The term “love jihad” has once again been propelled to the center of political dialogue in a religiously-divided India. It began with an uproar on social media following an advertisement by Tanishq, an Indian jewellery brand, which showed an inter-faith marriage. Several citizens criticised the ad for romanticising “love jihad”, the purported forced conversion of Hindu women by Muslim men. This was then followed by a viral CCTV footage of the brutal killing of Nikita, a young student in Haryana, which her family claimed to be a result of the same practice. Perhaps in a bid to ride on the widespread outrage caused by these two incidents, several Chief Ministers of states across India vowed to enact laws and crack down on the alleged practice. However, will these proposals be able to pass the test of judicial scrutiny, or are they just redundant additions to existing laws that already exist to protect women from violence and other physical and mental harm?
Before we delve into the legality of a law on “love jihad,” it is essential to first understand what the term even entails. In February, the Minister of State for Home Affairs, G. Kishan Reddy, said that the phrase “love jihad” has not been defined in the existing laws. In fact, he said that no such cases of this practice have even been reported by any central agencies. However, gathering from what advocates of the proposal are seeking to achieve, this term refers to the alleged practice of Hindu women being fraudulently and coercively compelled to “convert to Islam.” For instance, while announcing his decision to introduce a law on the issue, the Chief Minister of Uttar Pradesh, Yogi Adityanath, vowed to penalise men who “hide their identities” and “play with the honour of daughters and sisters.” Hence, despite there being no legal definition or even acknowledgement of the practice in law, the word continues to be floated about by several legislators and political leaders.
The exact content of the proposals has not been made accessible to the public yet. However, even with the minimal information available, any such law will clearly contravene several fundamental principles enshrined in the Indian constitution. Primarily, the law is an alarming threat to the right to freedom of religion, which, in India, includes the right to “profess, practice and propagate,” any religion and also comprises the right to convert. Hence, by terming conversion of Hindu women to Islam as “love jihad” and cracking down on the practice, the law endangers women who are merely exercising their right to adhere to a religion of their choice.
Moreover, it is also in blatant violation of the principle of equality in two ways. Firstly, by targeting marriages in which Hindu women convert to Islam, it creates a distinction between Hindu-Muslim marriages and other inter-faith marriages. While the presenters of the proposal claim that it is not religion-specific, it is abundantly clear that the law does not intend on targeting conversions as a whole, but only those exclusively involving Hindu women. Secondly, it is also detrimental to the right to gender equality through the implication that women do not have the agency to make such choices of their own volition. By taking a patriarchal and protectionist tone, the law hampers a woman’s autonomy to profess any religion she chooses to. More importantly, the law also infringes on a woman and her chosen partner’s right to privacy, by bringing their personal decision under the scrutiny of government authorities and moral vigilantes.
While it can be argued that the above mentioned violations are permissible in light of the threat to “public order,” the proposal does not achieve anything that hasn’t already been outlawed by the existing laws in India. To begin with, the Supreme Court has already ruled that the right to propagate religion does not include the right to forcibly convert. Moreover, at least eight states, including those that have vowed to enact laws on “love jihad,” already have legislations that outlaw forcible conversions and conversions done solely for the purpose of marriage. Several High Courts across the country, too, have reiterated the illegality of such conversions.
Furthermore, advocates of such a policy also argue for its need by suggesting that the practice often results in other crimes against women, including human trafficking, sexual and physical violence, domestic violence, and other forms of physical and mental abuse. However, once again, these crimes are extensively addressed in criminal and civil laws in India; the reason that the aforementioned dangers continue to persist lies in the improper enforcement of those laws, not in the alleged absence of them. For instance, in the Nikita case, the victim had already filed multiple complaints of harassment against her abusers. In fact, in 2018, her family members had also approached the police after the accused had abducted her. However, no action was taken by authorities in furtherance of these complaints. Furthermore, Haryana and Uttar Pradesh, both of whose Chief Ministers have been vehemently arguing for the need to introduce an anti-“love jihad” law, are infamous for high rates of gender-based violence and sexual crimes. This seriously draws into question whether their proposals are truly intended to protect women, given that they have done little to address women’s safety, aside from anecdotal instances that serve to advance their divisive rhetoric.
Moreover, the violence propagated against women in the name of “love jihad” is not the only threat to the safety of women in India. To name a few, caste-based violence, acid attacks, and sexual harassment at the workplace continue to tarnish society and hamper its goals of achieving gender parity. In fact, the National Crime Records Bureau reported that in 2019, an average of 87 rape cases were recorded every day in India. While the alarming levels of these crimes is no secret, even those arguing for a law on “love jihad” are using statistics that suggest that over the past ten years, merely 170 cases of this practice have been reported.
Forcible conversions are indeed a reprehensible act, but if that is what the Chief Ministers truly aims to target, then their proposed law will merely replicate existing legal principles. By introducing the law as means to “protect” Hindu women from the “evil” intentions of Muslim men, the only thing that will be achieved is increased stigma against inter-faith marriages, which are already vulnerable to social and moral policing in India. Moreover, by portraying Hindu women as helpless victims, the law will only water down their already limited autonomy even further.
With the world growing increasingly sceptical towards “radical Islamism” and “Islamic extremism,” it is easy to slip into a web of Islamophobia and religious discrimination. By propagating such laws, policymakers will reinstate the belief that there is a “religious war” that needs to be won. This will only increase the violence and vulnerability that continues to tarnish the social fabric of democracies across the world. At the same time, political leaders must proceed with caution while dealing with these sensitive issues in order to ensure that women are not further burdened under the guise of protection. However, with religion becoming a matter of political importance across the world, politicians are likely to continue to pander to populist sentiments to further a divisive narrative, irrespective of its long-term sociological impact.
Is a Law on Love Jihad Really Necessary?
Not only does a law on “love jihad” attract questions on its constitutionality, it also raises doubt on whether the law provides any further protections than what already exist in Indian laws.
November 12, 2020
SOURCE: GETTY IMAGES