Skip to main content

Kerala Bishop raises love jihad bogey, takes stance 'similar to' Gujarat govt

By Fr Cedric Prakash SJ* 

The bogey of ‘Love Jihad’ continues to be kept centre-stage! An insidious strategy to defocus on real issues plaguing society in India. Recently, a Bishop from Kerala directly accused Muslims for making ‘Catholic’ girls in the State, victims of ‘love and narcotic jihad’; on September 10 the CM of Gujarat (who has since resigned for other reasons) said that his Government is “dealing strictly with those who trap Hindu girls and elope with them.”
Both the Bishop and the BJP CM are wrong on several counts -- and in fact, their words are patently unconstitutional. Their words are reflective of a patriarchal mindset -- which regards an adult Catholic/Hindu woman as a ‘moron’ who is unable to think and decide for herself: be it in marrying the person of one’s choice or for that matter embracing the religion of one’s choice.
Secondly, both Bishop and CM have absolutely nothing substantive to prove their point: the Bishop is certainly unable to say how many Kerala Catholic girls have married Hindus or people from other faiths; or for that matter just left the Catholic Church. It is exactly the same for the CM.
The Bishop needs to have the honesty to address the scandals: financial and sexual within the Church; the CM needs to address the dismal state of affairs on every possible front, in Gujarat! Both Bishop and CM should also take a visible and vocal stand in championing the rights (particularly, dignity and equality) of women in the Church and the country!
The questions the Bishop and the CM need to ask are: if two mature consenting adults would like to marry, does the State or the Church have the right to stop them from doing so? If a Dalit girl wants to embrace Buddhism, since it is the religion of her husband and will perhaps lead to enhancing the quality of her life, does she have the right to do so? Or for that matter, if a Christian girl wants to freely embrace Islam after marrying a Muslim, does she also have the right to do so?
Why should the State (with its brutal mechanism and vigilantes) or the Church, interfere in matters which are personal and private and clearly violative of Article 21: the right to privacy. On 24 August 2017, the Supreme Court of India in a historic judgement declared the right to privacy as a fundamental right, protected under the Indian Constitution. In declaring that this right stems from the fundamental right to life and liberty, the Court's decision has far-reaching consequences for every citizen.
On September 8, 2021, the Gujarat High Court sent a notice to the Government as to why it should not quash the first ‘love jihad’ case under the newly amended law. The woman concerned has petitioned the court to do so; she says that the charges made against her husband were fabricated by the police.
Earlier, on August 19, in a landmark interim order, the High Court stayed the operation of several sections of the Freedom of Religion (Amendment) Act, 2021, including the provision that termed interfaith marriages as means for forceful conversion.
The law, which was amended to bring in the clause on interfaith marriages as a means to carry out forced conversion, among other things, was passed by the Gujarat Assembly on 1 April; after the Gujarat Governor gave his assent on May 22, the State Government notified it and enforced the amended law in the entire State from June 15.
There were two petitions that had challenged some of provisions of the amended Act, primarily on the grounds that the law is completely arbitrary and violates the right to privacy.A division bench headed by Chief Justice Vikram Nath (who has now been elevated to the Supreme Court) stayed sections 3, 4, 4A to 4C, 5, 6 and 6A of the amended Act pending further hearing, saying they "shall not operate merely because a marriage is solemnised by a person of one religion with a person of another religion without force or by allurement or by fraudulent means and such marriages cannot be termed as marriages for the purposes of unlawful conversion".
A week later the High Court (on August 26) turned down the State Government's plea seeking rectification of its recent order in which it stayed the operation of Section 5 of the new anti-conversion law. That Section of the Gujarat Freedom of Religion (Amendment) Act, 2021 mandates that religious priests must take prior permission from the district magistrate for converting any person from one religion to another. 
Moreover, the one who got converted also needs to "send an intimation" to the district magistrate in a prescribed form. " We do not find reason to make any changes in the order passed by us on August 19”, the same division bench stated after hearing the arguments put forth by State Advocate General.
The recent interim orders passed by the Gujarat High Court are indeed path-breaking and will surely be used as a precedence in the challenge of the other draconian and unconstitutional ‘anti-conversion’ laws (or by its more innocuous sounding sobriquet ‘freedom of religion’ or the more derogative ‘love jihad’) which exist in some of the States today and is high on the agenda of the ruling regime as a national legislation.
The amendments of the Gujarat Freedom of Religion Act were passed by the Gujarat State Assembly amidst strong protests from the Opposition members. If it not for the fact that the original act of 2003 and its present amendments are blatantly violative of the Constitution, some of the provisions are so ridiculous that they could lead to tears of laughter!
