The various aspects of religious conversion in the context of the Hadiya case were debated at a programme organised by NISA, a progressive Muslim women’s organisation, here on Saturday.
Hameed Chendamangalloor, social commentator, pointed out that women were being lured to other religions “promising a paradise”. “When a person converts, what is the need to change their name? What is happening is not only a change of religion, but also a change of identity.” There was discrimination against the neo-converts also as those from the lower castes were not getting a fair treatment in their new religion. He criticised Muslim organisations who have taken up the cause for Hadiya saying that none of them were around to take up the case of Moulavi Chekanur when he mysteriously disappeared over two decades ago.
N.P. Chekkutty, senior journalist , said the religious conversions in the 21st century were markedly different from what had happened in Kerala in the 19th century. “The conversions then had a social angle as it led to economic and political advancement. Now, it has been reduced to a commercial operation and it is leading to serious social problems,” he said. The kind of funds being received by certain religious organisations and how they were being spent should be subjected to an inquiry. “Also, why are only women being converted?” he asked.
K.K. Shahina, journalist, said the current interest in religious conversions should be looked at from the political atmosphere prevailing in the country. The Hadiya case had gender and human rights dimensions. “The High Court issued the order annulling Hadiya’s marriage with Shefin Jahan following a complaint filed by her father Ashokan. Actually it was the second such plea by Mr. Ashokan,” she said. The court had settled the first complaint filed in January 2016 and sent Hadiya with A.S. Sainaba, a women’s activist.
Second plaint
Mr. Ashokan, however, filed the second complaint in August alleging that she had been taken to an undisclosed centre and her studies were being disrupted.
The court had decided to instruct Mr. Ashokan to hand over her certificates and bear the expenses. On December 25, when case was heard again, Ms. Hadiya came to the court with her “husband”. The court was told that she got married on December 19, the previous date of hearing. Ms. Shahina said the court must have felt that it was cheated as the information about her marriage had not been disclosed on that day.
