1 hour ago
4
With support from opposition parties like Shiv Sena UBT and NCP SP, Maharashtra legislature has passed the Freedom of Religion Bill in both the houses during the ongoing budget session of the Assembly. Once the Governor gives his assent, Maharashtra will become the 13th State in India to have a legislation against forced conversions. Within days after the Bill was tabled in the Assembly last week, it was cleared by Maharashtra Legislative Assembly on March 16, and by the Legislative Council on March 17.
What stood out during the debates for these two days was the absence of the opposition parties during the voice vote in the lower house, and the explicit support to the legislation by almost all major opposition parties barring the Congress and the Samajwadi Party. The apprehensions expressed by BJP’s ally NCP in the upper house also drew attention.
The major concerns which emerged out of the debate in both the houses in Maharashtra were the lack of empirical data leading to the requirement to bring this bill, the concerns about the infringement of the right to religious freedom as promised by the Constitution, concerns about the requirement for a 60-day notice before conversion and questions about the additional powers given to the administrative authorities leading to the possibility of misuse.
Interestingly, BJP’s ally in the Mahayuti, the Nationalist Congress Party led by Sunetra Pawar, expressed strong apprehensions about the bill during the discussion in the upper house. NCP(SP), on the other hand, did not participate in the debate in the lower house, and supported the bill in the upper house while raising a few apprehensions.
Differences in Maha Vikas Aghadi
The differences in Maha Vikas Aghadi were out in the open, after Shiv Sena (UBT) explicitly supported the bill. Only Congress opposed it, while NCP (SP) stayed away from the debate in the lower house. Shiv Sena (UBT) said the bill was good and that there was no reason to oppose it. “We support the bill. It does not mention any particular religion. Every religion has this tendency that people become custodians of religion. Humans have made religion. Religion hasn’t made humans. There is nothing wrong with the bill. I welcome it with open arms. It doesn’t target any particular religion,” Bhaskar Jadhav, Shiv Sena (UBT) MLA, said during the debate in the lower house.
In the upper house, Shiv Sena (UBT) MLC Anil Parab raised more pertinent issues like the responsibility of the State to ensure education and medical care for the poor, so they are not forced to change religion in return of services. He also questioned the state’s logic behind introducing the requirement to give a 60-day prior notice before conversion. He sought that the government should clarify about the need for such provisions in cases of voluntary conversion.
All the parties which argued in both the houses said there was no opposition to the need to crack down on forcible conversions.
Where is the data to justify the bill?
But some leaders asked why the State was bringing a separate law when current provisions were being used to crack down on such cases. “What is the need to bring about such a bill? Is it to target a particular community? The state government had formed a seven-member committee led by the DGP to look into such cases. Why has that report not been tabled in the house? What are the findings? How many such cases (of forced inter-faith marriage and forced conversions) have been reported in the state?” asked Congress MLA Aslam Sheikh.
Rais Shiekh termed the bill as regressive, strict and curtailing religious freedom. He demanded that the bill be sent to the select committee and be thereafter sent for public consultation. “The government should have presented statistics for the need to bring such a bill. After Maharashtra Minister (Mangalprabhat Lodha) had said there were one lakh cases of love jihaad in the State, the State had said, there were 402 complaints. The bill will be passed on the basis of brute majority. It is a one sided bill to target a particular community,” he said.
Idris Naikwadi, an NCP MLC, asked if the government considered itself bigger than the Constitution. He doubted if the government’s intentions were clear in bringing about the bill, imploring it to remove the condition for a 60-day prior notice. He claimed that it will lead to heightened social tension. “There should be no forcible conversion. But who are you to stop voluntary conversion? How can you take away someone’s right to change religion?” he asked.
‘SC has empowered States’
While speaking in the lower house, Chief Minister Devendra Fadnavis said that 12 States including Odisha, Arunachal Pradesh, Gujarat, Chhattisgarh, Jharkhand, Uttarakhand, Himachal Pradesh, Uttar Pradesh, Madhya Pradesh, Haryana, Karnataka, Rajasthan, had passed a similar legislation. “Tamil Nadu has passed it too, but it hasn’t yet implemented it,” he said, adding that the bill was applicable to all the religions.
Giving reasons behind the rationale for bringing about this legislation, he said that the current legal framework was not sufficient to handle the law and order situation caused by such cases. “It is not against any one particular religion. In the state, for several times, law and order situation is created. For effective action, existing laws do not have clear provisions. Again and again, two communities have faced each other. this should not happen. so this bill has been brought about,” he said.
Adding that right to convert to any religion was a constitutional right, he said that the State has been empowered to protect its citizens against forcible conversions.
Pulse Maharashtra: freedom of religion bill
Pulse Maharashtra: freedom of religion bill | Video Credit: The Hindu
English (US) ·