February 10, 2009
Sri Lanka’s first anti-conversion bill was introduced in Parliament just last month, and will likely become law sometime before February ends. The bill, titled “Bill for the Prohibition of Forcible Conversions,” criminalizes any attempt to convert a person from one religion to another by use of force, fraud, or allurement. Punishments for those convicted of forcibly converting another person include up to seven years in prison and/or a hefty fine of 500,000 rupees ($4,425 US) – equivalent to about 3 years worth of wages for the average Sri Lankan.
Sri Lanka, a small tropical island off the coast of India in the Indian Ocean, is roughly the size of West Virginia – but has a population of over 21 million. According to the CIA World Factbook, nearly 70% of the population is Buddhist, with Islam and Hinduism each comprising about 7% of the population, and Christianity approximately 6%. Sri Lanka’s Constitution guarantees religious freedom to all religions, but also states that “The Republic of Sri Lanka shall give to Buddhism the foremost place.”
“Criminalizing Charity”
Buddhist members of Parliament who introduced the “Bill for the Prohibition of Forcible Conversions” claim that the measure will simply ensure the prevention of forcible conversions. But Sri Lanka’s Christian community thinks the legislation will limit Christian outreach work and impede freedom of religion.
The National Christian Evangelical Alliance of Sri Lanka (NCEASL) recently released a press statement, voicing their concerns about the potential ramifications of the legislation.
“It is our gravest concern that this bill will grant legal sanction for the harassment of religious communities or individuals,” the statement reads, “and offer convenient tools of harassment for settling personal disputes and grudges, totally unrelated to acts of alleged ‘forced’ conversion.”
Joseph Grieboski, founder and president of the Washington DC-based Institute for Religion and Public Policy, agrees with NCEASL’s assessment of the dangers. “The anti-conversion bill in Sri Lanka is overly broad and targets all religious conversions, not just ‘unethical conversions,’” he says. “It also criminalizes charitable acts, humanitarian aid, and peaceful religious dialogue. This law not only contradicts Articles 10 and 14 of the Constitution of Sri Lanka, but also violates Sri Lanka’s obligations under the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.”
He goes on to point out that “Sri Lanka already has laws in force against assault, false imprisonment, blackmail, defamation, and fraud – which are the true problems of ‘unethical’ conversions.”
Open Doors Minister at Large Paul Estabrooks, who recently traveled to Sri Lanka to visit with the Christian community there, also sees danger in the proposed legislation.
“It is a limitation on the freedom of religion,” says Estabrooks, “There is no freedom of religion if you cannot change your faith. It’s an issue we confront in Muslim nations with the apostasy laws. The issue is the limitation of not being able, of your own choice, to change your faith. For Open Doors as a ministry, anti-conversion laws create situations where there is increased persecution.”
Growing Concern in India
In January, a state assembly in the north India state of Himachal Pradesh approved an anti-conversion bill, becoming the eighth state in India to pass anti-conversion legislation. Five Indian states have already signed this legislation into law, causing growing concern in the Christian community. And while the laws are nothing new – Chhattisgarh and Orissa states have anti-conversion legislation dating back to the late 1960s – the laws have received more publicity in recent years.
The nationalist Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), a parent organization of numerous Hindu extremist groups, enacted more stringent versions of these laws in three state legislatures in the last year, although none of these versions have been codified yet. According to Compass Direct News, Christians and political analysts credit these efforts with spikes in violence by Hindu radicals, such as the August violence on Christians in Orissa state.
Yet the emergence of anti-conversion legislation has another side – it means that churches are growing enough to gain notice.
“[W]hat it does show,” Estabrooks continues, “is that there is a growing Christian community in these areas. Anti-conversion laws are only implemented when there is concern over the growth of the church in that area. The Hindu extremists in these states are concerned about losing their people to Christianity.”
Indeed, it would seem that increased conversions from Hinduism to Christianity are triggering a backlash from Hindu extremists. India’s Christian community has experienced repeated attacks in recent months from Hindu groups angry over the growing presence of Christianity.
A Vocal Response
Estabrooks believes that the indigenous Church in Sri Lanka and India needs to “react on a legal level, in terms of challenging the political leaders of the day. It’s a religious freedom issue. Any government that says you cannot convert is obviously limiting the freedom of their people. I think that’s the basis on which this should be challenged.”
Christians in the West can play a vital role as these anti-conversion laws spring up, Estabrooks said. American Christians can use their freedom of speech to protect their fellow believers’ freedom of religion.
“I think we should speak out. Our culture here in the West champions religious freedom. This is the basis of our society. We also espouse the UN Charters, which protect religious freedom. We should speak out as loudly as we can against such unjust actions around the world.”
No Turning Back
Grieboski believes that at their core, anti-conversion laws reveal a deeper issue. “Anti-conversion bills are more often than not simply political tools used by religious nationalists to maintain a semblance of ‘cultural unity,’” he says, “but in fact serve to limit the influence of outside religions which are seen in themselves as political tools of other countries. By limiting conversions, religious nationalists and political leaders using religion as an excuse can maintain a tight control on resources, funding, and for that matter even have a tighter control on the overall population.”
Apparently the controlling measures of Sri Lanka’s predominantly Buddhist government have not yet deterred local Christians. In spite of the persecution they face as a minority faith in Sri Lankan society, Estabrooks says he has encountered a high level of persistence in the Christians he has visited there.
He tells of one young man, a former Buddhist monk, who was severely persecuted for his conversion to Christianity. His house was destroyed 13 times. When asked, “How can you stand it?” the young man’s reply was to quote the words of the well-known hymn, “I have decided to follow Jesus, no turning back, no turning back.”
Kristin Butler has visited with Christian communities throughout India and Pakistan, and recently met with believers on both sides of the conflict in Israel/Palestine. She is a contributing writer at Crosswalk.com and covers religious freedom and human rights issues at BreakPoint.org. Kristin can be reached at [email protected].