For example, the Statement of Objects and Reasons of the Bill states that “there are episodes of religious conversion promising better lifestyle, divine blessings and impersonation. There is an emerging trend in which women are lured to marriage for the purpose of religious conversion.”
The Gujarat Freedom of Religion Act 2003, which was passed by the Gujarat Assembly on March 26, 2003; at that time, the entire Opposition walked out. It took full five years till 2008, for the Gujarat Government to frame the necessary rules.
The law is easily one of the most draconian ones in the history of any democracy in the world and was piloted by the then Chief Minister of Gujarat, Narendra Modi who is currently the Prime Minister of India! During his election campaign in 2002, he singled out Muslims and Christians and promised to bring in an anti-conversion law.
The provisions of the 2003 law include the following:
  • it prohibits forcible conversion by allurement or fraudulent means. ‘Allurement’ is defined as “any gift or grant of any material benefit, either monetary or otherwise”. ‘Force’ is defined as “show of force or a threat of injury of any kind, including threat of divine displeasure or social ex-communication”. ‘Fraudulent means’ is defined as “misrepresentation of any other fraudulent contrivance”.
  • it provides for punishment of those who seek to forcibly convert for a period up to three years imprisonment and a fine up to Rs.50,000. but if the person being forcibly converted is a “minor, a woman, or a person belonging to scheduled caste or scheduled tribe”, the punishment is for a term of up to four years imprisonment and a fine of Rs 1 lakh
  • anyone seeking to convert someone from one religion to another, either by performing a ceremony as a religious priest, or takes part directly or indirectly in the ceremony, shall have to take prior permission from the district magistrate (a civil authority) through a prescribed format
  • the person who is sought to be converted shall have to intimate the district magistrate about the ceremony within a prescribed period, to be laid down in the rules. In case of default, the converted shall face upto one year imprisonment or a fine of Rs.1,000 or both
The Act was clearly aimed at the minorities of the State particularly the Muslims and Christians.
In February 2006, in keeping with letter and spirit of his anti-Constitutional law, at a Shabri Kumbh (a mass gathering of Hindus) programme in the Dangs (supported by the Gujarat Government), Modi warned the Christians “It is my constitutional duty to prevent conversions. Our Constitution disapproves of them, and yet some people turn a blind eye.”
Morari Bapu accused the Christians of bringing in plane-loads of missionaries from the Vatican “who come here to carry out conversion activities but when we organise a ‘ghar wapsi’ why should it be termed as bad?” Both Modi and Morari Bapu also clearly endorsed the ‘ghar wapsi’ programmes which were part of that programme. 
In 2009, the constitutional validity of this law was challenged in the Gujarat High Court by the Gujarat United Christian Forum for Human Rights and others. A notice was sent to the Government to respond, they did not have do so. The petitioners later withdrew their petition with an intention of making it stronger.
Recent interim orders of Gujarat High Court are path-breaking and are a precedent for challenging draconian anti-conversion laws 
The basic premise is not whether one has the right ‘to convert another’; but whether a citizen has the right to freely choose a religion of one’s choice. Article 25 of the Constitution of India guarantees the freedom of conscience, the freedom to profess, practice and propagate religion to all citizens and Article 18 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (of which India is a signatory) asserts:
“Everyone has the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion; this right includes freedom to change his religion or belief, and freedom, either alone or in community with others and in public or private, to manifest his religion or belief in teaching, practice, worship and observance”.
Whilst piloting the recent amendments, Home Minister of Gujarat Pradipsinh Jadeja did not try to hide the communal intent of the Gujarat Government saying, “Our Government will never forgive the Jihadi elements who abuse our daughters. Love Jihad is not our political agenda but it is our pain and our government is determined to take strict action by converting this pain into the system”.
In a manner which has come to characterise the mindset of the ruling regime, Jadeja added that love jihad was a ploy of Muslim countries to control India and attack the social fabric of the country. The April 1 amendments are not jokes nor tomfoolery. Referred to now as the Gujarat Freedom of Religion Act, 2021 it provides more stringent punishment against forced religious conversions through marriage.
The new law has provision for three to ten years in jail and a fine of up to five lakh rupees if the accused is found guilty. The Bill amends a 2003 Act and seeks to curb the emerging trend in which women are lured to marriage for the purpose of religious conversion. Gujarat is the fourth State to have a law on so-called ‘forced’ conversion after Uttar Pradesh, Madhya Pradesh and Himachal Pradesh.
The key amendments in the ‘Gujarat Freedom of Religion Act, 2021’ include:
  • The original act of 2003 specified only two categories of allurement or offer of temptation (under Section 2 of the Act): -Any gift or gratification, either in cash or kind, and a grant of any material benefit, monetary or otherwise. However, the amendment bill proposes a third category “better lifestyle, divine blessings or otherwise”.
