CHENNAI, INDIA, October 11, 2002: The anti-conversion ordinance is “not directed against any particular religion, least of all any minority religion,” the Chief Minister of Tamil Nadu, Jayalalitha, has said. In a statement, she clarified that it was “directed against the use of fraudulent means, allurement and force in enticing individuals into changing their religious denomination against their will.” Ms. Jayalalitha reasoned that the ordinance “clearly recognizes and provides for action to be taken to arrest a disturbing trend found in various parts of Tamil Nadu, as reported and documented, where inducements, monetary and material, fraudulent and clandestine, have been adopted by some persons and institutions to convert people to another religion, capitalizing on their poverty, illiteracy and ignorance. The State has a duty cast upon it to make laws to protect its citizens against exploitation by such unscrupulous elements.” Even the Supreme Court, in its 1977 ruling in the Stanislaus vs. State of Madhya Pradesh case, held that the right to propagate one’s religion (by advocacy or preaching) did not include the right to convert another. In doing so, the Court upheld a similar ordinance against conversion in Madhya Pradesh. In a report appearing in the Times of India, the Catholic Bishops’ Conference denied the church was indulging in forced conversions. Spokesperson Archbishop Vincent M. Concessao said, “Anyone willing to become a Christian has to undergo preparations of six months before he is recommended.” However, he also stated that the church gives scholarships and other benefits, and wondered whether these can be considered as inducements for conversion. A report in The Hindu stated that the BJP political party welcomed the ordinance, charging that the involvement of foreigners and foreign funds for conversion had been damaging the fabric of society.
A daily summary of world news for Hindus and non-Hindus alike