Striking The Balance: Secular Governance And Religious Freedom

The Author of this Blog Article is Ms. Unnati Kapil, a law student pursuing B.A.LL. B from Bennett University Greater Noida.

Abstract

Secularism is an ideology where the individuals should be free to practice their religion, customs, traditions without any state interference where the state should not promote or favour any particular community or religious belief. This calls for religious neutrality among various groups. In today’s world, the proper balance of secularism and state intervention

becomes an essential for the survival and to achieve the target of freely exercising individuals’ beliefs while maintaining neutrality and discipline across the communities. This blog includes the study of various definitions, interpretations, and history of secularism in political, social, and moral means. Furthermore, it includes a deep analysis of two landmark judgments keeping in mind the public opinion. This reading aims to make readers understand the concept, inculcate their mind and thoughts by not only referring to the textbook rather thinking rationally, about religion and ways to achieve the balance of rightful governance and religious freedom.

Secularism

(1) THE IDEA OF SECULARISM AND ITS CONSITUTIONAL PRINCIPLES-

“The constitutional freedom of religion is the most inalienable and sacred of all human

rights”.

Thomas Jefferson.

India, with a population exceeding 1.21 billion as of 2011, showcases a rich diversity of religious affiliations. Hindus constitute the majority at 79.8%, followed by Muslims at 14.2%, Christians at 2.3%, Sikhs at 1.7%, Buddhists at 0.7%, Jains at 0.4%, and other religious groups and persuasions totaling 0.7%. Additionally, 0.2% of the population did not specify a religion, highlighting the country's religious diversity.[1]

The term "secular" was introduced into the Indian Constitution's preamble through the 42nd Amendment Act of 1976 during a period of emergency. This addition aimed to balance governance with religious freedoms, reflecting India's status as a secular nation. Unlike Fundamental Rights, which are enforceable against the state, the preamble is non-justiciable, meaning citizens cannot use it to challenge the state in court.

Protecting religious freedoms is integral to India's constitutional framework. Articles 25 to 28 of the Constitution explicitly outline these freedoms. Article 25 guarantees freedom of conscience and the right to profess, practice, and propagate religion, subject to considerations of morality, health, public order, and other fundamental rights. Article 26 grants religious denominations the right to manage their own affairs, subject to public order, morality, and health. Article 27 ensures that no person can be compelled to pay taxes for the promotion of any particular religion. Lastly, Article 28 provides freedom regarding attendance at religious instruction or worship in certain educational institutions.

These constitutional provisions underscore India's commitment to preserving the rights and beliefs of its diverse religious communities while upholding the principles of secularism and religious freedom.

(2) VARIOUS DEFINITIONS AND INTERPRETATIONS OF SECULARISM

Secularism varies in interpretation based on regional, environmental, and temporal factors. In Western contexts, secularism entails complete separation of state and religion, emphasizing freedom of religion, equal citizenship irrespective of religion, and no state support for religious institutions. Conversely, Indian secularism, as per the Constitution, guarantees equal state protection to all religions while allowing for positive state intervention to address

societal issues. India's secularism permits state funding for religious schools and infrastructure, safeguarding both individual and communal religious rights. India's approach is unique, rejecting a state religion and ensuring citizens' freedom of religion without offending religious sentiments. This distinct model of secularism accommodates diverse

religious practices and beliefs within a neutral state framework, fostering a pluralistic society. [2]

In the reference to social science, secularism means religion should lose its importance in public life or society. Citing a real-life example of first people engaging themselves in different activities hence building the feeling of togetherness and then spending time in their homes watching Ramayana, Mahabharata, which used to stream at a particular time in a day. This clearly gives us an idea how and when religious traits enter into public and societal domains and creates unnecessary hustle. In modern India, British people, enforced common law for every citizen of the country which initiated divide and rule policy. This created communal discord that is separate electorate for Scheduled Castes, Schedules Tribes and weaker sections of the society.

