From the early childhood we often studied and learnt by Heart that India is only the Country in the world which is multi cultural, multi religious, multi lingual, multi dimensional because we live in a Pluralistic Society. Our Constitutional makers planned a heaven on earth with mutual love and ample of equal opportunities for all without any discrimination because Britishers ruled on us by applying the tactics of “Divide and rule” and hunted this Golden Bird into several fragments. But again in the form of Preamble of India unites every fragment in that give a new life to that Golden Bird which was ruined for 200 years states as “We the People of India having solemnly resolved to constitute India into a Sovereign, Socialist, Secular, Democratic ,Republic and to secure to all it citizens”.
Conversion and Secularism
Secularism is the spirit of India which says all religions are equal or state has no religion of its own. Now the concept of Ghar waapsi creating havoc in the minority communities of India and a gross violation of the basic structure of Constitution of India that cannot be violated in any case by any Person, state or any authority. In the PM Modi regime we expect that such inequality, injustice, forced or allure conversion would not be tolerated which is sowing the seeds of hatred among religious communities and the landmark case related to conversion Rev Stanislaus vs. Madhya Pradesh, 1977 SCR (2) 611 Conversion is a matter where Supreme Court of India considered the issue that whether the fundamental right to practice and propagate religion includes the right to convert and upheld the constitutional validity of the forceful conversion-prohibiting laws enacted by Madhya Pradesh and Orissa .
Does Article 25(profess,practice and propapagate religion) supports Conversion?
The Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court headed by Chief Justice A.N. Ray interpreted the word `propagate’ used in Article 25(1) of the Constitution as `defined’ in the Shorter Oxford Dictionary – “to spread from person to person, or from place to place, to disseminate, diffuse (a statement, belief, practice etc.)” and in the Century Dictionary (which is an Encyclopedic Lexicon of the English Language) Vol. VI – “to transmit or spread from person to person or from place to place; carry forward or onward; diffuse; extend; as `propagate’ a report; `propagate’ the Christian religion.” The Bench observed: “We have no doubt that it is in this sense that the word `propagate’ has been used in Article 25 (1), for what the Article grants is not the right to convert another person to one’s own religion, but to transmit or spread one’s religion by an exposition of its tenets.”
A distinction was made between the right to propagate and the right to convert. The former was allowed while the latter was seen as not part of the fundamental rights. Secularism is under threat and need to be preserved as we can understand such enmity will destroy the lesson of ethics which we learn in childhood.
National threat on India’s Secularism
- The pamphlet issued for reconversion by the Dharma Jagran Samiti to offer open allurement to the Christians (2 lakhs) and Muslims (5 lakhs) that grossly violates the tenets of Secularism in constitution of India. Mohit Agarwal, senior police official in Aligarh town where the ceremony is planned, said “strict action” would be taken against the organizers on 25 December 2014
- Last week, more than 50 Muslim families were reportedly converted to Hinduism against their will in the town of Agra.
- Those who were converted were poor rag-pickers from a slum and many of them told the BBC they had been promised food ration cards if they attended the ceremony. They also said they had no idea they were going to be converted to Hinduism.
- The Hindu groups denied the charges, saying the conversions had been voluntary.
- The issue caused outrage in parliament, with opposition MPs accusing hard-line Hindus of undermining India’s unity and secular nature. Critics say Hindu hard line groups are flexing their muscles under the new Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) government, led by Prime Minister Narendra Modi.
- Recently, a row broke out after government minister Niranjan Jyoti used an abusive term to refer to non-Hindus, by asking people at a public rally to choose between Ramzada (children of the Hindu God Ram) and Haramzada (bastards).
- Mr Modi said he disapproved of her language but refused to sack her.
- On Friday a BJP MP apologized in parliament after praising the killer of independence leader Mahatma Gandhi as a “patriot”.
- Statements by the ministers that Geeta should be the National Book Of India and we learn Politics from Mahabharata.
