Belagavi, Dec 23 (UNI) The anti-conversion bill was passed via voice vote in Karnataka assembly on Thursday amidst protests by Congress.
Pandemonium erupted after BJP claimed that the anti-conversion bill was an improvement on the draft prepared during Opposition Siddaramaiah's tenure as the chief minister in 2016. Both members of the ruling and opposition members cast aspersions on each other.
Chief Minister Basavaraj Bommai questioned the Congress why the bill was processed by the law commission during Siddaramaiah's tenure as the chief minister and why it was not stopped then. He said the then law minister had approved the draft bill and was presented before the cabinet, which even Siddaramaiah agreed to it.
Bommai also said the Congress prepared the then bill inspired by Himachal Pradesh Chief Minister Virbhadra Singh, who brought anti-conversion law in 2006.
The Chief Minister also hinted at the BJP government led by Jai Ram Thakur in Himachal Pradesh amending the earlier 2016 law with the quantum of punishment raised from three to seven years.
It has also broadened the scope of the law to deal with Love Jihad. The bill was passed unanimously with the Congress backing it in the House. Among the eight new provisions added in the Himachal Pradesh Freedom of Religion Bill 2019 also covered marriage done with the sole purpose of conversion.
The then Chief Minister Thakur also had said that the earlier law was just cosmetic and lacked both, political will as well as the resolve to question those indulging in the crime of religious conversions.
"The Congress is saying that the present bill is prepared by RSS. It is an open secret that RSS is against forcible religious conversion. But, why the Congress wanted to pursue the RSS agenda of bringing anti-conversion bill," he asked.
"The reason why the Congress had brought the then bill in 2016 in Karnataka was, it was inspired by Virbhadhra Singh's stringent anti-conversion and Love Jihad bill," he added.
Bommai said the present bill is constitutional and is with the purpose of stopping the forcible religious conversion and protecting Dalits and women. The bill's objective is to maintain public order as conversions create tension between communities, he said.
The Chief Minister also alleged that the Congress was opposing the bill for vote bank politics and have double-tongued approach towards the issue. "When they are in power they are for anti-conversion bill and when in opposition, they oppose it. This is dual policy of the Congress," he said.
"Therefore, I urge the chair (Speaker) to pass the bill," Bommai concluded.
When Speaker Vishweshwar Hegde Kageri put the bill for voice vote, the Congress members trooped into the well of the House in protest against it.
Earlier Siddaramaiah, in defence, agreed that the law commission report was submitted, but it was not discussed and approved by the then cabinet, and hence the then Congress government did not have any intention to implement the bill.
If the then government had the intention of implementing the bill, it could have been done as it was in power for next two years, Siddaramaiah said.
Joining the issue, Congress members argued that the details of the then bill was different from the one presented by the BJP government.
Countering it, Madhuswamy agreed it is dissimilar because two to three changes have been made to the 2016 draft.
Kageri adjourned the House for 10 minutes in the pre-lunch proceedings, and summoned Madhuswamy and Siddaramaiah to his chamber to go through the documents.
On resumption of the proceedings, Siddaramaiah said the anti-conversion bill is identical with Uttar Pradesh and Gujarat, and therefore it will be struck down in the court of law as it was done in these states.
He argued that there was no necessity to introduce the bill as section 295 (a) of Indian Penal Code already protects from conversion with malafide intentions. IPC 295(a) states "Deliberate and malicious acts, intended to outrage religious feelings of any class by insulting its religion or religious beliefs."
Countering Siddaramaiah's Dr Amedkar's stand on conversion, Kageri said Babasaheb did not accept Islam and Christian religions, but Buddhism, which is an Indian religion and rooted in the Indian culture.
Madhuswamy said Dr Ambedkar was not a converted Buddhist because Buddhism is a part and parcel of Hinduism, which was argued by Babasaheb's himself.
Health Minister and BJP member Dr K Sudkhakar said the very first wish of Mahatma Gandhi was to stop conversions if he was a part of the government.
UNI BDN SHK1850