India Pushes For Time-Bound UNSC Reform, Says Veto Must Not Serve Narrow Political Interests

India has renewed its long-standing demand for comprehensive reform of the United Nations Security Council (UNSC), arguing that the veto power held by the Council’s five permanent members must be exercised with restraint and responsibility rather than being used for narrow political purposes.

The intervention comes as New Delhi continues to press for a more representative and equitable global governance structure that reflects contemporary geopolitical realities rather than the balance of power established in 1945.

Speaking at the United Nations in New York, India’s Permanent Representative to the UN, Parvathaneni Harish, stressed that the veto remains a unique privilege enjoyed exclusively by the five permanent members of the Security Council and carries a corresponding obligation to safeguard international peace and security responsibly.

“India has always maintained that the veto, which is right now a prerogative only of the five permanent members of the UN Security Council, is a responsibility that must be exercised with great restraint, especially on matters bearing upon the maintenance of international peace and security. It should not be an instrument of narrow political expediency,” Harish said.

The Indian envoy highlighted the historical record of veto usage, arguing that its repeated use by only a small number of countries has weakened the Council’s credibility and effectiveness. According to India, the veto has been exercised 331 times on around 200 resolutions since the UN was established.

Harish noted that two of the five permanent members have not used the veto for more than three and a half decades, while the overwhelming majority of vetoes and threatened vetoes have originated from only three members of the P5.

He also questioned the effectiveness of efforts introduced to improve accountability. Referring to the UN General Assembly’s 2022 Veto Initiative, which requires the Assembly to convene a debate whenever a veto is cast, Harish said expectations that the mechanism would discourage excessive use of the power have not been borne out by subsequent events.

“The record of the Veto is stark. Over the life of this Organisation, the veto has been exercised 331 times on around 200 resolutions. We also note that two out of the five permanent members have not exercised a veto for over three and a half decades, and most of the vetos or threats of vetos have emanated from only three of the P5.

The Veto Initiative of 2022 was seen as a harbinger of change, by mandating a UNGA debate every time a veto is cast, to fix accountability. However, the actual record of the large number of veto cast since the UNGAR 76/262 was adopted tells a contrary story.”

India reiterated that meaningful reform cannot be achieved by focusing solely on the veto question. Instead, New Delhi believes discussions must simultaneously address all major areas of Security Council reform, including categories of membership, regional representation, the Council’s size, its working methods and the veto mechanism itself.

Harish argued that altering one aspect of the Council without addressing the broader institutional framework would do little to change the existing concentration of decision-making authority among the permanent members.

“Limiting the veto cannot be separated from the questions of categories of membership, regional representation, size and working methods. We need to move forward on all five clusters together. India reiterates its call for a comprehensive approach towards Security Council reforms. The starting point is early commencement of text-based negotiations, with clearly defined timelines and milestones. Addressing the veto in isolation does not change the decision-making dynamic of the P5.”

A key element of India’s intervention was its emphasis on launching text-based negotiations without further delay. New Delhi has repeatedly argued that years of discussions have produced limited progress and that structured negotiations with defined milestones are necessary to break the deadlock surrounding Security Council reform.

The ambassador also drew attention to what India describes as “effective” or “de facto” vetoes operating within the Council’s procedures. He argued that veto power is not limited to formal votes cast publicly in the chamber.

According to Harish, consensus-based practices governing presidential statements, press statements and sanctions committee decisions frequently allow a single member to prevent action without publicly exercising a formal veto or providing an explanation.

“The veto is not only what is cast in the open. There is also the ‘effective or de facto veto’ that every Council member, elected and non-elected, holds over presidential statements, press statements and the decisions of sanctions committees, where the unwritten rule of consensus allows a single member to hold or block a proposal, most often without explanation.”

Reaffirming India’s support for the Common African Position on Security Council reform, Harish stressed that any expansion of permanent membership must be based on equal rights and responsibilities. India has consistently argued that creating a second category of permanent members with fewer powers than the existing P5 would institutionalise rather than eliminate inequality.

He maintained that if the veto continues to exist within the UN framework, every permanent member of a reformed Security Council should possess the same privileges and obligations.

“India’s position on the veto is principled and well known. It is aligned with the Common African Position. We reiterate that as long as the veto exists, it must be held by all permanent members of a reformed Council. Fairness and justice demand that all permanent members enjoy the same rights and responsibilities.”

Harish further rejected proposals for new forms of permanent membership that would not carry identical powers to those currently enjoyed by the P5, arguing that such arrangements would only complicate an already difficult reform process.

