Zero Convertibility

The ordinance was pushed through, even though the assembly session was only 20 days away. One reason being cited in the AIADMK circles is that Tamil Nadu has seen a sharp rise in the conversion of Dalits and women to Christianity and Islam in the past two years. Last month in Madurai, 200 Dalits embraced Christianity and in several villages Dalits have been embracing, or threatening to embrace, Islam (see box).

While Christian and Islamic outfits seem obvious targets of such a law, what could've also precipitated the ordinance was the October 3, 2002, order of a two-judge bench of the Madras High Court. Chief Justice B. Subhashan Reddy and Justice K. Govindarajan stayed a letter dated September 19, 2000, of the Karunanidhi government, according to which a person born to Christian converts, on reconversion to Hinduism, shall not be eligible for an SC certificate.

The stay order was passed in pursuance of a petition filed by I. Ilangovan of Vellore. His plea was that a five-judge constitution bench of the Supreme Court had observed in 1976 that it is open to such a person to become a member of the scheduled caste to which his parents originally belonged. The only condition, imposed in order to weed out fraudulent cases, was that on reconversion the caste should admit him or her.

The DMK regime had issued the letter as an administrative response to the large number of 'reconversions' happening for the sake of reservation benefits. That the AIADMK was using this for other ends was clear—one unwitting political victim of the letter was Ashok Kumar, the principal sessions judge who admonished cops about the manner of M. Karunanidhi's arrest on June 30, 2001. He had famously asked them: "Is your heart made of mud?" Kumar was born a Dalit Christian who converted to Hinduism and availed of reservation benefits during education and employment. Currently, a case is under way against him where it's claimed, based on the September 2000 order, that his scheduled caste certificate is invalid.

"After the high court's stay on the government letter, Ashok Kumar and thousands like him can breathe easy," says Ilangovan, himself a potential victim of the letter. But the petitioner's happiness was shortlived. Within two days of the stay order, the government came out with the ordinance that has the potential to not just prohibit the conversion of Dalit Christians to Hinduism, but also prohibit all "forced conversions" to Islam, Christianity or Buddhism. The ordinance is a double-edged sword—it pleases the Sangh by clamping down on conversions from the Hindu fold on the one hand, and can be used selectively, on the other, against irritants like judge Ashok Kumar.

The ordinance, however, isn't exceptional. Similar laws are already in place in Orissa (1967), Madhya Pradesh (1968) and Arunachal Pradesh (1977).These laws have survived being challenged for violating Article 25 that ensures freedom to propagate religion. Efforts at similar legislation at the Centre were made twice. In December 1978, the Jana Sangh's Om Prakash Tyagi introduced the Bill on Freedom of Religion in the Lok Sabha; and in July 2001 Shiv Sena MP Anant Geethe moved the Prohibition on Religious Conversion Bill. Both the private member bills fell through.

However, an anti-conversion law has always been high on the rss agenda. Only last month, sarsanghchalak K.S. Sudarshan wrote on the need for an anti-conversion legislation in Panchajanya. With her ordinance, Jayalalitha has won admirers in the rss. The 'Annadaanam' (free lunch) scheme and spiritual classes in over 150 Hindu temples, a marriage mela for Hindus, her refusal to join other CMs in condemning Narendra Modi for Gujarat, her support for pota, and most recently, her raking up of Sonia Gandhi's Italian origins, have won Jayalalitha the admiration of hardcore Sanghis.

vhp leader Ashok Singhal hailed the ordinance as a "bold step and an eye-opener for other states". Kanchi Shankaracharya Jayendra Saraswati is enthused and wants a similar law covering the entire country. Last year, Tamil Nadu's Hindu Munnani had passed a resolution at their annual conference demanding such a law.

The ordinance also comes at a time when Jayalalitha's future is to be decided by a Supreme Court bench hearing the TANSI cases. The point is will it redeem her?