Pakistan’s problem with forced conversion through marriage begins at a police desk. A girl’s age, safety and own wishes must be established before anyone treats a certificate as the end of the case.

From Karachi, I can picture the first hours. A family arrives at a police station with a photograph and whatever proof of age they have kept safe. Their daughter has gone missing. Soon another set of papers appears: a certificate of conversion and a marriage document. Each side says the papers tell the truth. Somewhere between the desk and the court, the girl herself may have little room to speak.

That is a reconstruction of a recurring problem, not the account of one unnamed child. The Human Rights Commission of Pakistan’s 2024–25 investigation describes girls who disappeared and later reappeared as converts and wives. It also records cases in which families disputed their ages. A conversion certificate can tell us that a ceremony was recorded. It cannot, by itself, establish age, freedom from pressure or the legality of a marriage.

In April 2026, United Nations experts raised a fresh alarm. They described continuing patterns of abduction and forced conversion through marriage affecting women and girls from religious minorities. Their statement said that, among the cases reflected in the figures they cited for 2025, about three quarters involved Hindu women and girls, one quarter Christians, and nearly four fifths occurred in Sindh. Those percentages describe the cases behind that statement; they are not a national count of every conversion.

First establish whether she is a child

The distinction between an adult and a child should come before any argument about a family’s honour or a change of faith. An adult woman has a right to choose her religion and spouse, even if her parents object. A child needs protection that a marriage document cannot cancel. The UN experts put the point plainly: a child’s marriage cannot rest on the full and free consent required for marriage.

Sindh already has a clear age threshold. The Sindh Child Marriages Restraint Act, 2013 defines a child, male or female, as someone under 18 and provides penalties for child marriage. Islamabad’s 2025 child marriage law also sets 18 as the minimum age in the capital territory. These are distinct jurisdictions. A law passed for Islamabad does not automatically rewrite provincial law across Pakistan.

Yet the number written on a nikahnama can compete with older records. HRCP documented the case of a Christian girl whose National Database and Registration Authority B-Form, school record and church certificate gave a birth date in March 2010. A nikahnama prepared after her disappearance listed her as 19 in June 2024. HRCP reported that the family struggled to register its complaint, that she entered child protection custody, and that she was later returned to the man accused of abducting her. HRCP’s account covered proceedings through its 2024–25 reporting period. I cannot infer her present circumstances from it.

That case does not prove every allegation of abduction. HRCP itself said it could not determine whether the girl had been taken by force or lured away. Its documented conflict between contemporaneous age records and the marriage document is serious enough without inventing a conclusion the available record does not support.

I have worked with documents long enough to know that a paper gains authority from the process behind it. When a bank checks identity, it does not resolve a conflict by accepting the newest form without looking at the older record. A child’s case carries far greater stakes. Police and courts need to compare original birth, school and identity records promptly, investigate any discrepancy, and explain how they reached an age finding.

The absence of a birth certificate can also leave a family exposed. UNICEF’s work on birth registration explains why registration matters for a child’s legal identity. It does not follow that an unregistered girl’s age may be guessed from her appearance or simply copied from a marriage certificate. Investigators should seek available school, health and family records and test their reliability. The burden of a weak registration system should not fall on a child.

Then ask whether she could speak freely

Age is only the first question. A girl may say in a video or before a magistrate that she converted voluntarily. Her words matter. So does the setting in which she says them. Who brought her to the camera? Where was she living before the hearing? Could she speak privately to independent counsel? Was she afraid of a husband, her family or a hostile crowd?

The National Commission for Human Rights and Legal Aid Society examined forced conversion through marriage through survivor interviews and other research. They distinguish several situations, including a genuinely chosen change of faith, deception, exploitation and coercion. That range is useful. It prevents an investigator from assuming that every disputed marriage is an abduction. It also prevents a signed statement from ending an inquiry into pressure, dependency or threats.

Pakistani authorities have pointed to cases in which judicial inquiries found that a woman had converted willingly. Their submission to a UN human rights process cites such outcomes. Those findings deserve to be recorded accurately. They do not settle a different child’s age or consent. Each case requires its own inquiry, and the law must protect an adult’s choice as firmly as it protects a minor from coercion.

The commission’s proposed safeguards are practical: protective accommodation while voluntariness is assessed, a clear record of the process, trained investigators and separate procedures for adults and minors. A shelter must actually be safe and accessible. It should give a person space to speak without handing control to either the family or the alleged abductor. Otherwise, moving her from one source of pressure to another merely changes the address.

The UN experts say police sometimes dismiss families’ complaints, delay investigation or fail to assess age properly. That is an assessment by the experts, not a finding against every police officer. It identifies the moments when protection matters most. A late first information report can cost investigators time. Delay can also allow a contested marriage document to become the main story before the child’s original records reach a judge.

Poverty gives power to the wrong people

Religion is central to these cases, but the surrounding imbalance matters. HRCP’s study of Hindu migration from Sindh describes insecurity alongside economic hardship. Its more detailed religious freedom report says Scheduled Caste Hindu families face particular vulnerability where low income and limited social mobility restrict their choices. A household dependent on local employers or influential figures may struggle to pursue a case that lasts months.

The NCHR and Legal Aid Society likewise describe a mixture of gender inequality, poverty and local influence. Their work makes me pause over a familiar newspaper phrase: the family claims. A claim deserves testing, of course. Yet a powerful man may arrive with a lawyer and a certificate while the family travels from a village with a school record and little money. Equal treatment means investigating both accounts with the same care, not pretending that both sides have equal power.

There is a second danger. Some families may object to a grown daughter’s independent choice and call it coercion. The answer cannot be to give parents ownership of an adult woman. It is to establish her age first, provide confidential access to independent legal help, and hear her wishes away from anyone who may intimidate her. That process protects a woman who chose to leave as well as one who wants to return.

For a minor, the state has an additional obligation. It must examine possible abduction, sexual violence or trafficking under the applicable law. Conversion cannot erase a child protection inquiry. Nor should officials treat the religious identity of the alleged husband as evidence of guilt by itself. Conduct and evidence must decide the case.

What should change at the first hearing?

Pakistan does not have to wait for another speech about tolerance. The first police response can record a missing child’s documents, preserve communications, locate her quickly and refer her for independent protection. An investigator can verify a claimed age against earlier records instead of relying on a fresh nikahnama. A court can document how it assessed age and take a statement in conditions that reduce pressure. These steps follow the failures identified by HRCP, the NCHR and the UN experts.

Lawmakers still have work to do. The UN experts called for an 18-year minimum marriage age throughout Pakistan and a distinct offence of forced religious conversion. HRCP has urged stronger child marriage enforcement and scrutiny of institutions repeatedly linked to underage conversions. Any new rule must preserve the right of an adult to change faith freely. A broad ban on conversion would place another power over the very person the law should hear.

The question at the police desk stays with me. A father may be holding a B-Form. A lawyer may be holding a marriage document. The girl may be waiting somewhere else. Pakistan will know whether its protections work when officials establish her age, give her a safe chance to speak and act on the evidence before the paperwork hardens into an answer.