“A new category of permanent members, with or without the veto, would only further complicate a discussion that is already difficult, and would further entrench the very inequity we are seeking to correct. Periodic elections and the concept of permanency are fundamentally contradictory.”

India has for decades advocated expansion of both permanent and non-permanent categories of UNSC membership, arguing that the current structure inadequately reflects the demographic, economic and political realities of the modern world. New Delhi maintains that meaningful reform is essential to preserve the legitimacy, credibility and effectiveness of the Security Council in addressing contemporary international challenges.

ANI

Comments

Continue Reading

UN Secretary General Guterres Warns of Growing Risk of ‘Ethnic Cleansing’ As West Bank Tensions Escalate

United Nations Secretary-General Antonio Guterres has expressed grave concern over the deteriorating situation in the occupied West Bank, warning that conditions on the ground are becoming increasingly coercive and raising fears of what he described as the growing “spectre of ethnic cleansing”.

Speaking publicly through his official social media account while also addressing regional developments during a visit to Egypt, Guterres said Israeli policies and actions in the West Bank are contributing to an environment marked by displacement, violence and insecurity for Palestinians.

The UN chief pointed to continued settlement expansion, ongoing evictions and a surge in settler-related violence as key factors driving the worsening situation. According to Guterres, Palestinian communities are being subjected to mounting pressure, with families facing assaults and the loss of access to their land.

“I’m deeply alarmed by Israeli actions in the occupied West Bank. Settlements are expanding, evictions are unrelenting with Palestinians driven from their lands, settler violence is surging, Palestinian families are being assaulted,” Guterres said.

He stressed that stability across the Middle East cannot be achieved without addressing the long-standing Palestinian question and ensuring the legitimate rights of Palestinians, including their right to self-determination.

“We are seeing an increasingly coercive environment, with the spectre of ethnic cleansing looming ever larger. This must end. There can be no durable peace in the Middle East without the realization of the legitimate rights of the Palestinian people to self-determination,” he stated.

The remarks come amid growing international scrutiny of developments in the West Bank. UN officials have separately raised concerns over large-scale displacement operations and restrictions imposed on Palestinian communities, warning that forced displacement, demolitions and punitive measures risk further destabilising the region.

During his engagements in Egypt, Guterres also received public backing from Egyptian President Abdel Fattah El-Sisi, who praised the UN Secretary-General’s approach to major international challenges and his long-standing support for a comprehensive and just resolution of the Palestinian issue.

The concerns over the West Bank coincide with an increasingly severe humanitarian situation in Gaza.

According to reports, around 800 displaced Palestinians were left without shelter after Israeli quadcopter strikes triggered a massive blaze at a displacement camp in Gaza City’s Shujayea district.

The Palestinian Public Works Ministry said the fire began at approximately 8:00 pm on Sunday and continued burning beyond midnight. The blaze destroyed tents housing hundreds of displaced civilians, many of them women, children and elderly people.

The ministry said the destruction left hundreds without basic shelter and appealed for urgent international assistance to provide replacement tents and emergency relief supplies for affected families.

Guterres’ latest warning adds to a series of recent UN statements expressing concern that continued violence, displacement and settlement growth are undermining prospects for peace and increasing pressure on Palestinian communities across the occupied territories.

ANI

Comments

Continue Reading

UN Must Lead, Not Watch: EAM Jaishankar Renews Call For Reformed Multilateralism On UN Day

External Affairs Minister S Jaishankar has called on the United Nations to move beyond what he described as institutional passivity and undertake long-pending structural reforms, arguing that the organisation must demonstrate leadership rather than remain a spectator to global crises.

Speaking at the Chinmaya Amrit Mahotsav Global Sammelan on ‘Non-Dualism for World Understanding’ at Bharat Mandapam on the occasion of UN Day, Jaishankar said the international community cannot afford to remain helpless while conflicts in Ukraine and West Asia continue to inflict economic and social costs on countries and populations far removed from the battlefields.

Highlighting the original purpose of the United Nations, he noted that the global governance architecture established eight decades ago under Article 1 of the UN Charter was intended to serve as a centre for harmonising international action. However, he argued that institutional paralysis now leaves nations with no role in triggering conflicts bearing significant consequences from them.

Jaishankar said the world has long wrestled with a fundamental debate between competition and cooperation. While competition reflects nations acting primarily in their own interests, cooperation embodies collective efforts to address shared challenges.