  • Insertion of new Section 3A on Lodging of Complaint: Any aggrieved person, his parents, brother, sister or any other person related by blood, marriage or adoption may lodge a first information report with the police station having jurisdiction against the person.
  • Insertion of new section 4A for Punishment for contravention of provisions Section 3 in case of marriage by unlawful conversion: Notwithstanding anything contained in Section 4, whoever contravenes the provisions of Section 3, insofar as conversion by marriage or by getting a person married shall be punished with imprisonment which shall not be less than 3 years but which may extend to 5 years and shall also be liable to fine which shall not less than Rs 2 lakh.
  • Insertion of new section 4B on Marriage by unlawful conversion: Any marriage which is done for the purpose of unlawful conversion by the person of one religion with the person of another religion, either by converting himself/herself before or after marriage shall be declared void by the Family Court or were the Family Court is not established by the Court having jurisdiction to try such cases.
  • Section 4 (C), if any institution or organisation is found contravening the law, then every person who was in charge or was responsible for violation of law could be punished for imprisonment for three years (may extend up to 10 years) in jail and a fine of up to ₹5 lakh can be imposed.
  • Insertion of section 6A on Burden of Proof: The burden of proof as to whether a religious conversion was not affected through misrepresentation, force, undue influence, coercion, allurement, or by any fraudulent means or by marriage shall lie on the person who has caused the conversion and, where such conversion has been facilitated by any person by act, omission, aid, abetment or counselling, on such other person.
  • Offences to Be Cognizable and Non Bailable in Section 7: The offences under the Act have been made Cognizable and Non Bailable and they will be investigated only by an officer who isn't below the rank of Deputy Superintendent of Police
There are several points both in the original Act of 2003 and in the recent amendments, which are not only contentious but blatantly unconstitutional. For example, the point of ‘better lifestyle, divine blessings or otherwise’: this certainly has far-reaching implications and can have a whole range of interpretations.
Let’s talk about ‘better lifestyle’: who decides what is a so-called ‘better lifestyle’? Take the instance of a person whose original religion dictated plenty of fast and penance – now s/he embraces a religion which say, allows eating plenty and perhaps a different type of food and also with less rigorous penance; all of this makes the ‘converter’ a happier person – could this be interpreted as a ‘better lifestyle?’
Then there is the aspect of ‘divine blessing’; for centuries, people from all walks of life have been invoking God’s blessings on each other! So, does it now mean that in Gujarat we can no longer say “God bless you!” or invoke God’s blessings (or divine intervention) on another for whatever the reason? Strange indeed! Then comes the whole dimension of preaching: the sermons and homilies that Christian priests, religious and catechists give all the time.
One speaks about ‘heaven’, ‘eternal life’, ‘finding peace in God’ and so on – does all this contravene the newly amended law? The opposite is ‘divine displeasure’ which may come under this ambit: can one say that one may go to ‘hell’ if one does not obey the commandments of God or maybe even embrace a particular religion? The icing on the cake is the word ‘otherwise’ – what does it mean legally, is it tenable or does one leave it to the whims and fancies of the so-called interpreter and judge of the law?
Any informed and concerned citizen, knows that there are ample provisions in the CrPC to deal with anything to do with force and fraud, bribery and corruption, threat and kidnap – why are these not being used to deal with say the bogey of ‘love jihad’? On the other hand, why are these not being used against our high and mighty politicians and other vested interests?
They have made promises galore, cheated the poor and the marginalised of what is rightfully theirs and looted the nation. Many of them should have been imprisoned for life, long ago! The amended Gujarat Freedom of Religion law has provisions like the ‘offences to be cognizable and non-bailable’ which seem to taken right out from another draconian and anti-people legislation the Unlawful Activities Prevention Act (UAPA).
We the people of India are certainly experiencing difficult days under a fascist regime! These laws are against democratic tenets, the nation’s secular fabric and the fundamental rights of citizens. It reveals the agenda of a fascist regime that is clearly afraid that a thinking and discerning citizenry will expose their hegemony on the marginalised and the minorities, the Dalits and Adivasis of the country; above all, it is a pitiable attempt to defocus from the urgent and pressing issues which are destroying the nation today!
The Gujarat Court’s interim orders are a ray of hope to many who cherish the rights and freedoms enshrined in the Constitution. The so-called ‘love jihad’ is clearly a bogey! The Bishop needs to wake to the Gospel of Jesus; and together with the Gujarat government (where the issue is sub-judice) and their ilk, should realise that we have a Constitution which is sacred and meant to guarantee and protect the rights of all citizens!
---
*Human rights, reconciliation and peace activist/writer

