Anti-conversion legislation: Ethical or unethical?

• ACBC releases report on unethical conversions
• Anti-Conversion Bill to be enacted soon

By Santhush Fernando
The highly controversial debate on unethical conversion legislation or anti-conversion bill as many others call it, is back to the fore with the launch of the Commission Report of Unethical Conversion of Buddhists of the All Ceylon Buddhist Congress (ACBC), last week and the the architects of the anti-conversion bill the Jathika Hela Urumaya (JHU), commencing its final battle for the enactment of the “Prohibition of Forcible Religious Conversions Bill”, presented way back in 2004.

Bill to face final test in February-JHU
Bill will not change in principle
The Bill is to be submitted back to Parliament next month, for its third reading and vote, after completing its committee stage, JHU Spokesperson Nishantha Sri Warnasinghe told The Bottom Line. JHU was seeking the backing of the Roman Catholic Church along with Buddhist and Hindu organization as well as the Sri Lanka Freedom Party (SLFP), United National Party (UNP) and other Tamil parties, he said.

“The JHU will be re-presenting a slightly amended bill which it will not differ significantly from its previous one. After its first and second reading, the Bill in question was referred to a Parliamentary Select Committee headed by dissident Parliamentarian Wijedasa Rajapaksa,” Warnasinghe said.

“However Ven. Itthapane Dhammalankara Thera and Ven. Maduluwawe Sobhitha Theras made representations in 2007 to the Committee on behalf of the Inter Faith Congress (Sarwagamika Samuluwa) stating that such legislation was unnecessary and that issues of conversions should be resolved by a forum comprised of religious leaders and not by legislation,” he said.

“With the steeping down of MP Wijedasa Rajapaksa, however the committee became dysfunctional. We thereafter made a request to Speaker W J M Lokubandara, to appoint a MP from JHU in order to fulfil our promise.

“Following the Supreme Court determination and select committee proceedings the JHU had made several slight changes but the original Bill has not changed in principle,” he added.

Salient features of the JHU Bill
The draft bill proposed imprisonment of not exceeding five years and a fine not exceeding Rs 150,000 to be imposed on a person found guilty of using force, allurement or fraudulent means to convert a person to another religion.Schedule I referred to in Section 4 (a) of the bill further states that a person found guilty of converting a minor, a woman, Samurdhi beneficiary, prison inmates, inmates of rehabilitation and detention centers, physically and mentally disabled, employees of an organisation, members of the armed forces or police, students, inmates of hospitals and or places of healing and refugee camps and any other category as may be prescribed by the Minister of the subject by regulations, will have to serve an imprisonment not exceeding seven years and also be liable to a fine not exceeding Rs 500,000.

When the constitutionality of the bill was challenged, the Supreme Court ruled that Clause 3 which made it mandatory to report a conversion to the Divisional Secretary and Clause 4(a), which made it an offence with the penalty of imprisonment and fine, where one failed to meet the terms of Clause 3, were inconsistent with the Constitution.

Clause 4 was amended to provide for the institution of all prosecutions under the Bill be carried out according to the Criminal Procedure Act while Clause 5 was altered to stipulate that such institution of prosecution, should have the written sanctions of the Attorney General.

Rival bill by Freedom Alliance Government
In June 2004, the then Buddha Sasana Minister and Deputy Defence minister Rathnasiri Wickremanayake presented another bill aimed at curtailing conversions named “Freedom of Religions Bill” which was said to be more draconian than the JHU bill in its outlook. It carried a clause where the Presumption of Innocence guaranteed under Article 13 of the Constitution was removed, of an offender charged under the said Bill, human rights lawyers opined.

Mainline Christian Churches including the Roman Catholic Church said that although both the JHU and the Government had assured that mainline churches have nothing to fear from the new bills and that they were solely against certain unethical activities of fundamentalist churches, the bills in question did not make any distinction between mainline churches and fundamentalist churches. Either of these two bills, if enacted into law would result in the persecution of religious minorities under statutory sanction, they said.

Rubbing salt on wounds?
However, some believe that the enactment of this Bill will very likely create another blood bath in the country this time a religious conflict, similar to unfortunate repercussions following the passing of ‘Sinhala Only’ Bill in 1956.

Anti-conversion legislation will only create further division among Sri Lankans who are already divided on ethnic grounds and once passed in Parliament, this will portray to the world that the majority of the Sinhalese Buddhists are extremists - both racially and religious, and will only help the pro-LTTE quarters to regain sympathy and turn world opinion in their favour, as being the first victims of rising Sinhala extremism.

