UNO: India’s Human Rights Violations Internationalized

By Sajjad Shaukat

United Nations Human Rights Council-41st Session of Universal Periodic Review, subject human rights, production date November 10, 2022, Geographic subject India—United Nations General Assembly will discuss gross human rights violations in India in light of the already submitted report prepared by various official and non-official entities, including Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch, NGOs, joint groups and individuals working with the states. These human rights violations as pointed out by them are given below:-

JS17 of the International Court of Justice (ICJ) stated that the security forces and police in India had been engaging in extrajudicial killings or fake encounter killings, and that the culture of extrajudicial killings was normalised in the country. Ambiguities and gaps in investigation procedures had translated into impunity for killings.

JS36 stated that the reporting period had been marked by disproportionate use of force by law enforcement agencies. Prosecution of police officers for human rights violations amounting to criminal offences had rarely materialized.

The European Centre for Law and Justice (ECLJ) stated that despite its abolishment, the caste system was in practice still very much prevalent, especially in rural areas and states that had anti-conversion laws.

JS35 stated that Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes were economically deprived and socially marginalized, and lacked resources, access to education, employment and other income-generating opportunities.

JS36 stated that custodial torture and violence remained an entrenched and routine law-enforcement strategy across India. In only a few cases registered against police officers for torture or custodial deaths had the police been held accountable and convicted for murder.

JS44 stated that Dalit communities were subjected to violent search and seizure operations, falsified charges; caste based verbal abuse and humiliation, severe beatings, inhuman torture, forced bribery for their release and sexual abuse following arrest.

JS11 stated that many Adivasi/Tribal women in the custody of the police or other authorities were raped or sexually abused.

JS32 stated that the use of the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act made it virtually impossible to obtain bail, leaving individuals incarcerated for extended periods of time with no legal recourse.

Amnesty International (AI) stated that two-thirds of the prison population was in pre trial detention, with Dalits, Adivasis and Muslims being disproportionately represented.

JS25 stated that during the Universal Periodic Review (UPR) cycle, there had been a rampant misuse of counter terrorism legislation to persecute human rights defenders, journalists and persons critical of the Government, such as the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, the National Security Act  and the Jammu & Kashmir Public Safety Act.

AI said that the Government-hold accountable public officials—advocate religious hatred that constitutes incitement to discrimination, hostility, or violence.

JS29 stated that lawyers were the subject of physical attacks in connection to their professional activities. Such acts were often perpetrated against human rights lawyers from poor, marginalised and migrant backgrounds, or lawyers who represented these groups.

JS14 stated that efforts by the Government to criminalise dissent and censor information included shutting down the internet, preventing journalists from entering protest sites, filing criminal charges against journalists that criticise the Government, and issuing broad advisory directives to social media companies to block critical content.

AI stated that peaceful protesters had been charged with offences under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act and the Indian Penal Code, including for sedition, hurting religious sentiments, and hate speech. Protesters had also been met with excessive force from the police and violence by non-state actors.

JS31 stated that the Government routinely used Section 144 of the Criminal Procedure Code 1973 to declare a curfew and prevent peaceful public gatherings, restrict protests, and stifle people’s movements.

AI stated that the Government continued to misuse the Foreign Contribution Regulation Act to silence NGOs. Since the last UPR, the Foreign Contribution Regulation Act license of 6,683 NGOs had been cancelled.

In this regard, Human Rights Watch (HRW) also pointed out almost similar human rights violations as reported by AI, but stated in JS36 that mob violence or lynching by Hindu nationalist vigilante groups targeting minorities continued during the reporting period. Police were either complicit in the killings and the cover-up, or stalled investigations and ignored procedures. The police routinely filed complaints against the victims, their families, and witnesses.

HRW stated that people who protested or criticized the Government were frequently labeled “anti-national” and the authorities targeted them by bringing politically motivated criminal cases under the broadly worded counterterrorism law, the Unlawful Activities Prevention Act, sedition law, or by alleging financial fraud or irregularities.

JS18 stated that multiple studies had found that Dalits in India had a significantly increased risk of slipping into forced and bonded labour and child labour.

JS9 stated that widespread poverty amongst Adivasi communities forced Adivasi women and girls to migrate in search of work, often becoming bonded labourers. Adivasi women were also vulnerable to trafficking.

Particularly, JS6 stated that strong caste-based occupations still continue.

ActionAid Association (India) (AAA) stated that an estimated 90% of the workforce in the country was in the informal sector.

JS40 stated that industrial accidents were common given the weak protections of the Occupational Safety, Health And Working Conditions Code and the low inspection and reporting rate.

These official and non-official entities also presented recommendations regarding prevention of human rights violations.

In this respect, the National Human Rights Commission, India (NHRC) justifying, said that there was no anti-conversion law in India, and that everyone was free to profess and propagate the religion of their choice. Inter-communal violence was dealt with by law enforcement agencies.

