Follow Us
Aditi Tandon
Tribune News Service
New Delhi, December 13
The debate around anti-conversion laws and their constitutional validity is not a new phenomenon in India. In the latest UN review of India’s human rights situation in 2012, the UPA government at the Centre had faced questions from some peer nations on the existence of such laws in some states back home.
Italy and The Vatican, the capital of the Roman Catholic Church, were the two countries that grilled then Attorney General Ghoolam Vahanvati representing India at the UN Human Rights Council’s Universal Periodic Review (UPR) on anti-conversion laws, urging for their repeal.
The Government of India had, however, not accepted the recommendation of abrogating anti-conversion laws. At the time of India’s UN review, even the National Human Rights Commission, tasked with the responsibility of officially reporting the human rights situation to the UNHRC, hadn’t mentioned anti-conversion laws in five Indian states as a case of constitutional violation in the country report they submitted for review. The Freedom of Religion Act (which bars conversions) exists in Odhisa, Madhya Pradesh, Chhattisgarh, Gujarat and Himachal Pradesh.
Former NHRC member Satyabrata Pal, who was part of the review process, said the issue of anti-conversions as a violation of the Constitution was never discussed at the commission except in context of the anti-Christian Kandhamal riots where large-scale forced conversions were reported.
“The NHRC never took a position on the constitutionality of these laws. Even the Government of India didn’t include repeal of these laws among its final 68 recommendations for action at the end of UPR process,” Pal said.
2
5