§ 11 am
§ Andrew Selous (South-West Bedfordshire)I am extremely grateful for the opportunity to raise this important issue.
As a secular republic since it was granted independence, India has committed itself to religious toleration. Events over the past few years have, however, threatened to tarnish that reputation. Bhutan has a reputation as a remote and isolated country, which is slowly opening up to outside influences. Its treatment of ethnic and religious minorities, however, leaves a great deal to be desired.
India is governed by a coalition called the National Democratic Alliance. The Bharatiya Janata party, a Hindu nationalist party linked to militant Hindu groups such as the Vishwa Hindu Parishad and the Bajrang Dal, is the leading party in the coalition. Since the BJP came to power in 1998, persecution of Christians and those of other faiths has risen enormously in certain parts of the country. Such persecution usually emanates from militant Hindu groups and state and local governments rather than directly from the national Government. However, the BJP's emphasis on Hindu expansionism has helped to create a climate in which the persecution of Christians in particular can flourish.
The BJP's close links with the VHP and the Bajrang Dal are of great concern as those groups have been implicated in many attacks on both Christians and Muslims in which the attackers usually escape justice. Page 1 of the United States State Department's annual report 2000 on international freedom states:
ineffective investigation and prosecution of attacks on religious minorities is interpreted by some extremist elements as a signal that such violence is likely to go unpunished".That is partly due to weaknesses in the legal system, although many observers attribute it in large part to links between those groups and the BJP.Over the past four years, many Christians have been killed or wounded by Hindu militants, although most of those attacks go unnoticed by the outside world. Occasionally, an incident comes to the world's attention: in January 1999, an Australian missionary, Graham Staines, and his two young sons were burned to death in their camper van by a mob of extremists, which made headlines around the world.
More common are attacks and murders, which go largely unreported. At the end of September 2000, a Christian woman in a remote part of Tamil Nadu state was burned to death in an attack by local extremists on Christians in a village. In February 2001, a gang of Hindu extremists beat to death a young Christian evangelist, Riyaz Augustin. In the same month, a Catholic priest, Father Tommy Manjuli, was shot dead by an unidentified gunman, who was believed to be a militant. Sometimes, the name of the victim is not recorded for posterity. In December 2000, the body of a 35-year-old man involved in Christian missionary work was found in a remote part of Orissa state. Extremists who were angered by his evangelistic work had apparently murdered him. His body was found only after he had been missing for some time.
215WH Hindu militants particularly target evangelists, missionaries, religious orders and Christian leaders such as pastors and priests, who are subject to the biggest threat because they are active in living out their faith. Those people are also easy targets because they make long journeys in isolated areas as part of their work, and many of them have been killed and attacked in recent years. Churches are regularly attacked by mobs of Hindu militants, who are often armed and shouting anti-Christian slogans. Many Christians have been injured in those attacks, and Church property is frequently destroyed.
Other campaigns of intimidation may be more subtle but still have malicious intent, such as the campaign in the summer of 2001 to close down some Christian orphanages. Bishop M. A. Thomas, who runs such an orphanage, received death threats. Last year, in a widely circulated e-mail, a prominent Hindu militant made a thinly veiled death threat against a Christian leader, Dr. John Dayal, who is the secretary-general of the All India Christian Council. Dr. Dayal has campaigned vigorously on behalf of Christians and other minorities, especially the Dalits, who were formerly known as the Untouchables. His effectiveness is probably the reason why he has been targeted.
We know from recent surveillance in Gujarat, where the Muslim community was targeted, that more than 2,000 people have been killed. There is evidence of complicity of the state authorities in that carnage. Indeed, there are rumours that Hindu militants are planning to rise up against the Christian community in Gujarat in the same way that they rose up against the Muslim community last year.