Tolerance- Wither Buddhism and Hinduism?
The 1956 Buddhist Commission as it came to be popularly known, stated under its concluding chapter of the report titled ‘Tolerance’ that “Almost every page of this Report bears witness to the extent and duration of Buddhist tolerance (in the colonial era). Yet fully eight years after this country is alleged to have gained independence, when Buddhists ask for some of that justice which has been denied to them for centuries, they are characterized as a truculent majority and asked to show tolerance. By a flagrant disregard of historical fact and contemporary reality, the Buddhists are made to appear in the light of domineering tyrants…”

In the aftermath the tsunami of 2004, foreign-funded evangelists arrived in Sri Lanka in the guise of rehabilitation work were in fact distributing Bibles and other Christian literature among poor tsunami victims, manipulating the tolerance of Buddhists, some quarters believe.An independent commission appointed in 2003 to examine allegations by the Ministry of Buddhist Affairs, accused 188 nongovernmental organizations of engaging in unethical conversions.

Fundamentalism- Mainline churches too bearing brunt of it
Although Roman Catholic Church was not in favour of anti-conversion legislation, it issued two statements in 2004 condemning fundamentalist Christian groups for employing unethical tactics such as offering material rewards for conversion, and posing a threat to the co-existence of diverse religious groups in the country.

Some of these groups were not only coercing Buddhists and Hindus to smash statues of Lord Buddha and other gods and eat sweets fashioned in the shape of Lord Buddha, but had forced number of Roman Catholics to do the same to statues and pictures of Mother Mary and other saints. Following the controversial death of well-renowned Buddhist monk- Ven Gangodawilla Soma Thera, under mysterious conditions in December 2003, fundamentalist Christians were charged by some quarters to have conspired the murder. Prayer centers belonging to these sects in the predominantly Buddhist and Hindu areas, were attacked by hardline Sinhala Buddhists. Some of them even targeted established churches, triggering fears among the country’s long-standing Roman Catholic and Christian Churches.

Western influence
However, the focus of Western countries on socio-religious developments within Sri Lanka was clearly portrayed with Angela Wu, Becket Fund Director of International Advocacy, testifying before the Congressional Human Rights Caucus at a Capitol Hill hearing on anti-conversion laws and religious freedom in South Asia and the Middle East on April 7, 2006.

Ms. Wu dedicated significant testimony to the situation in Sri Lanka, that there had been an “overall deterioration in religious freedom”.

“The U.N. and the human rights community must remain vigilant and continue to press Sri Lanka for reform, but there is also a critical role for Congress. … Yet according to the State Department, there has been an “overall deterioration in religious freedom” in Sri Lanka. … It is ultimately up to Congress to determine if Sri Lanka deserves Millennium Challenge Account monies and it may condition any award on specific and concrete improvements in religious liberty.”

In July 2005, the JHU charged that in a statement made by the then Deputy Secretary of State Ms. Christina Rocca the US Government “threatened Sri Lanka with major consequences including termination of US funds if Parliament passes these bills on to law…”

“We condemn this stand taken by your Government, as we believe your Government has no right to interfere in the internal affairs of the republic of Sri Lanka.” JHU said in retort.

Increasing attacks on churches in 2008
International Religious Freedom Report-2008 released by the Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights, and Labour of the US State Department cites that attacks on churches and Christians were on the increase.

•In June 2008 anti-Christian banners were mounted in Middeniya, Hambantota and an anti-Christian rally where a cross and picture of the Virgin Mary were burned.
•On June 24, 2008, three men attacked and warned a Christian pastor, Rev. Fernando, not to return to his village in Ampara, while returning home from a church group meeting in Uhana.
•In March 2008 a reportedly armed Wennappuwa Provincial Council member assaulted a security guard at the Pentecostal Believer's Church Bible College in Lunuwila, Puttalam District. Later on, masked men attacked and nine students were injured.
• In March 2008 a group of protesters prevented Christians from attending a Sunday service at the King's Revival Church in Mathugama, Kalutara District.
• In March 2008 approximately 200 persons gathered outside the house of the pastor of Niyagama Bible Ministry in Galle District.
• In March 2008 the Zion Mount Prayer House in LTTE-held Mullaitivu was set on fire while the pastor, his wife, child, and two others were in the building. All escaped safely.
• In February 2008 Pastor Neil Edirisinghe of the House Church Foundation in Ampara was shot dead outside his house by two men on a motorcycle. The attackers also shot his wife and injured her young son.
• In February 2008 the house of a parishioner of the Independent Church in Weeraketiya, Hambantota District, was stoned while the pastor and his family were paying a visit.

Overwhelming evidence of unfair conversions: ACBC Report
Last week the All Ceylon Buddhist Congress (ACBC) launched the report of its commission set up to inquire into the conversion of Buddhists into other religions through unethical means and ruses which was headed by retired High Court Judge Sarath Gunathilake.