Critical Perspectives and Landmark Judgements

1.) Case of SR Bommai v The Union of India (1993)

After critically analysing the facts of this case it was concluded that there was an essential connection between secularism and democracy. The concept of secular state became very essential for the working of democracy and the realisation of social, economic needs that are essential for material and moral prosperity and political justice. One major part of this case included that secularism, is a part of the basic structure of the constitution and therefore cannot be amended. It is derived from the cultural principle of tolerance and ensure the equality of religions which was discussed earlier. The court also reiterated Nehru’s opinion that no religion will be at risk in Secular India, because the government will not be aligned to religion. Further on 27th October 2016, amidst an acrimonious legal debate on quashing role of religion in electioneering, and The Supreme Court asked whether Secularism meant the complete separation of religion from politics. The bench then concluded that Secularism does not mean that the state should stay aloof from religion, but that it should give equal treatment to every religion. In addition to this, Religion and caste are vital aspects of our polity and it is not possible to completely separate from politics. [4]

2.) Indian Young Lawyers Association v. The State of Kerala (known as the Sabrimala judgement)

This case is a perfect example of conflicting ideas between the idea of secularism and religious freedom. It created legal, social controversies all around. The facts of this cases are- There exists a temple known as the Sabarimala temple in the state of Kerela. According to the norms of this temple and Rule 3(b) of the Kerala Hindu Places of Public Worship (Authorization of Entry) Rules, 1965, women particularly of the mensurating period (12-50 years) were not allowed to enter the premises of the temple. This restriction was based on the principle of Lord Ayappa and its traditions that was to be followed since long. Now, the whole conflict was about whether this violates the freedom of people, creates inequality, and violated women constitutional rights. The judgement was given in 2018, where the court held that this custom of prohibiting group of certain girls and women was unconstitutional and hence triggered the people who used to rigorously and religiously followed those customs and traditions. This case raised several questions among citizens and communities-

• Whether this prohibition is violative of article 14 and 15 of the Constitution which talks about right to equality and no discrimination based on caste, sex, religion, etc. • Whether this can be protected under Article 25 of the constitution by morality.

• How much should the State interfere with our religious norms and cultures?

• Whether Kerala Hindu Places of Public Worship (Authorisation of Entry) Rules,1965 is in contradiction to Part III of the Constitution.

• Whether this particular falls under the category of Religious Denomination or not.

• And a big question that aroused in minds of people was how shall we protect our religion, its traditions, norms and cultures like this?

In the judgement it was clearly held that particular community did not fulfil the basic criteria of religious denomination. Justice Dipak Mishra clearly mentioned that religion is something which is very sensitive in nature is greatly connected to the feelings of individuals, their inner conscience and their self-respect. Therefore, disbarring the females from entering into the temple stripped women of their freedom of worship, ensured under Article 25(1). Further, this practice did not fulfil the criteria of being an essential religious practice as well. Hence it violated the fundamental and constitutional rights of the women in the society. Attribute to devotion to divinity, should not be subjected to rigidity and gender-based stereotypes. It should follow the basic principle of Constitutional morality. The other minority side of Justice Indu Malhotra opposed by saying a religion has its own ethics, morals, values, rituals and ceremonies to be followed. She also added by saying Article 26 is not subject to restrictions placed under Article 25 and hence it is absolute in nature, cannot be challenged under any circumstances. She emphasised by dismissing the appeals going against the norms of age-old temple. After critically analysing both the sides of the petitioner and the opposition, it is very evident to say that even after the judgement still there has been long ongoing debates, arguments and discussions about whether the State has a right to intervene in these age-old traditions and customs. Individuals still argue about these facts and judgments by asking themselves is this what we call a truly secular nation. To get some real-life knowledge and comprehensive understanding about how people perceive this, I conducted a survey as follows-

❖ “I am a Malayali. I grew up hearing the stories of journey of ayyappan. I went to Sabarimala two times. And the second time was during padi pooja, the padi pooja of that year was conducting by my family. At that age I didn't know the power of Ayyappan. When I went there, I simply prayed and said not to give me much difficulties while climbing down the Mala. For me going to Sabarimala was very joyful because I felt my teachers and all others are giving me much respect and all. So, I only enjoyed this. I didn't know why certain age group women are not allowed there. My parents told me you can't go to Sabarimala after 10 years. I didn't question that because the fact is that I didn't care about that. When I was in 8th standard the verdict came on Sabarimala that women of all age groups can enter there. By that age I understood the reason why women between age 10 -50 are not allowed. We all know women can't enter inside mosque. I don't know why but I don't like to question that because whatever the reason it's up to them. It's their belief. We are nobody to question that. Like that this is our belief everybody needs to respect that. My question is the woman who came to enter the Sabarimala carrying sanitary pad with her irumudi kettu (it’s a cloth bag containing coconut, ghee etc). Her name is Rehana Fathima, even though she is a Muslim and she don’t dare to question her community belief but she is ready to question Sabarimala. I am saying she need to respect our belief and before arguing they need to understand why women of certain age groups are not allowed like the way she understands Muslim belief.... I felt this much anger because I am from the land of Ayyappan”- Jayanti

