INDIA CHALLENGES UN’S HUMAN RIGHTS SCRUTINY, WARNS AGAINST POLITICAL SELECTIVITY DAYS AFTER DELHI PROTEST CRACKDOWN

October 14, 2026 

India has urged United Nations human rights mechanisms to remain impartial, avoid political selectivity and respect the cultural and historical contexts of individual countries, days after the UN human rights office raised concerns over the mass detention of protesters, lawyers, journalists and civil society representatives during the recent police crackdown in New Delhi.

Delivering India’s statement at the 81st session of the United Nations General Assembly’s Third Committee on Monday, First Secretary at India’s Permanent Mission to the UN, Anuj Swarup, reaffirmed New Delhi’s commitment to protecting and promoting human rights while cautioning international institutions against politicising their assessments.

Swarup said India would continue to cooperate with the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights and the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights in a spirit of trust and partnership. He stressed that the promotion of human rights must be guided by consistent standards rather than selective scrutiny or double standards.

“We hope that the UN human rights mechanisms will rise above politicisation and selectivity, respecting cultural and historical context, so that these bodies remain an impartial moral compass for the world,” Swarup said.

The statement came days after the Office of the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights expressed concern over reports of mass detentions during demonstrations in Delhi. The UN office had highlighted reports concerning protesters, protest organisers, members of civil society organisations, lawyers and journalists who were detained before and during the large-scale demonstrations.

The protests were organised amid opposition demands for the resignation of Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar over alleged irregularities in the Special Intensive Revision of electoral rolls. The demonstrations were met with extensive security restrictions and preventive detentions, prompting criticism from opposition parties and civil society groups.

India had previously rejected the UN human rights office’s comments on the Delhi crackdown, describing them as unwarranted and an unacceptable interference in the country’s internal affairs. New Delhi maintained that matters concerning domestic law and public order must be considered in their proper context, while reiterating its commitment to constitutional governance and human rights.

In his address to the UN General Assembly’s Third Committee, Swarup presented India’s approach to human rights as rooted in its civilisational traditions of pluralism, tolerance and peaceful coexistence. He said the country had engaged constructively with the UN Human Rights Council and remained committed to ensuring dignity for every citizen.

The Indian representative also highlighted the government’s social protection and poverty-reduction programmes as evidence of its emphasis on improving living conditions and expanding access to essential services.

According to the figures presented by Swarup, more than 250 million people had been lifted out of multidimensional poverty over the preceding decade. He said India’s social protection system reached more than one billion people, including approximately 800 million beneficiaries of free food grains and 600 million people covered by free health protection. He also cited the opening of 320 million bank accounts for women as part of the government’s broader people-centred development model.

Swarup argued that efforts to advance human rights should account for the social and economic circumstances of individual countries and recognise the importance of policies designed to improve the dignity and welfare of their populations. He reiterated India’s commitment to working with other countries to make the Human Rights Council an effective, objective and credible institution.

INDIA ALSO CHALLENGES UN REPORT ON INDIGENOUS PEOPLES

Separately, India strongly objected to a reference concerning the implementation of the Forest Rights Act in a report by Albert Barume, the UN Special Rapporteur on the rights of Indigenous Peoples.

The report, which examined the demarcation, registration and titling of Indigenous peoples’ lands, territories and resources, stated that although millions of claims had been submitted under India’s Forest Rights Act, a substantial number remained unresolved, particularly claims concerning community rights.

Swarup rejected the reference, arguing that the assessment relied on a submission from a single individual and was not supported by official data. He said such reliance on unverified information raised questions about the rigour and objectivity of the report.

Presenting figures from official records, the Indian representative said more than 5.4 million claims had been filed under the Forest Rights Act, of which more than 80 per cent had been decided. He added that over 2.5 million titles had been distributed under the legislation.

India offered to provide updated data to the Special Rapporteur so that what it described as inaccuracies arising from unverified submissions could be corrected. Swarup reiterated that New Delhi supported the protection of Indigenous peoples’ rights and remained committed to sustainable and inclusive development that left no community behind.

The objection reflects India’s broader concern that international assessments should rely on verifiable evidence, official information and transparent methodology rather than uncorroborated submissions. The government has maintained that such standards are essential if UN human rights mechanisms are to retain their credibility and legitimacy.

The UN General Assembly session has also seen the election of 15 countries to the Human Rights Council for the 2027–2029 term: Brazil, Burundi, the Dominican Republic, Germany, Ghana, Ireland, Japan, Jordan, Kuwait, Nepal, Nigeria, the Republic of Moldova, Ukraine, Uruguay and Zambia.

India’s interventions have placed two connected issues before the international community: the need for consistency and impartiality in human rights scrutiny, and the importance of ensuring that country-specific assessments are grounded in reliable evidence. New Delhi’s position is that international mechanisms should promote the protection of human rights through constructive engagement rather than politicised criticism.

The dispute over the Delhi protests and the objections to the report on Indigenous peoples remain distinct matters, but both have underscored India’s insistence that the UN system must apply objective standards across countries and substantiate its assessments with credible information. The government says it remains willing to cooperate with international institutions while challenging what it considers inaccurate, selective or politically motivated criticism.