The United States Commission on International Religious Freedom (USCIRF) has once again drawn sharp criticism from New Delhi following the release of its latest report entitled Systematic Religious Persecution in India.

The document claims that India’s political and legal frameworks foster an atmosphere of discrimination against religious minority communities, despite constitutional guarantees that uphold freedom of religion or belief. The report reiterates the Commission’s long-held position that India’s internal governance and existing laws allegedly enable systematic bias against certain groups.

The Ministry of External Affairs (MEA) dismissed the allegations as baseless and politically motivated, asserting that such repetitive assessments stem from preconceived biases rather than objective investigation.

MEA spokesperson Randhir Jaiswal categorically rejected the report’s conclusions, stating that USCIRF has developed a pattern of misrepresenting isolated incidents to portray an exaggerated picture of societal discord. He emphasised that India’s multicultural and pluralistic society stands as a testament to coexistence and tolerance among followers of all religions.

In its report, USCIRF examined what it describes as the “interconnected relationship” between the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS) and the ruling Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), alleging that this dynamic enables the creation of legislation that adversely affects religious minorities.

The Commission cited citizenship laws, anti-conversion measures, and cow slaughter restrictions as examples of discriminatory legal frameworks. It further contended that the enforcement of these laws disproportionately affects certain communities, limiting their ability to freely practise their faith in accordance with Article 18 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), a treaty to which India is a signatory.

The USCIRF also reiterated its earlier recommendation to the United States Department of State, urging it to classify India as a “Country of Particular Concern” (CPC). The Commission claimed that this designation would be warranted under U.S. law for nations engaging in systematic, ongoing, and egregious violations of religious freedoms.

The CPC categorisation, if acted upon, could potentially open the door to diplomatic consequences, including sanctions, though past U.S. administrations have refrained from adopting this recommendation regarding India.

Responding to these assertions, the Indian government maintained that such external evaluations fail to grasp the depth and vibrancy of the country’s democratic and social systems. Jaiswal reiterated that India is home to 1.4 billion people of every major faith known to humanity and that its constitutional structure ensures equal rights and protections for all citizens.

He remarked that malicious attempts to question India’s social cohesion only expose the lack of credibility and understanding within USCIRF.

Reinforcing its position, the MEA repeated its earlier characterisation of USCIRF as a “biased organisation with a political agenda” that continues to project motivated narratives under the guise of human rights advocacy.

Indian officials argue that the Commission’s analyses are influenced by partisan lobbying groups in the United States and fail to acknowledge India’s robust democratic institutions, judicial independence, and record of religious tolerance. The government maintains that the country’s pluralistic ethos remains deeply rooted in everyday civic and cultural life, with diverse communities coexisting largely in peace.

Over recent years, India’s government and USCIRF have engaged in a recurring pattern of mutual criticism, with New Delhi rejecting external commentary on internal matters. Indian diplomats consistently argue that international evaluations of this kind amount to interference in domestic affairs, particularly when they overlook constitutional safeguards and the complex socio-political context of the country.

The latest report, therefore, marks yet another round in a long-standing dispute over perceptions of religious freedom and governance in one of the world’s most diverse societies.

Based On ANI Report