Those are not the only incidents of threats and intimidation. Recently, a confidential circular from the umbrella militant Hindu organisation, the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh, was discovered. It was sent from RSS headquarters in Nagpur, Maharashtra state, to local RSS officers. Although only recently uncovered, it is believed to have been in circulation for some two years. One commentator notes:
the circular contains a total strategy for persecuting, weakening and marginalizing the Christian, tribal and Muslim communities through economic boycotts, media onslaught and conflict provocation.It advocates waging a terror campaign against various minorities, including tribal peoples, lower castes, Christians and Muslims. Article 11 calls formass rapes of Muslim/Christian women during riots".That is a sinister precursor of what actually happened in Gujarat last year when Muslim women were gang-raped by Hindu militants.Shockingly, article 4 of the e-mail suggests that doctors sympathetic to the aims of the RSS should inject newborn Christian babies with diseases that would handicap them, and should prescribe dangerous drugs to Christians, tribal peoples and Muslims. Article 32 urges the killing of "anti-Hindus", and article 26 discusses a plan to starve non-Hindu groups in areas where there are food shortages. It discusses continuing the malnutrition of Christians.
216WH Article 12 recommends lies and deceit as a means of discrediting minorities:
Place images/idols under the ground near non-Hindu religious structures … new literature to be fabricated to prove all old churches … are old Hindu structures.The tactic was used very successfully against Muslims by the RSS and the VHP in a notorious incident in 1992. A mob of Hindu militants stormed the mosque of Babri Masjid on the dubious grounds that it was built on the birthplace of the Hindu god Ram. Indeed, as the BJP owed its subsequent electoral triumphs at least partly to the incident and the way in which it was manipulated, the tactic proved successful beyond all expectations.The close links between the RSS and the governing political party, the BJP, become all the more sinister in the light of the RSS document. One Indian commentator stated:
It frightens me that the leaders of our country, while telling the world that they respect freedom of religion, are really working for an organisation that has no problem killing, raping and poisoning those of other religions to advance their agenda of Hindu extremism.The circular is far from unique. Typical of other threatening literature is an e-mail from a supporter of the RSS concerning a series of planned evangelistic meetings in Sikkim, which were to be conducted by a Christian, Dr. Paul Dinakaran. The writer encourages fellow militantsto disrupt the proceedings and if possible intimidate and threatenDinakaran, and urges:If he does not vacate Sikkim in three days time an attempt should be made to kick him out and set his residence on fire.There are general as well as specific threats. An e-mail from a Hindu militant a few months ago, which was intended for wide circulation, states:On the other hand, if Muslims and Christians use perfidy and force in conversion, as they frequently do, we have to act with merciless ferocity and militant determination",usingunwavering force without quarter, delivered calmly without passion or attachment.The following example, which was reported by a western missionary who was in India with her husband but who has since returned to Britain, shows the threats and intimidation that Christian and other faith leaders face:The local community had had visits from the police and had been told to inform on us … Our Hindu friends came to us and told us that we were on a killing list. The local Catholic priest was, as well. It had been passed to all the local shopkeepers who had been told to inform on us. Everything we did or said was thereafter re-hashed until we had assumed sinister, subversive roles and were [seen as] a danger to the community".The reference to the role of the police in that example should set alarm bells ringing. Elements in both local and national Government are unsympathetic to the plight of Christians, Muslims and other minorities. Officials and police are often reluctant to register or investigate attacks even when they are reported to them and the Indian Government refuse to denounce the activities of militant groups such as the VHP and the Bajrang Dal. Given the close links between the BJP and such groups, that comes as no surprise.217WH Other significant instances of persecution are occurring in India. The state of Tamil Nadu has just passed a law that claims to ban conversions "by force or fraud". However, it has been widely seen as an attempt to prevent all conversions to Christianity in the state. It is the culmination of a campaign by militant Hindu groups against Christian conversions. They allege that all conversion to Christianity is "by force or fraud". The leader of the RSS recently claimed:
No-one converts voluntarily. It is motivated by greed".The law is also aimed at stopping Dalits converting from Hinduism to other religions, such as Buddhism, Christianity and Islam. Many Dalits see Hinduism as an oppressive religion that keeps them at the bottom of the caste system. Over the past couple of years, a number have converted to other religions, saying that they find greater freedom that way. State authorities vigorously opposed a recent conversion rally in Tamil Nadu, at which a number of Dalits converted to Christianity and Buddhism.Christians and Dalits in India fear that the law will spread to other states. There is even a similar Bill pending in the national Parliament. Such laws will make it easier for militant Hindu organisations such as the RSS to harass and obstruct Christians witnessing to non-Christians, and they will give the mobs an excuse to attack evangelists on the pretext that they are breaking the law. The laws would also be a means of stopping the Dalits converting to other religions.
