Anti-conversion law will inflict yet another socio-political fracture

Sri Lanka, which is already crippled by the fifty year old Sinhala-Tamil conflict, appears poised to inflict on itself yet another fracture, namely, socio-political antagonism between Buddhists and Christians.

Current attempts by the ruling United Peoples' Freedom Alliance (UPFA) and the opposition Jathika Hela Urumaya (JHU) to bring about a rather draconian law banning unethical religious conversion, may divide the country on religious lines, this time into Buddhists and Christians. They will only add to the woes of a country already reduced to tatters by the ethnic conflict between the majority Sinhalas and the minority Tamils.

As a student of sociology told this correspondent, if the Budddhist-Christian conflict develops, many Sinhala families will be disrupted because it is not uncommon in Sinhala society for Buddhists and Christians to inter-marry and allow religious freedom within the integrated family. The existing familial, social, cultural and political tolerance will go up in smoke.

Fortunately, the proposed law is unlikely to affect Buddhist-Muslim relations because Islam in Sri Lanka, like Buddhism, is not a proselytising religion. Islam here is preoccupied with sharper definition and internal consolidation rather than expansion. On the other hand, Christianity, especially the new fangled brands known as "Evangelist" or "Fundamentalist", is expansionist. Some of the new churches are manifestly and aggressively so.

Such high voltage evangelism has scared the Buddhist leadership, and a section of the Hindus too. Buddhists and Hindus are no match to the highly organized, foreign-funded, and cash rich churches and religious NGOs. Not being organized religions, Buddhism and Hinduism have been forced to appeal to the State to intervene on their behalf. Hence the clamour for an anti conversion law.

But the medicine may be worse than the malady, as is the case with the Prevention of Terrorism Act (POTA) in neighbouring India. The draconian nature of the proposed anti-conversion law could create a siege mentality among the Christians. It could lend itself to gross misuse by the rulers to achieve personal, political and Sinhala communal goals. It could result in the kind of communal divide (Sinhala-Tamil) which followed the "Sinhala Only" policy adopted in the 1950s. What was then done to correct an imbalance between the underprivileged Sinhala majority and the privileged Tamil minority, actually widened the rift between the two and made them implacable enemies. The rift is now threatening to partition the country.

The Buddhists constitute about 70 per cent of the population and the Christians about 7 per cent. Although much smaller in number and not a match to the Buddhists n democratic politics, Christians are ahead in education and are key members of the socio-economic elite and the upwardly mobile classes of Sri Lanka. Unlike the Buddhists, the Christians have international links through their churches. Any Buddhist-Christian conflict will, therefore, be bitter, with long term social, economic and political consequences.

The proposal to being an anti-conversion bill is not new. The previous United National Front (UNF) government had promised to bring a bill to parliament, following an agitation by Buddhist monks. But the promise could not be kept for want of time. The UNF was out of office as a result of the April 2 parliamentary elections.

The UPFA, which was voted in, had come riding a wave of Sinhala-Buddhist nationalism. Moreover, the elections had put into parliament an explicitly and unabashedly Sinhala-Buddhist force a party of Buddhist monks called the Jathika Hela Urumaya (JHU).The minority UPFA government is dependent on the support of the JHU to stay in power.

An avowedly secular formation, UPFA was not, deep down, keen on any law to ban religious conversions, because such a law would only further divide an already divided Sri Lankan society and polity. But it was coming under pressure from JHU, which claimed to be the authentic spokesman of the Sinhala-Buddhist community, the largest political constituency in the island.

In fact, the JHU took the lead and threatened to steal the show, by introducing its own bill in parliament. Its Private Member's bill "Prohibition of Forcible Religions Conversions" was gazetted on May 28.This is scheduled to be taken up in parliament when it meets later this month.

The JHU's moves forced the Buddha Sasana Minister, Ratnasiri Wickramanayake, to draft a government bill on the same matter.

Euphemistically called "Act for the Protection of Religious Freedom," the bill was approved by the cabinet in June, albeit against the wishes of the Christian members.

"Once parliament takes one of the bills up, we will have just seven days to raise our objections," a worried Godfrey Yogarajah, General Secretary of the National Christian Evangelical Alliance of Sri Lanka (NCEASL), told Hindustan Times on Sunday.

Anticipating opposition to the bills, unruly but unidentified elements started terrorizing the NCEASL into submission. " Last night (Saturday) our office was attacked and ransacked. Some documents and CDs have been taken away. The police are investigating," Yogarajah said.

The NCEASL had put in advertisements in the leading papers of Sri Lanka calling upon all freedom lovers to resist the bills. The ads point out that Article 10 of the Sri Lankan Constitution states that "every person is entitled to freedom of thought, conscience and religion, including the freedom to have or to adopt a religion or belief of his choice." But the bills seek to deny these rights.

"They legitimise oppression of minority religions by those seeking to destabilize society or settle personal disputes, by bringing false charges. They allow courts to determine what forms of religious devotion and practices are acceptable. They criminalize all works of charity and good deeds carried out by individuals and establishments of minority religions as allurements for religious conversion. They prohibit teaching and propagation of religion," the ads say.

"The bills are clearly draconian," commented SL Gunasekara, a top notch lawyer, and a former leader of the Sinhala party, Sihala Urumaya (SU).