According to him, the creation of the United Nations after the Second World War represented a conscious global choice in favour of cooperation, making UN Day a reminder of that spirit of collective responsibility.

He observed that the concept of oneness is particularly relevant at a time when many of the challenges confronting humanity transcend national borders and require collaborative solutions. He stressed that the most effective responses to global opportunities and crises emerge through collective action rather than unilateral approaches.

“Humankind has witnessed perpetual arguments between those who stress competitiveness and others who see a virtue in cooperation. These may be individual or even societal predicaments, but on the global stage, they translate into how nations behave with one another. The collective and cooperative instincts of the world were articulated, were expressed eight decades ago in the founding of the United Nations.

It is fitting, therefore, that we gather to advance a sense of oneness as we celebrate the UN Day. After all, whether it is the challenges or the opportunities that confront the world, these can be best, most effectively addressed collectively,” Jaishankar said.

Drawing attention to the wars in Ukraine and West Asia, the External Affairs Minister underscored how the impact of such conflicts extends far beyond the countries directly involved. Rising fuel costs, food insecurity, supply chain disruptions and broader economic instability have affected societies and economies around the world, including those with little influence over the conflicts themselves.

“There are today two major conflicts going on in the world: in Ukraine and in West Asia or the Middle East. Societies and economies, peoples far away, who have little say in the matter, are actually paying the cost. We cannot remain helpless spectators,” he said.

Jaishankar reiterated India’s view that dialogue and diplomacy remain the only viable path to resolving ongoing conflicts. He said India’s position reflects a broader global sentiment that wars cannot deliver sustainable solutions and confirmed that New Delhi remains willing to work with partners to advance peace efforts.

“India expresses global sentiment when we urge that dialogue and diplomacy are the only solution. We are making efforts ourselves and are open to working with other partners to that end,” he added.

A central theme of his address was the growing urgency of reforming global institutions, particularly the United Nations Security Council. Jaishankar argued that contemporary geopolitical realities are not reflected in current decision-making structures and that large sections of the developing world, especially countries of the Global South, continue to be underrepresented in global governance mechanisms.

Calling for reformed multilateralism, he said the case for change becomes stronger with each passing day as emerging powers and developing nations seek a greater voice in decisions that affect international peace, security and economic stability.

“We live in an imperfect world, but we all continuously strive towards greater perfection. Where the UN is concerned, that means recognising its shortcomings and limitations, and seeking its improvement. The case for reformed multilateralism gets stronger by the day. Large parts of the world cannot be left out of decision-making,” Jaishankar stated.

He further emphasised that the United Nations must actively shape responses to international crises rather than merely observe events as they unfold.

“On this occasion, even as we recognise the need for such long-awaited changes, let us renew our commitment to work together. We are common, we are shared, we are united,” he said.

UN Day, observed annually on 24 October, commemorates the entry into force of the UN Charter in 1945. The organisation formally came into existence after the charter was ratified by the majority of its signatories, including the five permanent members of the Security Council.

Yet the anniversary arrives amid growing scrutiny of the institution’s effectiveness. The United Nations was established with the pledge to “save succeeding generations from the scourge of war”, but many observers argue that its post-war structure has struggled to adapt to twenty-first century realities.

Critics point out that the Security Council continues to reflect the power distribution of 1945, with the United States, the United Kingdom, France, Russia and China retaining permanent membership and veto authority.

Meanwhile, major contemporary powers such as India, Brazil, Japan and South Africa remain outside the permanent decision-making framework despite representing a substantial proportion of the world’s population and economic influence.

The veto system has become a particular source of criticism. Because any permanent member can block a resolution, action involving a major power or one of its close partners often becomes impossible. This has repeatedly exposed divisions within the Security Council and limited the organisation’s ability to respond decisively to major international crises.

Recent conflicts have intensified concerns over the UN’s effectiveness. The Russia-Ukraine war highlighted sharp divisions within the Security Council, while disagreements among permanent members over the conflict in Gaza repeatedly prevented consensus on resolutions. As diplomatic deadlock persisted, fighting continued on the ground.

Beyond these high-profile conflicts, the organisation has also faced criticism for its limited ability to influence developments in Sudan, Myanmar and Afghanistan, where instability, conflict and political upheaval have continued despite international concern.

As confidence in multilateral institutions has weakened, countries have increasingly pursued alternative security arrangements and regional groupings such as the Quad, AUKUS and the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation. These mechanisms are often viewed as more agile and responsive, although they operate outside the United Nations framework.