As religion is a personal matter and no faith in India has predominance on another religion whether in Majority or Minority. Conversions are legal if they do not involve force, fraud or inducement. Referring to Article 25(1), Chief Justice Ray, writing for the Court, held: What the Article grants are not the right to convert another person to one’s own religion, but to transmit or spread one’s religion by an exposition of its tenets. It has to be remembered that Article 25(1) guarantees a freedom of conscious to every citizen, and not merely to the followers of one particular religion and that, in turn, postulates that there is no fundamental right to convert another person to one’s own religion because if a person purposely undertakes the conversion of another person to his religion, as distinguished from his effort to transmit or spread the tenets of his religion, that would impinge on the “freedom of conscience” guaranteed to all the citizens of the country alike.This distinction between conversion and propagation simply for “the edification of others” was previously stated in Ratilal v. State of Bombay, [FN61] which was appealed to as a precedent.
Conversion, reconversion, National book, National religion or Uniform Civil Code is not going to solve the problems of this developing nation. We need higher education, employment, Infrastructure, Information and technologies, Schemes for Youth development, Nirbhaya Fund for women, Child development, Sanitary and health facilities , rural and urban development, Inflation, Poverty, Hikes In prices of fuel and proper strategy for renewable and renewable resources that really elevates India and its Constituents(we the people of India).
M Rama Jois, former chief justice of the Punjab and Haryana High Court, says, “Organised conversion, whether by force or fraud or by providing help or allurement to persons, taking undue advantage of their poverty and ignorance, is anti-secular. Respect for all religions is the essence of our secularism, whereas religious intolerance constitutes the basis of planned conversion. Therefore, conversion cannot be a secular activity.”
————–
Naheed Mustafa is a research scholar,Law Faculty,AMU,Aligarh
Initially, I was also a little confused on the liberal “misuse” of the word “secular” (in the west, separation of church and state; in other words, clerics wont have any say in running the affairs of the “government”). Dr. Ambedkar and his team who drafted this rather too lengthy document for a constitution had to separately define what they meant by secularism in the Indian context, I paraphrase and borrow from Wikipedia and the post,”Secularism in India means equal treatment of all religions by the state,” based on which the justice cited in the post concluded,”Therefore, conversion cannot be a secular activity.” I hope you find my comment helpful and not more confusing. To be brutally honest, in my personal observation, and understanding of both the terms, both a la dictionary and the actual text of the Indian Constitution, neither of these was implemented by any party yet. The mess created by not maintaining the sanctity of the “sacred constitution”, to which every government employee getting his/her salary from our tax money has to “declare allegiance”. It is sad that not only executive branch of the “bharti sarkar” has been negligent, but the legislative and judiciary who are supposed to interpret the constitution, and didn’t consistently follow the nuance that India is a secular state by law and its individual citizens have to be provided “secularism” at every step of the way, including choice of a religious persuasion.
To face this new challenge of conversion by deceit brought about by RSS and its fringe groups, Muslims of India need to stand united. This is a real game changer for the Muslims (and for the Christians) in India. Muslims need to face this greatest challenge after independence. There is great strength in unity.
This may be considered as an OPEN LETTER TO JAMAIT E ISALMI HIND.
The time has come for the Jamait e Islami to take true leadership of the Muslims of India and politically fight against the Hindu right. The Jamait should take the help of the Left parties, and other political parties.
The AIMPL should legally file cases against any unconstitutional conversions of Muslims and Christians or neo Buddhists.
The Tablighi Jamait should come forward and visit Muslims hamlets, especially the poor people Muslims, and alert them to the machinations of the RSS.
The Barveli jamiat should also chip in and reach each Muslims to alert them not to reconvert.
Deoband should also help in educating the Muslims and others about Muslims contribution to the freedom struggle for India.
The RSS should be fought politically, legally, and socially. And to do this each and every Muslims organizations should united and along with other secular political parities fight the RSS and its affiliates.
This is imperative as the RSS is a fascist organization and we should learn from history. How can we forget what Remember Martin Niemöller, (1892–1948) the prominent Protestant pastor who emerged as an outspoken public foe of Adolf Hitler and spent the last seven years of Nazi rule in concentration camps. He is perhaps best remembered for the quotation:
First they came for the Socialists, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a Socialist.
Then they came for the Trade Unionists, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a Trade Unionist.
Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a Jew.
Then they came for me—and there was no one left to speak for me.