Comments

TRENDING

A comrade in culture and controversy: Yao Wenyuan’s revolutionary legacy

By Harsh Thakor*  This year marks two important anniversaries in Chinese revolutionary history—the 20th death anniversary of Yao Wenyuan, and the 50th anniversary of his seminal essay "On the Social Basis of the Lin Biao Anti-Party Clique". These milestones invite reflection on the man whose pen ignited the first sparks of the Great Proletarian Cultural Revolution and whose sharp ideological interventions left an indelible imprint on the political and cultural landscape of socialist China.

Two more "aadhaar-linked" Jharkhand deaths: 17 die of starvation since Sept 2017

Kaleshwar's sons Santosh and Mantosh Counterview Desk A fact-finding team of the Right to Feed Campaign, pointing towards the death of two more persons due to starvation in Jharkhand, has said that this has happened because of the absence of aadhaar, leading to “persistent lack of food at home and unavailability of any means of earning.” It has disputed the state government claims that these deaths are due to reasons other than starvation, adding, the authorities have “done nothing” to reduce the alarming state of food insecurity in the state.

N-power plant at Mithi Virdi: CRZ nod is arbitrary, without jurisdiction

By Krishnakant* A case-appeal has been filed against the order of the Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change (MoEF&CC) and others granting CRZ clearance for establishment of intake and outfall facility for proposed 6000 MWe Nuclear Power Plant at Mithi Virdi, District Bhavnagar, Gujarat by Nuclear Power Corporation of India Limited (NPCIL) vide order in F 11-23 /2014-IA- III dated March 3, 2015. The case-appeal in the National Green Tribunal at Western Bench at Pune is filed by Shaktisinh Gohil, Sarpanch of Jasapara; Hajabhai Dihora of Mithi Virdi; Jagrutiben Gohil of Jasapara; Krishnakant and Rohit Prajapati activist of the Paryavaran Suraksha Samiti. The National Green Tribunal (NGT) has issued a notice to the MoEF&CC, Gujarat Pollution Control Board, Gujarat Coastal Zone Management Authority, Atomic Energy Regulatory Board and Nuclear Power Corporation of India Limited (NPCIL) and case is kept for hearing on August 20, 2015. Appeal No. 23 of 2015 (WZ) is filed, a...