The challenges facing the UN are not only geopolitical. Observers note that renewed great-power rivalry has created conditions reminiscent of Cold War-era competition, making consensus increasingly difficult. The role of the Secretary-General has also come under pressure, with many arguing that the office lacks the authority needed to compel action from powerful states.

At the same time, adherence to international humanitarian law has come under growing strain. Incidents involving UN-linked facilities and personnel in conflict zones have raised wider concerns about respect for international norms and the protection of humanitarian operations.

Financial pressures further complicate the organisation’s work. The UN relies heavily on contributions from member states, and delays or withholding of funds by major contributors can affect peacekeeping operations, humanitarian missions and development activities.

Against this backdrop, Jaishankar’s remarks reflected a broader international debate about the future of global governance. His call for reformed multilateralism underscored India’s longstanding position that the United Nations must evolve to remain credible, representative and effective in addressing contemporary challenges.

Eighty years after the founding of the organisation, the question increasingly being asked by governments and analysts alike is whether the United Nations can successfully reform itself to meet modern realities, or whether it risks becoming what Jaishankar warned against: a spectator to the very crises it was created to prevent.

ANI

Comments

Continue Reading

India Tells Pakistan To Vacate Illegally Occupied Jammu And Kashmir, Focus On Citizens Instead Of Military Directives

India has strongly criticised Pakistan at the United Nations, accusing it of once again misusing an international platform to spread propaganda and reiterating that Jammu and Kashmir is an integral and inalienable part of India.

New Delhi also called on Islamabad to vacate all territories that remain under what it described as Pakistan's illegal occupation.

Speaking during the UN General Assembly Third Committee Interactive Dialogue with the Special Rapporteur on Minority Issues, India's First Secretary to the UN, Raghoo Puri, rejected Pakistan's remarks on Jammu and Kashmir and reaffirmed India's position on the region.

"Pakistan predictably misused the forum for propaganda. Jammu & Kashmir is an integral and inalienable part of India. Pakistan must vacate the territory under its illegal occupation," Puri said.

He further stated that Pakistan's representatives should focus on the welfare and well-being of their own citizens rather than acting on military directives.

Emphasising India's approach towards minority rights, Puri said the protection of minorities is fundamentally the sovereign responsibility of individual states and must be carried out in accordance with the principle of sovereign equality. He noted that India's long-standing civilisational commitment to diversity is reflected in constitutional safeguards for both religious and linguistic minorities.

Puri also highlighted the significant contribution made by minority communities to India's progress, pointing out that members of these communities have held some of the country's highest constitutional positions and leadership roles across major institutions.

The latest exchange follows another sharp response delivered by India at the United Nations on 23 October, when New Delhi criticised Pakistan over its treatment of religious minorities. India accused Islamabad of failing to safeguard vulnerable communities while attempting to lecture others on issues relating to religious freedom, burial rights and minority protections.

During an interactive dialogue with the Special Rapporteur on Freedom of Religion or Belief concerning funeral rights in exceptional circumstances, India's First Secretary at the Permanent Mission to the UN, Bhavika Mangalanandan, questioned aspects of the report's findings on religious discrimination during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Mangalanandan argued that the report appeared to focus disproportionately on alleged shortcomings in countries of the Global South while overlooking comparable challenges and tragedies experienced in developed nations. She also raised concerns regarding the report's advocacy of funeral rights for terrorists.

Separately, India reaffirmed its commitment to addressing climate change through a framework based on equity, climate justice and sustainable development during discussions at the UN General Assembly.

Speaking on the report titled, "An urgent and existential threat: the role of justice systems in addressing the climate crisis," Deputy Secretary Barkha Tamrakar said India views climate change as a serious global challenge with far-reaching implications for development, livelihoods and human rights.

Tamrakar emphasised that India's climate policies are guided by climate justice, sustainable development and the principle of Common But Differentiated Responsibilities and Respective Capabilities (CBDR-RC). She highlighted that environmental protection is supported by constitutional provisions, comprehensive legislation, the National Green Tribunal and an independent judiciary.

She further noted that the Supreme Court of India has recognised the fundamental rights to life and equality as important safeguards against the adverse effects of climate change.

Tamrakar also pointed to transparent and institutionally supervised judicial training programmes, including those conducted through the National Judicial Academy, aimed at strengthening judicial impartiality and preserving the independence of the judiciary.

