-International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights

Art.20(a)---International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), 1966, Art.18---"religious conversion", meaning of---religious conversion was adoption of a set of beliefs identified with one particular religious denomination to exclusion of others and said phrase described abandoning of adherence to one denomination and affiliating with another, which might be from one to another denomination within the same religion, for example, from Baptist to Catholic Christianity or from Shi'a to Sunni Islam, etc. PArt.20(a)---International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), 1966, Art.18---"religious conversion", meaning of---religious conversion was adoption of a set of beliefs identified with one particular religious denomination to exclusion of others and said phrase described abandoning of adherence to one denomination and affiliating with another, which might be from one to another denomination within the same religion, for example, from Baptist to Catholic Christianity or from Shi'a to Sunni Islam, etc.
PLD 2020 LAHORE 489
--------------------------------------------------
Art. 199---Constitutional jurisdiction of High Court---Custody of minor---Domestic employment of minor under the age of fifteen---Forced religious conversion---Legal recognition of religious conversion, criteria---Nature of religious conversion / belief---Scope---Petitioner sought custody of minor daughter, who whilst under domestic employment of respondents, allegedly converted from Christianity to Islam and refused to see petitioner / mother---Petitioner impugned order of Judicial Magistrate whereby said minor daughter was lodged in a shelter home instead of being returned to petitioner on ground that such minor expressly stated that she had converted to Islam and did not want to go with her mother / petitioner---Validity---Minor lacked legal capacity to abjure her religion without consent of her parents or guardian---While petitioner / mother stated before Judicial Magistrate that she had no objection to minor's conversion to Islam however such statement could not be regarded as parental consent for change of religion as it was made in anxiety under a misguided belief that same would help her to get custody of her daughter---Contention that alleged forced religious conversion of minor be declared void was not tenable as concepts of valid, void and voidable could not be applied to religious rights and resulting personal law unless latter itself ordained the same, or was sanctioned by statutory law; and a person's religious belief was not tangible and could not be seen or touched---Change of religion did not, ipso facto, deprive a parent of right to custody of a child and petitioner being real mother of minor was entitled to custody and also to exercise control over minor---High Court observed that minor was not sui juris and lacked legal capacity to change religion on her own, however, since question of faith was a matter of heart and conviction, therefore no Court could declare said conversion invalid or void and could only refuse to recognize or give effect to it for certain legal purposes---High Court directed that minor be returned to petitioner who was entitled to custody---Constitutional petition was allowed, accordingly.
PLD 2020 LAHORE 489
--------------------------------------------------
Art. 199---Constitutional jurisdiction of High Court---Question of religious conversion---Factual controversy---Scope---Conversion from one religion to another had far reaching legal consequences as it affected succession, marital status and right to seek elective office, etc.---Courts in certain cases, therefore, may be called upon to decide whether a conversion was bona fide, genuine, voluntary or otherwise and in such eventualities they gave findings on basis of evidence produced---Unless there existed statutory prescription about nature of proof required, subsequent conduct of a convert had immense importance and courts were to insist that declaration of conversion must be followed by adherence to cultural and spiritual tradition---High Court, under Art. 199 of the Constitution, could not undertake factual inquiry and thus question as to whether a conversion was tainted or otherwise could not be determined without recording evidence, therefore it could only be challenged through appropriate proceedings before a forum/court provided by Sub-Constitutional law.

PLD 2020 LAHORE 489