But, it agreed that measures to check trafficking should involve a more effective and integrated approach—the Government should continue to monitor the registration of births and deaths through local bodies in rural areas——the law regarding sexual harassment at the workplace needed to be enforced more strictly by the authorities—effective training was required to identify and redress crimes against women and children in the field of cyberspace—the Government needed to ensure effective implementation of and  sensitisation on the Transgender Persons (Protection of Rights) Act, 2019 etc.

HRW-JS1 recommended the Government to provide safe and speedy justice to victims of child-trafficking and domestic violence.

In this connection ICJ recommended that the Government become a party to the 1951 Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees and its 1967 Protocol.

JS5 recommended that the Government ratify the Convention on the Reduction of Statelessness, 1961 and the Convention Relating to the Status of Stateless Persons, 1954.

HRW recommended that the Government ratify the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court and implement the statute in national legislation.

The Kashmir Institute of International Relations (KIIR) recommended that the Government accede to the 1977 Additional Protocols to the Geneva Conventions.

The International Campaign to Abolish Nuclear Weapons (ICAN) called upon the Government to take immediate steps to sign, ratify or accede to the Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons, as a matter of international urgency.

Christian Solidarity Worldwide (CSW) recommended that the Government [should] issue a standing invitation to all UN Special Procedures.

JS1 recommended that the Government [should] respond positively to all requests for visits to the country by special rapporteurs.

HRW recommended the Government [to] repeal the Armed Forces (Special Powers) Act, the Jammu and Kashmir Public Safety Act and the National Security Act.

JS13 recommended that the Government [should] investigate all allegations of human rights violations during counterterrorism operations, including of “fake encounter” killings and other extrajudicial executions, and prosecute those found responsible regardless of position.

JS44 recommended the Government [to] institute an effective mechanism of redress for victims of violations by security forces, tasked to conduct independent investigations and prosecutions in civilian courts.

HRW recommended that the Government [should] amend the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act to conform to international standards and repeal the colonial-era sedition law.

AI recommended that the Government [should] immediately and unconditionally release all persons detained solely for peacefully exercising their rights to freedom of expression, peaceful assembly, or association, and drop all charges against them.

JS20 recommended the Government [to] provide civil society members, human rights defenders and journalists with a safe and secure environment in which to carry out their work, conduct impartial, thorough, and effective investigations into all cases of attack, harassment and intimidation against them, and bring perpetrators to justice.

ICJ (JS3) recommended that the Government [should] guarantee the full enjoyment of the right to freedom of religion and belief, including by strengthening measures aimed at protecting persons belonging to religious minorities from violence and persecution.

HRW recommended that the Government [to] repeal directives that ban the hijab, and ensure that schools and universities are inclusive spaces, and safeguard girls’ and women’s right to freedom of religion and expression.

JS35 recommended that the Government [should] enact a comprehensive law for unorganized workers.

JS44 recommended the Government [to] recognise domestic workers; part and full time, and include them in the four Labour Codes in order to ensure that labour rights and social security benefits are granted to them—JS44 also stated that forced evictions and demolitions of homes of the poor had continued unabated during the COVID-19 pandemic and that almost 16 million people were currently threatened with the risk of displacement.

JS5 stated that Muslims were forcefully evicted from settlements using protection of national parks or illegal encroachment of government lands as a justification, which rendered them homeless and destitute. Therefore, recommended that the Government [should] impose an immediate national moratorium on arbitrary forced evictions for any reason, invest adequately in affordable housing, and take steps to reduce homelessness by 2030.

JS44 recommended the Government [to] urgently address the discrimination and structural marginalisation faced by vulnerable groups in accessing health care.

AI stated that misinformation that Muslims were spreading Covid-19 had resulted in health care services denied to them.

ICJ recommended that the Government immediately declare a moratorium on executions with a view to abolishing the death penalty for all crimes and in all circumstances, and commute all death sentences.

The National Campaign against Torture (NCAT) recommended that the Government [should] enact a national anti-torture law.

JS35 recommended that the Government [should] adopt legislation to criminalize hate speech and prevent communal violence—JS4 stated that there was a need for a rigorous anti-discrimination law and policies.

JS23 recommended the Government [to] enact a national law to recognise and protect human rights defenders in compliance with the UN declaration on human rights defenders and other international standards.

Nevertheless these human rights groups and entities have emphatically insisted upon the Indian government to revoke the discriminatory acts and policies which amount to gross human rights violations.

Nonetheless, as mentioned in the Background: “the present report was prepared pursuant to Human Rights Council resolutions 5/1 and 16/21, taking into consideration the periodicity of the universal periodic review. It is a summary of 70 stakeholders’ submissions for the universal periodic review, presented in a summarized manner owing to word-limit constraints. A separate section is provided for the contribution by the national human rights institution that is accredited in full compliance with the Paris Principles. The report has been prepared taking into consideration the outcome of the previous review,”— Report of the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights.

The full texts of all original submissions are available at: WWW Ohchr.Org

Undoubtedly, after the submission of the above report in the UNO which is seriously considering it on November 10, 2022 has internationalized the gross human rights violations in India.

Sajjad Shaukat writes on international affairs and is author of the book: US vs Islamic Militants, Invisible Balance of Power: Dangerous Shift in International Relations