Through its interventions across multiple UN forums, India underscored its positions on Kashmir, minority rights, religious freedom and climate governance, while maintaining that constitutional safeguards, democratic institutions and an independent judiciary remain central to addressing both domestic and global challenges.

ANI

Comments

Continue Reading

Global South Applauds India’s Development Assistance Through UN Partnership Fund

Developing nations from across the Global South have praised India’s continued support for sustainable socio-economic development during the Ninth Annual India-UN Development Partnership Fund event held on the sidelines of the United Nations General Assembly on 22 October in New York.

Representatives from Laos, Sri Lanka, Tanzania, Micronesia, Moldova, Morocco, Saint Lucia, Cuba, Mozambique and several other countries participated in the event, highlighting the growing impact of the India-backed initiative across the developing world.

Tuvalu’s Permanent Representative to the United Nations, Ambassador Tapugao Falefou, underscored the tangible benefits of Indian-supported projects, particularly in education and infrastructure development at the community level.

“The Indian investment will certainly benefit hundreds of schools and institutions. The project demonstrates the value of development that is responsive to national priorities and local needs. Tuvalu remains deeply grateful to the Govt of India's development assistance,” Falefou said.

Saint Lucia’s Permanent Representative to the United Nations, Ambassador Menissa Rambally, described the Fund as a significant instrument for advancing economic and social development throughout the developing world. She said the initiative serves as a leading example of capacity building and support for countries seeking to address diverse developmental challenges.

“The purpose of the Fund is multifaceted. It facilitates economic and social development across countries of the Global majority. The critical importance of the Fund is a beacon of distinction in capacity building in the Global majority,” Rambally noted.

Highlighting the broader impact of the initiative, she added, “The support provided by the India-UN Fund is instrumental as countries seek to meet the challenges in myriad areas of economic and social development.”

Tanzania’s Permanent Representative to the United Nations, Ambassador Togolani Edriss Mavura, expressed appreciation for India’s sustained commitment towards the country’s development agenda.

“Tanzania expresses its sincere appreciation to India and the India-UN Fund for their continued support for sustainable development in Tanzania,” Ambassador Mavura stated.

Timor-Leste’s Permanent Representative, Ambassador Dionisio Da Costa Babo Soares, said the Fund has emerged as a strong example of solidarity among developing nations and has delivered meaningful opportunities through South-South cooperation.

“The India-UN Fund has become an important expression of solidarity among developing countries. For us, this approach is particularly meaningful as we benefited directly from this cooperation. Our experience with the Fund demonstrates how South-South Cooperation can translate shared commitments into meaningful opportunities for our people, particularly the younger generations,” Ambassador Soares remarked.

Cuba’s Permanent Representative to the United Nations, Ambassador Ernesto Soberón Guzmán, emphasised the Fund’s growing relevance amid global economic and developmental disparities. He credited India’s leadership in strengthening cooperation among developing nations and amplifying the collective voice of the Global South.

“In an increasingly unjust international order, the India-UN Fund form of cooperation is more necessary than ever to overcome structural inequalities and expand opportunities to strengthen the collective voice of the Global South. India's leadership in the Global South demonstrates the power of partnerships built on equality, mutual respect and shared aspirations for sustainable development,” Ambassador Guzmán stated.

Mozambique’s Permanent Representative, Ambassador Domingos Estêvão Fernandes, said the Fund represents a practical model of South-South cooperation rooted in national priorities, equality and non-interference, while also complementing traditional North-South development partnerships.

“The India-UN Fund offers a concrete example of south-south cooperation grounded in national priorities, equality and non-interference. It also compliments North-South cooperation. Mozambique commends India's leadership in advancing south-south cooperation and partnership,” Fernandes said.

Launched in 2017, the India-UN Development Partnership Fund is a $150 million initiative supported and led by the Government of India and implemented in partnership with the United Nations system.

The Fund finances demand-driven, transformational and nationally owned sustainable development projects across the developing world, with particular emphasis on least developed countries and small island developing states.

Projects are implemented by United Nations agencies in close coordination with partner governments, reinforcing India’s broader commitment to South-South cooperation, capacity building and inclusive development.

ANI

Comments

Continue Reading

'Right To Health Is Integral To Right To Life': Arun Govil Showcases India's Judicial Health Rights Framework At UN

India has highlighted its evolving legal and constitutional approach to healthcare at the United Nations, with BJP MP Arun Govil underscoring how the country's judiciary has strengthened health rights through a broad interpretation of Article 21 of the Constitution, which guarantees the right to life.

