UP's Anti-Conversion Law: Faith or Freedom at Risk?

Anti-conversion laws in India, particularly the Uttar Pradesh Prohibition of Unlawful Conversion of Religion Act, have garnered significant attention and debate since their introduction. Initially enacted in 2021, the law aims to prevent forced or fraudulent conversions, often framed within the context of “Love Jihad”, a term used by some groups to describe alleged coercive conversions linked to interfaith relationships.

The legislation mandates that individuals intending to convert must notify the District Magistrate at least two months in advance, establishing a formal religious conversion process. Recent amendments in 2024 have intensified the law’s provisions, increasing penalties, including life imprisonment for severe violations, and expanding the scope of who can file complaints to include any individual, rather than just the aggrieved parties or their relatives.

Critics argue that these laws can be misused to target religious minorities, particularly Christians and Muslims, while proponents assert that they protect vulnerable populations from coercion and exploitation. The law’s implementation has led to various legal challenges and public interest litigations, highlighting concerns about its potential for misuse and the implications for religious freedom in a diverse society. As the legal landscape evolves, the anti-conversion laws continue to be a focal point of contention, reflecting broader societal tensions regarding religious identity and freedom in India.

Jargon

love jihad: A controversial term used by some groups to describe alleged coercive conversions of Hindu women to Islam, often in the context of interfaith marriages.
anti-conversion law: Legislation aimed at preventing forced or fraudulent religious conversions, often perceived as targeting specific religious communities.
Uttar Pradesh Prohibition of Unlawful Conversion of Religion Act: A specific law enacted in Uttar Pradesh in 2021 to regulate religious conversions, requiring prior notification to authorities and imposing penalties for violations.
non-bailable offence: A category of crime for which bail cannot be granted as a matter of right, often leading to the accused remaining in custody until trial.
public interest litigation (PIL): A legal action initiated in a court of law to protect the public interest, often used to address issues affecting marginalized communities.

Viewpoints 💭

‘Left’ Viewpoint

Ideological Differences

‘Right’ Viewpoint

Anti-conversion laws are criticized for enabling harassment of minority communities, particularly Christians and Dalits, through complaints by non-aggrieved third parties.
The laws are perceived as a tool for rising persecution against Christians, leading to violence and social ostracism based on false allegations of forced conversions.
Critics argue that the amendments to the anti-conversion law could lead to misuse and target minorities, undermining due process and fundamental rights.
There is a concern that the broad scope for filing complaints, including by any individual, could be abused by right-wing groups to instigate fear among religious minorities.
The opposition claims that the focus on anti-conversion laws distracts from more pressing socio-economic issues and criticizes the government for reinforcing communal discrimination.

While the left views the anti-conversion laws as a means for harassment and persecution of minorities, the right sees them as necessary for the protection of vulnerable groups from exploitation and forced conversions.
The left criticizes the broad scope for filing complaints as a potential tool for abuse by right-wing groups, whereas the right considers it a mechanism to strengthen the law’s enforcement.
The left is concerned with the laws undermining religious freedom and fundamental rights, pointing out the potential for misuse. In contrast, the right emphasizes the laws’ role in preserving cultural identity and societal integrity.
Critics from the left argue that the focus on anti-conversion laws distracts from more pressing issues and reinforces communal discrimination, while supporters from the right view the laws as crucial for national and cultural security.
The ideological divide extends to the interpretation of religious freedom, with the left advocating for a more inclusive approach that respects individual rights to conversion, and the right prioritizing the protection of the majority’s religious and cultural norms against perceived threats.

The amendments to the anti-conversion law are seen as necessary to protect against forced conversions and exploitation, particularly in the context of ‘Love Jihad’.
Supporters argue that the law safeguards vulnerable populations, including women and SC-ST communities, from coercion and inducement in religious conversions.
The inclusion of life imprisonment and stricter penalties for offenders is viewed as reflecting the government’s commitment to addressing unlawful religious conversions.
Proponents believe that allowing any individual to file complaints enhances the enforcement of the law, ensuring broader protection against illegal conversions.
The amendments are considered a measure to protect societal integrity and cultural identity against perceived threats from foreign influences and mass conversions.

Prominent Voices 📣

From the ‘Left’

From the ‘Right’

Akhilesh Yadav (Samajwadi Party Chief): Highlights the BJP’s use of communal politics as a diversion from governance issues. [1] [2]
Aradhana Mishra Mona (Congress Legislature Party Leader): Supports punishment for forced conversions while upholding the right to voluntary conversions. [1]
Chandrashekhar (Azad Samaj Party MP): Accuses the government of prioritizing divisive politics over the basic needs of citizens. [1]
Citizens for Justice and Peace (CJP): Argues that anti-conversion laws infringe on constitutional rights, evidenced by their legal challenges against them. [3]
Mata Prasad Pandey (Leader of Opposition, UP): Raises concerns about the misuse of the law leading to false cases and suggests safeguards against police misconduct. [1]
United Christian Forum (UCF) Delegation: Claims the anti-conversion law is being used to target religious minorities. [4]

Yogi Adityanath (Chief Minister of Uttar Pradesh): Strongly supports the anti-conversion laws as a defense against ‘love jihad’ and a protection for the Sanatani heritage, women, and marginalized communities, emphasizing the need for stricter measures. [5] [6]
Kiren Rijiju (Federal Minority Affairs Minister): Acknowledges the Christian community’s concerns regarding the anti-conversion laws. [4]
Suresh Khanna (Parliamentary Affairs Minister): Advocates for the amendment as a means to strengthen the legal framework against unlawful conversions, emphasizing stricter penalties and the ability for anyone to file an FIR. [5] [6]
Uttar Pradesh Government (State Authority): Asserts that current laws are insufficient to curb illegal conversions, advocating for harsher penalties to protect vulnerable individuals. [7]