Will the Minister tell me what action Britain is taking to raise those issues with the Indian authorities? Our strong economic and cultural ties with India are likely to give Britain added opportunities to raise such issues. I realise that India is notoriously prickly concerning what it sees as outside interference, but there are ways in which such matters can be raised sensitively and appropriately.
The Indian Government need to crack down on the activities of Hindu militants. Those carrying out attacks on Christians, Muslims and others need to be caught and punished; justice needs to be done and to be seen to be done. The Indian Government need to be reminded of their international obligations, having ratified the international covenant on civil and political rights in 1979, as well as similar covenants and conventions. Above all, the Indian Prime Minister, Mr. Vajpayee, needs to be told that strenuous statements asserting India's commitment to secular, pluralistic government need to be backed up by strong action to demonstrate that.
Our Government can also take action closer to home. The VHP has an active British branch. Despite the repeated involvement of the VHP in atrocities in India, the VHP UK branch has charitable status, with all the advantages that that brings. Will the Minister ask his counterpart in the Home Office to launch an investigation into that? We need to be sure that money raised in this country under charitable pretexts does not end up funding the dubious activities of a militant organisation in India.
I want to consider another example in the same part of the world: the country of Bhutan. Bhutan has the only Buddhist Government in the world and Christians in the country face growing discrimination and persecution, which, unlike in India, comes directly from the national 218WH Government. In parts of the country, state officials, such as district administrators, apply huge pressure on Christians to force them to renounce their faith. That intimidation includes severe beatings, imprisonment, verbal threats and forced participation in de-Christianising rituals. Census officers sometimes mark the names of Christians in the register and threaten to delete their details if they do not renounce Christianity. Some observers believe that there is a strong possibility that, if current trends continue, Christian communities could be evicted altogether from Bhutan within a few years.
The British Government need to make strong representations on those points to the Government of Bhutan. I realise that Britain does not have formal diplomatic relations with Bhutan, but our high commission in India has a section that deals with Bhutanese issues. Britain also trades with Bhutan, and is an aid donor to the country. That should provide a useful context in which to raise issues of religious liberty.
Last year, the hon. Member for Rugby and Kenilworth (Andy King) tabled a series of written questions on the persecution of Christians in Bhutan. As part of his reply, the Under-Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs, the hon. Member for North Warwickshire (Mr. O'Brien), declared that the Government had no reason to discuss the issue with fellow European Union member states. That is simply not good enough.
The Government claim to put human rights and religious liberty at the heart of their foreign policy. Various former Ministers, including the present Secretary of State for Wales when Minister for Europe and the hon. Member for Leeds, West (Mr. Battle) when Minister of State at the Foreign Office, have reiterated that. The situation in Bhutan warrants a higher priority in discussions with other EU countries. That is especially true given that the EU has some links with Bhutan that are independent of Britain. Also, I gather that the EU is considering increasing development aid to Bhutan. If that is so, it should provide a good opportunity for the UK Government to raise human rights issues with their EU counterparts.
The Under-Secretary also declared that the form and content of a proposed Bhutanese constitution is a matter for the Government and people of Bhutan alone. However, that is not entirely true. The drafting of the constitution is not purely an internal matter, because Bhutan joined the United Nations in 1971, and by virtue of its UN membership has pledged itself to bring its law, including any constitution, into line with the universal declaration of human rights. Article 18 of that declaration upholds the right to freedom of religion. The international community has every right—indeed, an obligation—to ensure that article 18 is upheld and respected in Bhutan.