Interestingly, "SL" had himself been a victim of anti-Christian prejudice in the SU and had to quit. He was a Christian, albeit a non-practicing one.

According to "The Sunday Leader", Section 8 of the government's draft bill defines conversion in such a way that any kind of motivation to convert is illegal. The government will deem as objectionable any direct or indirect action or behaviour designed to cause a person to "embrace" a religion or religious practice or religious philosophy to which he does not subscribe to. Any direct or indirect action or behaviour designed to cause a person to "abandon" the practice of his religion or religious philosophy will also be considered illegal.

Again, according to "The Sunday Leader", the government's bill is more stringent than the Private Member's bill. If the offence is committed against a minor, the offender could get a maximum sentence of seven years and/or a fine of SLRs.500,000. Teachers and heads of institutions may be liable to more severe punishment if conversions take place under their aegis. The state could confiscate the assets of the offender. If the offence is committed by a group of persons (like those belonging to an organization), every director, shareholder, officer and every employee of that organization is considered guilty of the offence.

According to the Private Member's bill, anyone who performs or takes part either directly or indirectly in an initiation ceremony to convert another should inform the Divisional Secretary (the top most local level government officer) about the act.

"Allurement", in the "unethical" conversion process, is defined as the offer of any temptation in the form of any gift in cash or kind; the grant of any material benefit, monetary or otherwise; or employment or promotion in employment."

The term "fraudulent" includes "misinterpretation". As "The Sunday Leader" fears, the state may construe a Christian's claim that Jesus is the Son of God as a "fraudulent" claim made to influence the target of conversion.

In a statement issued in late June, the Catholic Bishops' Conference (CBC) and the National Christian Council (NCC) had said that while they were also opposed to unethical conversions, the proposed legislation would "pave the way for the oppression of minority religions in the country." It could also "seriously erode" the freedom of thought, conscience and religion, guaranteed by the country's Constitution and sanctioned by international conventions. They pointed out that the bill would have the effect of banning all charitable work by religious persons and institutions.

"Our already oppressed people simply cannot be burdened with more restrictions of this nature," the two organizations warned.

However, few will deny that unethical conversions are taking place in Sri Lanka, especially in the economically deprived rural Sinhala-Buddhist areas, the plantation areas in Central Sri Lanka and the war-ravaged Eastern Tamil districts. Neglect by the state and by the Buddhist or Hindu organizations, has driven the poor into the waiting arms of the evangelists dangling carrots in front of them.

" The new Fundamentalist groups, backed by foreign money, are indulging in open bribery to get converts," charged SL Gunasekara, although opposed to the proposed law. He also feared a cultural annihilation if the trend were allowed to continue unchecked. "The new Western-oriented churches create a cultural cleavage in the village and destroy the traditional harmony."

The traditional and established Christians churches, on the other hand, have not had such a destructive impact. And this is acknowledged by both the Buddha Sasana Minister and the JHU.

The new-fangled smaller churches come with American, European and increasingly, South Korean money. According to government minister Wickramanayake, these evangelical churches are only interested in increasing their flock in the shortest possible time. And to achieve their goal, they would adopt any stratagem.

Many of these "religious NGOs" feel the need to show an increase in their flock to continue to get grants from donors in the West. Many of them get themselves registered as non-profit companies under the Companies' Act and indulge in economic activities which are used as instruments to secure converts.

The UPFA government has assured the established and traditional churches that the proposed law will not curb their activities and that it will only target the questionable activities of evangelistic and fundamentalist churches. Minister Wickramanayake has even proposed a "Conciliation Council" to settle disputes.

But the traditional churches are not mollified. They fear that a draconian law necessarily gives room for misuse and will be misused. To them it seems that the two bills in question aim at stopping all conversion, not just "unethical" conversion.

Rationalists like SL Gunasekara argue that the practice of ascribing a particular religion to a new born child is also an "unethical" practice, which is being conveniently ignored by all religious groups. "There should be freedom of choice in this matter. You cannot thrust a particular religion on an innocent child, just as much as you cannot thrust a political view," he told Hindustan Times.

The government itself is divided on this issue. According to The Sunday Leader, the present Commerce Minister and former Christian Affairs Minister, Jeyaraj Fernandopulle, will not support such a bill. He is quoted as saying that he will ask for a "conscience vote" on it. According The Sunday Leader, the current Minister of Christian Affairs, Milroy Fernando, has described the bill as "absurd". He claims that only a small section of the Buddhist community wants the bill.

As an alternative, the Catholic Bishops' Conference and the National Christian Council, have jointly suggested that the government and the various religious groups discuss a "democratic" way of tackling the menace of unethical conversion.

Realising the truth that the so called "unethical" conversions take place because of poverty and unemployment, a top leader of Sri Lankan Buddhists, the Chief Prelate of the Malwatte Chapter, Ven Thibbotuwawe Siddhartha Thero, has suggested that vocational training institutes be set up for youth from the underprivileged sections of Buddhist society.

Some doubt if such a bill will actually be passed, because politicians may not want to lose the votes of Christians (7per cent of the population). But others think that it will be passed in the belief that the Sinhala-Buddhist majority in the country will be pleased, just as the "Sinhala Only" bill was passed in the 1950s to please the Sinhala majority, unmindful of its long term consequences for Sinhala-Tamil relations in the country. If short term and short sighted political strategies were adopted consistently in the past, they see no reason why things should be different this time round.