The Nagaland Baptist Church Council (NBCC) has raised concerns over the revival of the Arunachal Pradesh Freedom of Religion Act (APFRA), commonly referred to as an anti-conversion bill, urging the state government to rethink its decision.

The council fears the law could be misused to target specific religious communities under the guise of protecting indigenous traditions.

Advertisement

In a letter addressed to Arunachal Pradesh Chief Minister Pema Khandu, NBCC General Secretary Zelhou Keyho called for sensitivity in handling religious matters, emphasizing the need for inclusive governance in a state known for its cultural and ethnic diversity. The appeal comes amid growing apprehensions among Christian groups in the region.

The APFRA was enacted over four decades ago to regulate religious conversions in the state, making it mandatory for individuals to notify authorities before changing their faith. The law was originally introduced to prevent forced conversions, but it has long been criticized for its potential to be misused against minority religious groups.

Despite being in existence since 1978, the Act lacked a structured framework for implementation. However, during the recent Statehood Day celebrations, Chief Minister Khandu announced the introduction of new rules under the Act to address this gap, citing directives from the High Court.

Khandu has maintained that the updated rules are not aimed at restricting any religious group but are meant to safeguard the indigenous culture and traditions of Arunachal Pradesh. He assured that the government would engage with stakeholders, religious leaders, and officials to ensure a fair and balanced approach to implementation.

“We respect all faiths and communities, and our focus remains on preserving the identity of Arunachal Pradesh’s indigenous people,” Khandu stated.

The NBCC, however, remains skeptical, warning that any legal provisions regulating religious conversions could be misinterpreted or exploited to marginalize certain groups. Similar apprehensions have been voiced by civil society organizations and human rights groups, who argue that such laws could create social divisions and restrict religious freedoms.