These are important issues, which I say again I am grateful to have had the opportunity to put on record. While I have been speaking in this half-hour Adjournment debate, it is very likely that somewhere in India or Bhutan, or in both countries, someone has been attacked purely because of their adherence to their faith. The Minister, whose Government claim to put great emphasis on religious liberty, should urgently address that. Taking the steps that I have outlined today would be a good start.
§ The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs (Mr. Bill Rammell)I congratulate the hon. Member for South-West Bedfordshire (Andrew Selous) on the clarity of his arguments. In the short time available, I hope to address many of the points that he raised.
I start by making it clear that religious intolerance is deplorable in the United Kingdom, India, Bhutan or wherever it occurs. The close links of many British people of Indian origin with their families in Gujarat, Kashmir, Punjab and elsewhere in India mean that Britain has an especial interest in and responsibility to human rights issues in such areas.
The Government have put the promotion of human rights at the core of their foreign policy. The United Kingdom has a long-standing tradition of raising religious freedom issues around the world. In doing so, we take the 1948 universal declaration of human rights as our starting point. Article 18 of that declaration is clear and unambiguous on religious issues:
Everyone has the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion; this right includes freedom to change his religion or belief, and freedom, either alone or in community with others and in public or private, to manifest his religion or belief in teaching, practice, worship and observation.We take that very seriously.As my hon. Friend the Member for Rotherham (Mr. MacShane), the then Under-Secretary of State at the Foreign Office, made abundantly clear in July in replying to an Adjournment debate on violence against Christians in Asia, the Government unreservedly condemn the persecution of individuals because of their faith, wherever they are and whatever religion they practise. We certainly take every opportunity, both on our own and in conjunction with European partners, to urge states to pursue laws and practices that foster tolerance and mutual respect, and to protect religious minorities against discrimination, intimidation and attacks.
Wherever possible, we work with officials, religious leaders and non-governmental organisations at international and local level to promote mutual understanding and tolerance. Indeed, at the United Nations General Assembly in New York last year, we co-sponsored a resolution that made clear our determination and that of the international community to work towards eliminating all forms of religious intolerance.
The FCO's work is done not only through the European Union and the United Nations; we believe that it is vital to work with and alongside non-governmental organisations. I was pleased when the FCO restarted the religious freedom panel in December 2001. It is an informal contact group of NGOs based in the UK which are concerned with religious freedom worldwide. The panel's purpose and aim is to share information, to discuss strategies and to promote international religious freedom. I welcome the fact that most faiths are represented, including Christian Solidarity Worldwide, with which I know the hon. Gentleman has links.
Let me turn to the hon. Gentleman's specific worries about religious freedom in India. It is worth starting by saying that India has been seen as a model of a successful 220WH religiously diverse and democratic state for many years. It has won high standing throughout the world because of its respect for, and celebration of, religious diversity. India is a vast country with a population of more than 1 billion people and it is true that diversity is, and should be, inherent in its identity. Although the majority of the population are Hindus, people of all faiths—including Christians, Muslims, Sikhs and Buddhists—live largely peacefully together in Indian society. The concept of an Indian state in which all religions flourish was central to Mahatma Gandhi's thinking. He wrote:
Indian culture is neither Hindu, Islamic or any other, wholly. It is a fusion of all.That is absolutely right.The vast majority—82 per cent.—of India's population are Hindus. However, the population contains a substantial minority of Muslims. Owing to the size of India's population, that represents 120 million people. Although the Christian and Sikh communities are small minorities that each represent 2 per cent. of the population, more than 20 million Christians nevertheless live in India, which is a substantial number.