❖ “As a woman, I will respect the rules made by the temple even if there are 50 such temples. I am blessed to have darshan of worshipping 2000 temples around where I live. Respecting age-old temple tradition is also a woman's right and we cherish that”. - Rashi

❖ “I believe Supreme court did the right thing by allowing the females to enter into the premises, it supports the idea of our constitution and protects the basic individual rights which should be preserved at all costs”. – Suhani

❖ “As a man I feel we should respect our religion. Sabarimala should be respected as it forbids women to enter, the reason is because the deity is celibate. Hindu women should understand that it's not misogyny”. – Aman

By citing these two examples which deals with secularism, religious freedom, conflict of ideas we can draw an analogy how much importance should be given to religion when we talk about the society, we live in. Preserving Religious traits, customs become very vital along with keeping in mind what should be done and what should not be done so that it do not go against the morals of the society and the citizens of the nation. [5]

Conclusion

For me, I am all for gender equality -no woman should be biased against. However, I believe many people who fight cases like these have no knowledge of the history - for them it is always right to oppose things that may look like gender bias - in the case of Sabarimala without even considering that a similar "inequality" exists if you consider the Attukal temple festival where men are not allowed. They believe that they are "fighters for women's freedom" and everyone else is biased. The problem is that they have a very narrow outlook. Their main focus is on themselves - consciously or unconsciously - indirectly they want to glorify their own image as that of a person who fights for equality. If similar temples where the entry of men is prohibited exists then why is there a question on the entry of females in the Sabrimala temple. Although I strongly agree with the fact that religious norms should not cause any kind of contradictions to the morality of the society and should abide Secular with the Constitution of India but clearly, we all would validate that Our Constitution can be amended with the coming needs and principles of the society and citizens whereas religion, customs remain constant from the very old period of time. People who follow various religious group and associate themselves with some certain identity develop feelings, faith for that particular religion followed by its customs, traditions. They follow these customs from their heart with feelings of devotion within themselves. Adding to this, we observe how in other religions like Muslim women are not allowed to enter into any mosque because they have some restrictions which is followed by their religion, again In Christianity, why Nuns hide their hair. This simplifies every religion has its own unique rituals, customs, beliefs. And therefore, this more or less becomes a matter of rituals not any kind of discrimination. We need to understand this modernization, becoming a developing nation doesn’t really mean to forget our roots, our culture. It is equally important to value and preserve our culture while growing economically, socially, ethically, politically at individual level or at national level.

Finally, concluding with some questions to ponder upon, we discussed the idea of secularism, its various interpretations, modern and traditional definitions along with legal cases. But let us now reverse the question and try to ponder upon whether secularism is appropriate for India. And if yes, what other things can be done to make secularism if not perfect then adequate to counter the challenges, communal violence, differences in religious groups while protecting and preserving the minority interests. We should truly understand how India as a country is different and unique from the western countries and how we can preserve its history, nationalism, while not hurting the sentiments of any religion. Unity is Diversity is what something which makes India a unique country. Hence, Secularism becomes a very prominent feature of our nation.

References:

1.RGI releases Census 2011 data on Population by Religious Communities. (n.d.). https://pib.gov.in/newsite/printrelease.aspx?relid=126326#:~:text=Total%20Population%20in%202011%20is,Stated%200.29%20crores%20(0.2%25)

2. Secularism: Its content and Context on JSTOR. (n.d.). www.jstor.org. https://www.jstor.org/stable/41419770#:~:text=Secularism%20is%20sometimes%20said%20to,such%20an%20understanding%20of%20secularism.

3. https://main.sci.gov.in/judgment/judis/11570.pdf

4. Supreme Court Observer. (2022, June 24). Sabarimala Temple Entry - Supreme Court observer. https://www.scobserver.in/cases/indian-young-lawyers-association-v-state-of-kerala-sabarimala-temple-entry-background/

5. In 4:1 verdict, Supreme Court allows women’s entry into Sabarimala Temple.