Home > Voices > Religious freedom and religious conversion in Bhutan

Religious freedom and religious conversion in Bhutan

4 November 2009

In the wake of recent reports about the spread of Christianity in Bhutan, the debate about religious freedom and religious conversion in Bhutan is taking shape. Today, Bhutan is a democratic country, where the freedom of every individual is guaranteed by the constitution. Article 7(4) of Bhutan’s constitution specifically guarantees the freedom of religion to every citizen of Bhutan by declaring it a fundamental right.
From a point of view of an individual, freedom of religion means that s/he has the right to practice any religion or believe in any religious doctrine of his or her choice. From this argument follows the right of an individual to convert. It means that every individual has a right to choose his or her religion by free will. According to this logic, it follows that stopping religious conversion will violate the human rights of individual and violate his fundamental right as a citizen of this country. Therefore, there shall not be any ban on religious conversion. And the state should not intervene in the matters of its citizens’ religion(s).
The above argument seems to be logical. However, to serve the purpose of justice, societies put reasonable restrictions on individual freedom. There are two important reasons behind these restrictions.
One, the liberty given to individual should not turn into license, and it should not encroach on the freedom of others. Second, the stability, peace and well-being of society as a whole should be taken into account. This is the justification for the Article 7(22) of the constitution of Bhutan, which places reasonable restrictions on fundamental rights of individual in the interest of the community. Therefore, a restriction on religious conversion in Bhutan is justifiable keeping in view the larger interest of the nation and the community.
The argument of freedom is based on choice. Every individual has a right to choose his way of life and beliefs. But in the matters of religious conversion, most of the time, the element of choice is missing.
Rather it becomes a matter of chance, and obviously this is cheating the freedom of the individual. Let us closely observe the case of Bhutan in the light of this argument. Here, due to circumstances there is no option available; hence the choice becomes a default. Second, most of the people who are converting in Bhutan belong to poor strata of society with a very minimal level of education. Unless they are provided all the necessary information they cannot make a rational choice.
The issue becomes complicated when the information provided to them about various religions comes from only one source. And this leads to a biased decision based on lack of knowledge. Therefore it can be said that religious conversion in most of the cases is not about the freedom of religion, because the element of choice remains truncated. The last argument against religious conversion in Bhutan follows from the uniqueness of Bhutan. The preamble of the Bhutanese constitution argues that Bhutan is “blessed by the triple gem (and) the protection of our guardian deities…”.
This is an acknowledgement of the tradition of tantric Buddhism in Bhutan. This point becomes clearer in Article 3 of the constitution, where Buddhism is declared the spiritual heritage of Bhutan. It is quite evident that Buddhism remains an important pillar of the Bhutanese nation-state. It provides Bhutan with a unique identity, which is based on its rich history. If everyone is given a free reign to convert others to their own religion, this could result in anarchy in society. In this situation a religion with resources and power will wipe out other religions. The visionary constitution makers of Bhutan knew this problem, and wrote in Article 7(4) “No person shall be compelled to belong to another faith by means of coercion or inducement”.
Dealing with the issue of religious conversion the supreme court of India observed that freedom of religion does not mean freedom to convert others to one’s faith. Given the economic condition of society and lack of information to individuals, the recent conversions in Bhutan (in most of the cases) fall under the definition of coercion or inducement. And it is quite evident here that the religious conversion in Bhutan does not stand to the logic of fundamental rights and individual freedom. But unfortunately, taking advantage of socio-economic conditions of Bhutan, the freedom of religion is used as a cloak to the freedom to convert people.
Pranav Kumar, Lecturer Sherubtse College, Kanglung Pranav.politics@gmail.com

In the wake of recent reports about the spread of Christianity in Bhutan, the debate about religious freedom and religious conversion in Bhutan is taking shape. Today, Bhutan is a democratic country, where the freedom of every individual is guaranteed by the constitution. Article 7(4) of Bhutan’s constitution specifically guarantees the freedom of religion to every citizen of Bhutan by declaring it a fundamental right.

From a point of view of an individual, freedom of religion means that s/he has the right to practice any religion or believe in any religious doctrine of his or her choice. From this argument follows the right of an individual to convert. It means that every individual has a right to choose his or her religion by free will. According to this logic, it follows that stopping religious conversion will violate the human rights of individual and violate his fundamental right as a citizen of this country. Therefore, there shall not be any ban on religious conversion. And the state should not intervene in the matters of its citizens’ religion(s).

The above argument seems to be logical. However, to serve the purpose of justice, societies put reasonable restrictions on individual freedom. There are two important reasons behind these restrictions.

One, the liberty given to individual should not turn into license, and it should not encroach on the freedom of others. Second, the stability, peace and well-being of society as a whole should be taken into account. This is the justification for the Article 7(22) of the constitution of Bhutan, which places reasonable restrictions on fundamental rights of individual in the interest of the community. Therefore, a restriction on religious conversion in Bhutan is justifiable keeping in view the larger interest of the nation and the community.

The argument of freedom is based on choice. Every individual has a right to choose his way of life and beliefs. But in the matters of religious conversion, most of the time, the element of choice is missing.

Rather it becomes a matter of chance, and obviously this is cheating the freedom of the individual. Let us closely observe the case of Bhutan in the light of this argument. Here, due to circumstances there is no option available; hence the choice becomes a default. Second, most of the people who are converting in Bhutan belong to poor strata of society with a very minimal level of education. Unless they are provided all the necessary information they cannot make a rational choice.

The issue becomes complicated when the information provided to them about various religions comes from only one source. And this leads to a biased decision based on lack of knowledge. Therefore it can be said that religious conversion in most of the cases is not about the freedom of religion, because the element of choice remains truncated. The last argument against religious conversion in Bhutan follows from the uniqueness of Bhutan. The preamble of the Bhutanese constitution argues that Bhutan is “blessed by the triple gem (and) the protection of our guardian deities…”.

This is an acknowledgement of the tradition of tantric Buddhism in Bhutan. This point becomes clearer in Article 3 of the constitution, where Buddhism is declared the spiritual heritage of Bhutan. It is quite evident that Buddhism remains an important pillar of the Bhutanese nation-state. It provides Bhutan with a unique identity, which is based on its rich history. If everyone is given a free reign to convert others to their own religion, this could result in anarchy in society. In this situation a religion with resources and power will wipe out other religions. The visionary constitution makers of Bhutan knew this problem, and wrote in Article 7(4) “No person shall be compelled to belong to another faith by means of coercion or inducement”.

Dealing with the issue of religious conversion the supreme court of India observed that freedom of religion does not mean freedom to convert others to one’s faith. Given the economic condition of society and lack of information to individuals, the recent conversions in Bhutan (in most of the cases) fall under the definition of coercion or inducement. And it is quite evident here that the religious conversion in Bhutan does not stand to the logic of fundamental rights and individual freedom. But unfortunately, taking advantage of socio-economic conditions of Bhutan, the freedom of religion is used as a cloak to the freedom to convert people.

Pranav Kumar,
Lecturer
Sherubtse College,
Kanglung
Pranav.politics@gmail.com

Ratings: 1 Star2 Stars3 Stars4 Stars5 Stars
Loading ... Loading ...
Email this page Email this page     Print this page Print this page    

Posted by Bhutan Observer · Filed Under Voices 

Comments

Leave your comment





Note: Comments are moderated by Bhutan Observer, and may not appear until they have been reviewed and deemed appropriate for posting.

Bhutan Observer is Digg proof thanks to caching by WP Super Cache