Author: Hilda Raja
Publication: The Hindu
Date: December 3, 2002
It has been reported that a broad-based
platform comprising 65 Dalit organisations, religious minority fora and
civil rights groups has decided to take their opposition to the anti-conversion
law to a higher political platform. So they also want to rope in the Left
parties. Each of these in its own perception seeks political gains out
of the whole opposition strategy.
Conversion is a question of faith
but what seems to surface is that it has become a ransom to demand this
or that and it is used as a threat. "If you do not give us land we will
convert, we want equality and so we will convert," are the reasons given
to justify the need for conversion. Constitutionally equality is guaranteed
to all. The operation of this has been far from satisfactory. What is needed
is social awareness, a change in the attitude and recourse to the judiciary
in specific cases of discrimination. The cases of oppression and the discrimination
against the SCs as reported in the media and from what I have personally
witnessed are perpetuated by the BCs and the MBCs (these are referred to
as `caste Hindus' in the media).
In a village in Villipuram district,
the SCs are not allowed to enter the village temple by the Udayars. The
tragedy is that the SCs too practise discrimination. For example, the Pallars
will not inter-dine or intermarry with other SCs such as the Arunthathiyars.
Political parties and leadership are also based on these divisions. Exceptions
are not the rule. For that matter quite a few Pallars have married Brahmins.
The former are Sanskritised and have become highly ritualistic.
Sad reality
So when conversion from one faith
to another is being discussed I fail to understand how it can be an escape
route to equality and dignity. No religion including Hinduism sanctions
oppression and discrimination. It is a sad reality that the Dalits come
in handy for exploitation in every field and in any cause by the politicians,
the church leaders and those who are involved in the business of conversion
to suit their own vested interest. The protest against the law which prohibits
forced conversions is a telling example. For one thing the Christian churches
do practise discrimination even in death, and continue to bury the Dalits
in separate cemeteries even today. If it is dignity and equality that force
the Dalits to embrace Christianity it is for them to articulate so when
they get converted and prove their volition. The Dalit leader Ambedkar
opted for Buddhism because he found Christian religion too practised discrimination
and Dalits were oppressed within its fold. So to state that in Christian
churches they find dignity is far from truth and that makes it a misleading
inducement - to promise equality and then deny them that. Too long they
have been exploited and made scapegoats and used as a camouflage for the
vested interests of the high and mighty even by their own Dalit leaders.
The Dalit leaders who today are
forging a broad-based platform also have their political goals rather than
the intricate faith question of `conversion.' Even if all the SCs out of
their free will opt to become Christians or Buddhists who and what is preventing
them? If the Tamil Nadu CM showed an inexplicable hurry in ushering in
such a law the Dalit organisations are exposing their eagerness to use
this as a tool to gain political mileage and the Minority church leaders
are revealing their heartburns, because for them their `targets' for each
year will be affected - this will affect the flow of funds too.
Even the State Minority Commission
which had a belated meeting with the CM put forth very illogical views
to press its demand for revoking the law. For example, it stated that the
punishment in other States where such a law was in force is less harsh,
that the minorities are engaged only in service and that no statistics
are available to substantiate the argument that forced conversions took
place.
Is the law illegal? Does it violate
personal freedom and the Constitutionally guaranteed rights? Does it prohibit
and/or hinder service by the minorities? These should have been raised
and validated. If the law violates personal freedom, then would less harsh
punishment justify it? The law will become operative not against service
but against conversions.
Similarly each State has laws with
its own degree of severity and leniency. Is there any law that says that
all the States should have a uniform set of punishments? For example the
minority institutions in this country follow different sets of rules and
regulations - differing from State to State. In this State they come under
no government regulation! What is puzzling is why the church leaders while
saying that they do not indulge in forced conversions are so worked up
and demand the revocation of the law? On the other hand when there is blatant
discrimination against the Christian SCs and STs in denying them the same
concessions and reservation guaranteed to the Hindu Dalits there was/is
no consistent struggle and protest. Half-hearted attempts were made. Even
the neo-Buddhists are given the same benefits as the Hindu SCs and STs.
The argument that the law can be
misused is valid. It is reasonable then to ask for safeguard provisions.
But do the churches not have the resources - the power and the strength:
financial political, and social - to prove in the courts the `truth'? All
laws are misused. Do we do away with them?