The right to the freedom of religion is enshrined in the constitution of India. Article 25 of the constitution states:
All persons are equally entitled to freedom of conscience and the right freely to profess, practise and propagate religion".That is one of the clearest and least ambiguous statements of commitment to be found in the constitution of any country in the world. The Prime Minister of India, Mr. Vajpayee, reaffirmed in his new year message this year that India had beensecular since the beginning of her known history".He rightly defined secularism asthe duty to show respect for all faiths and to practise no discrimination among citizens on the basis of their beliefs".The founding principles of India and the words and commitment in the constitution are very strong. However, tensions between Hindus and Muslims and Hindus and Christians increasingly pose a challenge to the concepts of secularism, tolerance and diversity on which India was founded. We have heard disturbing accounts, especially about attacks on Christians and Muslims, and I verify that concerns are well founded.Violence against Christians in India increased significantly between 1998 and 2000. The Indian United Christian Forum claimed that the number of attacks against Christian institutions in 1998 alone was more than the total number of attacks between 1964 and 1997. Although the Catholic Bishops Conference of India reported in April 2001 that attacks had decreased since then, violence and the threat of violence remain a serious problem. The hon. Gentleman referred to the recent attack on Joseph Cooper, an American missionary, in Kerala, which was a particularly shocking example. That is not the only example of attacks on Christians, and the hon. Gentleman referred to many of them.
We welcome the fact that the Chief Minister of Kerala responded with a clear denunciation of that attack and we welcome the swift action of the Keralan police to arrest several people who were suspected of being involved in the assault. We hope—and urge—that the 221WH perpetrators will be quickly brought to justice, and our high commission in Delhi will continue to watch the situation closely.
The attack on Mr. Cooper was reminiscent of the brutal murder in January 1999 of an Australian missionary, Graham Staines, and his sons. Mr. Staines had worked with leprosy sufferers in Orissa for more than 30 years and had devoted himself to alleviating their suffering. That was one of several vicious assaults against Christians and Muslims that took place in 1999 and 2000. We have expressed strong worries about the attacks.
The hon. Gentleman also referred to the situation in Gujarat. The violence that engulfed Gujarat between February and April 2002 was the worst outbreak of religious-related violence that had occurred in India for more than 10 years. Christians suffered badly but Muslims were the main victims of the atrocities. We have expressed our concerns and we welcome the fact that the Indian Government have publicly condemned the violence. Prime Minister Vajpayee called it a "blot on India", and I agree with that assessment. We are worried by reports that the state Government of Gujarat did not do as much as they could to stop the violence. The National Human Rights Commission of India has accused the Gujarat Government
of a complicity that was tacit if not explicit".Nevertheless, we welcomed the Government's quick response in October to stop further violence after the terrorist attack on a Hindu temple in Gujarat.We remain concerned about the welfare of many in Gujarat, especially Muslims and Christians. We welcome the Government of India's assurances that they will take action to bring to justice the perpetrators of violence, but we understand that, to date, there have been no prosecutions. We have repeatedly voiced our concerns with the Indian authorities about such matters. We have also rightly offered practical assistance. The British Government have provided immediate relief assistance to victims of violence. We are now 222WH considering whether we can support practical measures under the human rights project fund to encourage reconciliation between the communities in Gujarat.
§ Andrew SelousWill the Minister speak to his counterpart in the Home Office about the United Kingdom charitable status of the VHP?
§ Mr. RammellThe hon. Gentleman has anticipated my next remarks. We are aware of the concerns about the links about the VHP and the BJP. It is worth saying that the BJP-led national Government have criticised the VHP's extremist rhetoric. Nevertheless, as for charitable status, the Charity Commission is keeping the activities of VHP-UK under review. If the hon. Gentleman has specific evidence about the VHP-UK's activities, I am sure that the Charity Commission would be interested to receive it.
I turn now to Bhutan, which has a population of almost 2 million. As the hon. Gentleman said, it is predominantly Bhuddhist. Its law allows for religious freedom, but Bhutan has not ratified the international covenant on civil and political rights. None the less, the international community expects Bhutan to observe the internationally agreed standards that it sets out. The hon. Gentleman referred to his concerns about the work of the European Union. We have certainly voiced our worries about it. The EU is providing assistance to Bhutan and, as is traditionally the case with its programmes of assistance, it is taking a carrot and stick approach. We shall push it further.
There are concerns; we have raised them, but I hope that the hon. Gentleman agrees that there remain grounds for hope in India and Bhutan. It is crucial that progress is made. The values of human rights and religious tolerance are values that we expect in this country, in India, in Bhutan and throughout the world. Within the Government, we will use our best offices to ensure that those values are upheld.
§ Sitting suspended until Two o'clock.