There were overwhelming evidence of Sinhala Buddhists being converted to other religious by unethical and unfair means due to poverty and unemployment, along with Tamil Buddhists and Tamil Hindus, the report said.

Article 9 of the Second Republican Constitution of 1978, accorded Buddhism the “foremost place” and commits the Government to protect and foster the religion it does not recognize it as the state religion. The government should appoint a Special Investigation Division to probe into all destructive religious groups and cults which were set up after the 1972 Constitution came into effect and take measures to proscribe them, Report proposed.

Recommendations to counter conversion
All religious and missionary institutions when registering should take an oath or pledge that it will undertake to uplift the religious wellbeing of its adherents only and not those of other religions and also to refrain from engaging in conversion by unethical and undue means, it recommends.

Written approval be obtained from the District Secretary for setting up or expansion of all temples, churches, mosques, shrines and prayer centers and that this approval be intimated to the Sashanarakshaka Balamandala of the area within two weeks it further stipulates. Such request should be published in newspapers and the decision should be made only after a public inquiry.

The government should take immediate steps to re-present Bill against Unethical Conversion which lapsed with the prorogation of the Parliament, as a bill presented by the state and all Buddhist organisations at their grass-root level should pressurise their representatives (Members of Parliament) for its due enactment.

Full details of all places of worship, prayer centres, pre-schools, day-care centres, elders and children’s homes, non-governmental organisations and special projects run by religious organisations must be provided to the District Secretariat and necessary legislations for the due regulation of the same should be enacted.

Sashanarakshaka Balamandala of the area be vested with power to inquire into such unethical conversions and that laws be enacted for the arrest, granting of bail or remanding of parties which fail to appear before Sashanarakshaka Balamandala when summoned, similar to provisions of Section 109(6) of the Code of Criminal Procedure Act no 15 of 1979.

Laws should be enacted to restrain the use of residential or business premises as prayer / religious centres or be converted to the same later on, and Police should inquire into such complaints and to intimate the Commissioner of Buddhist Affairs of the same, it further stipulated.

A public institution similar to Auditor General’s Department, directly accountable to Parliament, should be set up to inhibit the actions of all individuals and institutions violating Article 9 and such institution should inquire into all NGOs and foreign individuals and take action to register them while immigrations laws and Visa procedures should be streamlined to counter the same, it was further recommended in the Report.

Timeline of anti conversion bill

• Dec 2003-The precursor of the JHU, the Jathika Sangha Sammelanaya (JSS), led by Ven. Ellawala Medhananda Thera commences a fast in front of the Ministry of Budda Sasana urging legislation to end unethical conversions.
  
• Jan 2004- The then Minister of Buddha Sasana, W. J. M. Lokubandara, of the United National Party (UNP) appoints a committee constituted of Buddhist monks, to draft a bill.
  
• Feb 2004- Parliament dissolved. JHU is formed and enters into election fray vowing to bring necessary legislation.
  
• May 2004- Hardly a month after 2004 Parliament commenced, Deputy Leader of JHU and then national List MP, Ven. Omalpe Sobhitha Thera presents the Bill titled “Prohibition of Forcible Religious Conversions”. The Bill was held unconstitutional Sri Lanka’ apex court- Supreme Court.
  
• June 2004- Present Prime Minister and then Buddha Sasana Minister of the Freedom Alliance Government, Rathnasiri Wickremenayake presented another Bill targeting conversions titled, “Freedom of Religions Act”, despite much opposition within government. To add insult to injury, certain Government quarters publicly call for “conscience voting” allowing MPs to vote outside of party affiliations, which many observers criticised would all but assure majority passage while also creating a climate of divisive religious sectarianism in Parliament
  
• October 4, 2005: The JHU introduces 18th Amendment to the Constitution as a Private Members Bill, to establish Buddhism as the state religion and as an ancillary move, attempted to restrict the conversion of Buddhists “into other forms of worship or spread other forms of worship among the Buddhists.”
  
• April 2006- Speaker W J M Lokubandara appoints 19 members to the Select Committee to review the JHU Bill and MP Wijedasa Rajapaksa is made Chairman.
  
• 2007- Representations by Ven. Itthapane Dhammalankara Thera and Ven. Maduluwawe Sobhitha Theras of the Inter faith Confederation to the effect that anti-conversion laws were uncalled for and canvassing for amicable dispute resolution.
  
• 2007& 2008- Both anti conversion bill and 18th Amendment in stalemate with prorogation of Parliament and stepping down of Wijedasa Rajapaksa as Chairman.