As the world’s largest nation and democracy, we have the right to make our voice heard in the world organization.

In 2021, Michelle Bachelet, then United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights, said: “while it is the primary responsibility of the UN Human Rights Council, promoting and the protection of human rights is one of the best ways for the UN Security Council to fulfill its mandate. the maintenance of international peace and security. With this in mind, let us look at India’s engagement with the UN human rights system over the past few years. The fact is that India has not been a strong leader in the UNHRC, willing to take tough, principled positions with consistent application of human rights values; nor has it engaged particularly constructively with the mechanisms of the UNHRC. India has been a member of the United Nations Human Rights Council for 16 of the Council’s 18 years, the latest being from 2019 to 2024. Resolution 60/251 which established the Human Rights Council states that “members elected to the Council must adhere to the highest standards of promotion and advancement.” protection of human rights, will cooperate fully with the council and will be reviewed under the universal periodic review mechanism during their term of office.” India has been the subject of 25 critical statements from UN and OHCHR human rights experts since 2019 – during its last two terms – expressing concerns over its domestic problems in human rights and the lack of respect for its international human rights obligations.

Between January 24, 2011 and September 24, 2024, the Indian government received more than 200 communications from the United Nations Special Procedures, a group of independent experts established by the HRC and mandated to monitor and report on human rights man throughout the world. The Indian government only responded to less than a third of the communications received. After 2014, India facilitated only two visits to the country under a UN special procedure mandate. There are currently 19 pending visit requests. Some have remained unanswered since 1999 (for example, from the special rapporteur on torture). In its latest Universal Periodic Review, a mechanism through which each state’s human rights record is examined and recommendations for improvement are made, 21 countries urged India to improve its protection of freedom of religion and the rights of religious minorities, with several of them worried about the increase in violence and violence. hate speech and government adoption of discriminatory policies such as “anti-conversion” laws. Additionally, 19 countries said India should ratify the UN Convention Against Torture, a treaty we signed in 1997 but have never ratified. India declared during the 2012 and 2017 UPR rounds that it remained committed to ratifying the treaty. However, it has taken no steps to honor its commitment, even though torture and other ill-treatment continue to be routinely used by police and other security forces to gather information or coerce “confessions.” “. India is party to only six of the nine major human rights treaties. India’s reports under the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women and the Convention on the Rights of the Child are also awaited. India was the subject of two reports, in 2018 and 2019, from the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights on the human rights situation in Kashmir. Both reports call on Indian authorities to uphold their international human rights obligations in the region, repeal or amend repressive laws such as the Armed Forces (Jammu and Kashmir) Special Powers Act and the on public safety in Jammu and Kashmir, to end restrictions on journalists and to investigate. any general prohibitions or restrictions. Instead of engaging with the OHCHR, India called the reports “false, with a motivated narrative,” and accused the human rights body of “legitimizing terrorism.”

India has consistently been included in the UN Secretary-General’s report on reprisals, which outlines cases of alleged reprisals – against individuals and organizations – for cooperation with the UN in the area of ​​human rights man. In the 2020 report, the Secretary-General concluded that “continued intimidation and reprisals may have dissuaded some civil society representatives from cooperating with the United Nations for fear of further reprisals” in the country. So why is credible engagement with the UNHRC essential in the context of India’s UNSC bid? Discussions on Security Council reform should not be conducted in isolation from the performance and behavior of candidates in other UN bodies, including human rights. Membership in any of the UN bodies should be used to highlight and protect human rights, not to shield members or their allies from scrutiny of their rights records of man. This should be the case for all nations and it should not matter whether others are as bad or worse on this issue. It is abundantly clear that India is failing to comply with its domestic and international human rights obligations and commitments as a member and in its interactions with the various organs and mechanisms of the United Nations. Discussions on Security Council reform may not end anytime soon, but if India is serious about becoming a permanent member of the UN Security Council, it must demonstrate that it can commit to responsibly with UN human rights entities, including the HRC. It must comply with the UNHRC membership criteria in a consistent and principled manner. It must commit to the highest standards in the promotion and protection of human rights in order to fully cooperate with the United Nations human rights mechanisms. We hurt our chances when we deliberately choose not to do the right thing.