The anti-conversion bill, introduced by the Jathika Hela Urumaya (JHU) in 2004, was approved in January 2009, and the Sri Lanka Parliament is to vote on the Bill in February or March.
In 2004, the Supreme Court of Sri Lanka ruled that the Bill did not contravene the Constitution. But the bill is arguably inconsistent with international law concerning religious freedom. The legislation, which comes with the blessings of the government and the Buddhist-Sinhala fundamentalists, has caused deep concern among minorities that follow other religions.
The anti-conversion legislation calls for seven years’ imprisonment and a fine of up to Sri Lankan rupees 500,000 (US$4,425) for converting a person from one religion to another by using “force, fraud or allurement”.
Briefly, any attempt to “persuade or influence a person to adopt another religion” would become a criminal offence, and anyone convicted of offering “moral support [or] material assistance” leading to such conversion could be imprisoned for up to seven years.
Minority communities fear the law will extinguish freedom of religious expression and association for all Sri Lankans. At the core of religious freedom is the assurance that one is free to change one’s beliefs. It is obvious that this anti-conversion legislation aims to further boost the position of Buddhism, which has a foremost place in Sri Lankan society as a matter of Constitutional law. Secular forces see this legislation as another step towards curtailing human rights and another step toward building a “therocracy” in Sri Lanka at the expense of individual rights.
Liberals believe the Anti-Conversion Bill is a bad and unrealistic piece of legislation that will suppress the individual and impinge on human rights. They urge the government not to be a party to the whims and fancies of religious extremists. The legislation could “seriously erode” the freedom of thought, conscience and religion guaranteed in the Constitution and sanctioned by international conventions.
The successful enactment of the anti-conversion law could have similar consequences to the “Sinhala-only” policy engineered by former Prime Minister S. W. R. D. Bandaranaike in 1956 to woo Sinhala sympathy.
Dr. A. R. M. Imtiyaz,
Department of Political Science, Temple University, Pennsylvania, USA
|
E-mail