New RTI draft rules inspired by citizen-unfriendly, overtly bureaucratic approach

By Venkatesh Nayak* The Department of Personnel and Training , Government of India has invited comments on a new set of Draft Rules (available in English only) to implement The Right to Information Act, 2005 . The RTI Rules were last amended in 2012 after a long period of consultation with various stakeholders. The Government’s move to put the draft RTI Rules out for people’s comments and suggestions for change is a welcome continuation of the tradition of public consultation. Positive aspects of the Draft RTI Rules While 60-65% of the Draft RTI Rules repeat the content of the 2012 RTI Rules, some new aspects deserve appreciation as they clarify the manner of implementation of key provisions of the RTI Act. These are: Provisions for dealing with non-compliance of the orders and directives of the Central Information Commission (CIC) by public authorities- this was missing in the 2012 RTI Rules. Non-compliance is increasingly becoming a major problem- two of my non-compliance cases are...

Epic war against caste system is constitutional responsibility of elected government

Edited by well-known Gujarat Dalit rights leader Martin Macwan, the book, “Bhed-Bharat: An Account of Injustice and Atrocities on Dalits and Adivasis (2014-18)” (available in English and Gujarati*) is a selection of news articles on Dalits and Adivasis (2014-2018) published by Dalit Shakti Prakashan, Ahmedabad. Preface to the book, in which Macwan seeks to answer key questions on why the book is needed today: *** The thought of compiling a book on atrocities on Dalits and thus present an overall Indian picture had occurred to me a long time ago. Absence of such a comprehensive picture is a major reason for a weak social and political consciousness among Dalits as well as non-Dalits. But gradually the idea took a different form. I found that lay readers don’t understand numbers and don’t like to read well-researched articles. The best way to reach out to them was storytelling. As I started writing in Gujarati and sharing the idea of the book with my friends, it occurred to me that while...

What's behind Donald Trump's 'narco-state' accusation against Venezuela

By Manolo De Los Santos  The US government has revived its campaign to label Venezuela a "narco-state", accusing its top leadership of drug trafficking and slapping hefty bounties on their heads for capture. This campaign, which only momentarily took a backseat, is a strategic fabrication, not a factual assessment. This accusation, particularly amplified under the Trump Administration, is a calculated smokescreen to justify a long-standing agenda: the overthrow of the Venezuelan government and the seizure of its vast oil and mineral resources. A closer examination of the facts reveals a country that has actively fought drug trafficking on its own terms and a US government with a clear and consistent history of destabilizing independent countries in Latin America.

1857 War of Independence... when Hindu-Muslim separatism, hatred wasn't an issue

"The Sepoy Revolt at Meerut", Illustrated London News, 1857  By Shamsul Islam* Large sections of Hindus, Muslims and Sikhs unitedly challenged the greatest imperialist power, Britain, during India’s First War of Independence which began on May 10, 1857; the day being Sunday. This extraordinary unity, naturally, unnerved the firangees and made them realize that if their rule was to continue in India, it could happen only when Hindus and Muslims, the largest two religious communities were divided on communal lines.

Fate of Yamuna floodplain still hangs in "balance" despite National Green Tribunal rap on Sri Sri event

By Ashok Shrimali* While the National Green Tribunal (NGT) on Thursday reportedly pulled up the Delhi Development Authority (DDA) for granting permission to hold spiritual guru Sri Sri Ravi Shankar's World Culture Festival on the banks of Yamuna, the chief petitioners against the high-profile event Yamuna Jiye Abhiyan has declared, the “fate of the floodplain still hangs in balance.”

Ground reality: Israel would a remain Jewish state, attempt to overthrow it will be futile

By NS Venkataraman*  Now that truce has been arrived at between Israel and Hamas for a period of four days and with release of a few hostages from both sides, there is hope that truce would be further extended and the intensity of war would become significantly less. This likely “truce period” gives an opportunity for the sworn supporters and bitter opponents of Hamas as well as Israel and the observers around the world to introspect on the happenings and whether this war could have been avoided. There is prolonged debate for the last several decades as to whom the present region that has been provided to Jews after the World War II belong. View of some people is that Jews have been occupants earlier and therefore, the region should belong to Jews only. However, Christians and those belonging to Islam have also lived in this regions for long period. While Christians make no claim, the dispute is between Jews and those who claim themselves to be Palestinians. In any case...