A long overdue correction on conversion

(The article was originally published in Indian Express as a part of Dr Ram Madhav’s column titled Ram Rajya on June 27, 2026. Views expressed are personal.)

Union Home Ministry has promulgated new Foreign Contribution (Regulation) Act (FCRA) rules earlier this week, which seek to further tighten the activities of the NGOs receiving foreign funding. The new rules mandate that the foreign contributions can be used for construction or maintenance of religious places, printing and digitisation of sacred scriptures, building facilities for pilgrims, running community kitchens and promoting indigenous and tribal faith practises. However, they explicitly ban proselytization activity using foreign money.

Even before the amendments were formally gazetted earlier this week, they created ripples not only across India but even in the US and elsewhere. Proposed amendments to the FCRA act became an electoral issue during the recent assembly elections in states like Kerala and Tamil Nadu with largescale presence of Christian missionary led NGOs. The ripples reached Capitol Hill in Washington DC too. One of the strongest criticisms came from James Risch, who heads the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. Calling Indian government’s restrictions under FCRA “deeply concerning”, Risch threatened that the US “will not hesitate to call out countries who violate the internationally recognised human rights of Christians…”.

Undeterred by such criticisms, the Home Ministry went ahead with the amendments. It is no secret that foreign missionaries and foreign funding are an important source of religious conversion activity in India right from the time of the British rule. There was a lot of debate over the licitness or otherwise of conversions during the British times and after independence. That resulted in a few states like Orissa (1967), Madhya Pradesh (1968), and Arunachal Pradesh (1978) introducing anti-conversion laws initially. Organisations like the Sangh Parivar have consistently raised questions over the conversion methodology, especially the practise of mass conversions leading to several other states adopting anti-conversion laws in later decades. They include Chhattisgarh (2000), Gujarat (2003), Himachal Pradesh (2006), Jharkhand (2017), Uttarakhand (2018), Uttar Pradesh (2021), Haryana (2022), Rajasthan (2025) and Maharashtra (2026). Interestingly, states with highest conversion rates like those in South India and Punjab do not have any such laws regulating conversion activity. Jayalalitha, as chief minister, attempted to introduce a law in Tamil Nadu in 2002, but hastily withdrew it two years later under intense pressure from the missionary circles and others.

Home Ministry’s attempt at imposing restrictions on using foreign money for conversions is bound to generate a debate once again over the question of conversions. The Christians believe that it is an integral part of their religious activity. They insist that the ‘right to propagate’ includes ‘right to proselytise’. However, the Supreme Court, in a key judgement in Rev. Stainislaus vs State of Madhya Pradesh case in 1977, upheld the validity of anti-conversion laws stating that while Article 25 of the constitution gives freedom to choose one’s religion, it does not give right to convert other persons. The latest government action is in line with that judgement.

There have been persistent debates over the Christian conversion activity right through the independence movement with leaders like Ram Mohan Roy, Vivekananda and Gandhi raising serious questions. Even in the Constituent Assembly many concerns were raised by members over the missionary methods of proselytization.

Gandhi, a staunch critic of proselytization activities of the missionaries, told the Christian theologians that “conversion is the deadliest poison that ever sapped the foundation of truth”. In an interview in March 1931, when a journalist asked whether he would favour the retention of foreign missionaries in India after independence, Gandhi’s forthright reply was “If instead of confining themselves purely to humanitarian work and material service to the poor, they do proselytising by means of medical aid, education etc, I would certainly ask them to withdraw”. In another interview published in Harijan dated May 11, 1935, he categorically stated, “If I had power and could legislate, I should certainly stop all proselytising. It is the cause of much avoidable conflict”.

Knowing Gandhi’s views, the missionary bodies expressed apprehensions over their future. Jawahar Lal Nehru came to their rescue reassuring them in 1946 that “Christians form the third largest group in the country, and it is absurd for anyone to imagine that their religious or other rights can be suppressed or ignored”.

Debates took place in the Constituent Assembly over issues like “propaganda” or “propagation” and “conversions”. Congress had earlier promised freedom to “profess and practise” religion in its election manifesto. But the missionaries demanded right to propagate that included right to convert. Members like K M Munshi, Alladi Krishnaswami Aiyer and C Rajagopalachari took a contrarian view over the question of right to conversion. Even Sardar Patel and Maulana Azad insisted that mass conversions must be desisted by the missionaries as they did not carry any conviction. Munshi brought a draft article before the drafting sub-committee, which read “Conversion from one religion to another brought about by coercion, undue influence or the offering of material inducement is prohibited and is punishable by the law of the Union”. But most such suggestions could not muster majority support in the Assembly. Finally, Article 19 that included the phrase “to propagate religion” became the law.

Questions kept raising over the missionary work even after that. The Niyogi Committee, appointed by the Madhya Pradesh Government in 1954 to look into the activities of the missionaries in the tribal areas of the state, came out with a stinging report against their methodology and practises.

The committee confirmed that allegations against the missionaries were true. It made several recommendations to the Madhya Pradesh State Government that included: 1. Those missionaries whose primary object is proselytization should be asked to withdraw, and the large influx of foreign missionaries should be checked. 2. The Constitution of India should be amended in order to rule out propagation by foreigners and conversions by force, fraud and other illicit means. 3. Legislative measures should be enacted for controlling conversion by illegal means.

The Nehru Government had indirectly rubbished the claims of the Niyogi Committee while answering a related question in the parliament. Seven decades later, Modi government is taking steps to implement those recommendations.