is the Hindu religion so cheap that they can sell it for 30,000 or 50,000 rupees (less than 600 euros, ndr.) or for alcohol or job promises? They are very unfortunate fictional stories that need to be called into question.”