At a United Nations forum on Tuesday, 20th October, India firmly pushed back against concerted efforts to use uncorroborated assertions and deficient records to build a negative narrative around the functioning of the world's most populous constitutional democracy. Addressing the session, Barkha Tamrakar, Deputy Secretary in the Ministry of External Affairs (MEA), made it clear that multilateral human rights forums cannot be reduced to political instruments designed to isolate or target specific sovereign states.

The exchange took place during deliberations surrounding the report of the Working Group on Enforced or Involuntary Disappearances at the UN General Assembly’s Third Committee, which addresses social, humanitarian, and cultural matters (UN Third Committee Official Records). Taking a firm stance, the Indian delegation refused to accept unsubstantiated assertions as established truths, while maintaining that New Delhi has always remained open to addressing specific, thoroughly documented cases through proper bilateral and multilateral frameworks.

Setting out New Delhi's position, Tamrakar declared: “India firmly opposes any attempt to convert unverified allegations, incomplete statistics or a report that contains no India country (specific) observation into a negative characterisation of the world’s largest democracy.”

Reaffirming India's readiness to participate in constructive scrutiny, she stated: “India remains prepared to clarify specific, properly documented cases through established channels.”

Outlining the core principles governing India's participation on the global stage, she added: “India engages with international human rights mechanisms, but such engagement must be based on dialogue, consultation, cooperation with non-selectivity and transparency as guiding principles.”

Tamrakar also warned member delegations against misrepresenting procedural exchanges as final judicial determinations: “Human rights must not be used as an instrument of political pressure or selective country targeting. We call on delegations to cite the report faithfully, not to inflate a humanitarian communication into a verdict.”

The backdrop to these statements involves an ongoing procedural concern regarding several independent special rapporteurs appointed by the UN Human Rights Council. These experts frequently rely on submissions gathered from anonymous or undisclosed external entities without conducting rigorous, independent factual verification. Reminding the assembly of India's long-standing normative commitments, Tamrakar underscored that New Delhi is a formal signatory to the International Convention for the Protection of All Persons from Enforced Disappearance.

Explaining the deep-seated constitutional structures that protect civil liberties within the country, she noted: “India is a vibrant democracy anchored in the rule of law, and Article 21 of its Constitution guarantees the right to life and personal liberty. Our independent judiciary is fully empowered to issue the writs of habeas corpus, thus providing a strong and readily accessible safeguard against any alleged disappearance.”

Beyond constitutional guarantees and judicial oversight, Tamrakar highlighted the statutory checks and institutional avenues available to ordinary citizens. She pointed out that India’s Right to Information (RTI) Act acts as a structural guarantee for public transparency and administrative accountability, while statutory watchdogs—namely the National Human Rights Commission (NHRC) and various State Human Rights Commissions (SHRCs)—serve as independent forums dedicated to investigating grievances. She observed that an active landscape of civil society groups, paired with a robust and independent free press, establishes an essential, supplementary tier of democratic protection.

The firm response came in the wake of statements issued from Geneva on Tuesday by more than 20 UN experts, who expressed alarm over what they termed a repeatedly heavy-handed police response to demonstrations organised by youth groups in the capital. These rapporteurs had called upon authorities to investigate claims of excessive force. India’s intervention at the Third Committee served as an immediate, unequivocal refutation of those assertions.

This position follows a similar rebuttal delivered previously, when Indian diplomats rejected a critical assessment compiled by a UN Special Rapporteur concerning alleged actions against a satirical political group identified as the Cockroach Janta Party (CJP). Dismissing that document as unverified talk without evidentiary backing, India had delivered a scathing review of procedural laxity: “This level of arbitrary report writing is precisely the reason that the United Nations and its institutions have lost credibility. A sweeping charge against the world’s largest youth population resting on anonymous and unverified claims is not evidence. It is hearsay, dressed up as a UN report, and my delegation rejects it outright.”