Speaking during an interactive dialogue with the UN Special Rapporteur on the right to the enjoyment of the highest attainable standard of physical and mental health, Govil said the theme of ensuring justice and accountability through the justiciability of health rights closely reflects India's own experience.

He noted that over the years, the Supreme Court has consistently expanded the scope of the right to life to include the right to health.

Govil welcomed the report's focus on challenges that prevent people from fully exercising their health rights, including financial barriers, language difficulties, geographical distance and limited legal awareness. He also acknowledged concerns regarding corporate influence and accountability in matters affecting public health.

"We thank the Special Rapporteur for touching upon a timely and relevant theme in the report. We note the concerns it raises, that is, barriers of cost, language, distance and legal awareness impact a citizen's ability to enjoy the right to health. The SR also flags corporate power that evades accountability," he said.

He praised the inclusion of examples of successful policies and legal practices from different countries, stressing that such exchanges enable member states to learn from one another. "We particularly appreciate the focus of the report on good practices from across the globe, which helps member states learn from one another," Govil stated.

Drawing attention to landmark judicial decisions, Govil highlighted that the Supreme Court recognised health and medical care as fundamental rights decades ago. Referring to a 1995 judgement concerning workers' welfare, he noted that employers were directed to provide health insurance and safe working conditions, reinforcing the principle that economic and industrial development must not come at the expense of workers' health.

"As early as 1995, the court held that the right to health and medical care are fundamental rights and directed employers to provide health insurance and a safe working environment to workers so that industrial growth did not come at the cost of their health," he said.

Govil also pointed to judicial interventions aimed at protecting patients' access to emergency medical treatment and improving healthcare infrastructure. These rulings, he suggested, have played a significant role in strengthening accountability within the healthcare system and ensuring that essential medical services remain accessible.

Addressing broader determinants of health, he said Indian courts have repeatedly linked environmental protection with the right to life. He noted that the judiciary has recognised a clean and healthy environment as an essential component of Article 21 and highlighted a 2024 ruling that acknowledged freedom from the adverse effects of climate change as a constitutional right.

"Our courts have also addressed the determinants of health. They have recognised a clean, healthy environment as integral to Article 21. In 2024, the court recognised freedom from the adverse effects of climate change as a right under our Constitution," Govil said.

The BJP MP further referred to recent judicial directions concerning front-of-pack warning labels on packaged food products, connecting the issue to the commercial determinants of health. He also welcomed the Special Rapporteur's reference to an Indian Supreme Court judgement relating to access to reproductive healthcare.

Concluding his remarks, Govil reiterated India's commitment to expanding affordable and equitable healthcare access. He emphasised that significant reforms have been undertaken to improve accessibility, affordability and fairness across the healthcare system and reaffirmed the country's goal of ensuring quality healthcare services for every citizen.

"India has overhauled its healthcare system to ensure accessibility, affordability and equity. We remain committed to ensuring that every citizen has access to affordable and quality healthcare services," he stated.

ANI

Comments

Continue Reading

'UN Experts' An Oxymoron? Rubio Declines To Join Debate On India Protests

US Secretary of State Marco Rubio dismissed the credibility of United Nations experts during a media interaction on Wednesday, describing the phrase “UN experts” as an “oxymoron” when questioned about criticism of India’s handling of protests by opposition groups and students.

Rubio made it clear that the United States would not take a position on what he characterised as India’s internal political affairs. Responding to allegations by UN experts regarding an alleged crackdown on demonstrators, he said, “Well, the UN experts, yeah. My favourite. The UN experts, or is that an oxymoron?”

Emphasising Washington’s stance, Rubio stated, “No, it’s a domestic political matter. I mean, I am not going to get involved in their politics. This is a democracy. They have elections here. So I am not going to align on their domestic political matters.”

He noted that public demonstrations and political disagreement are normal features of democratic societies. At the same time, he drew a distinction between peaceful protests and violent unrest involving vandalism, arson and destruction of property.

Rubio argued that freedom of expression and political debate are essential democratic values. Referring to Cuba as a contrasting example, he highlighted how opposition voices there can face imprisonment, oppression or exile. However, he reiterated that India’s domestic political issues are matters for its own citizens, adding, “But we’re not going to comment on internal political matters. That’s for the Indian people to decide and navigate.”

The remarks came amid an ongoing disagreement at the United Nations over assessments of India’s human rights record. India has strongly challenged attempts to portray recent protests as evidence of broader human rights concerns and has accused certain UN-linked bodies of applying inconsistent standards.

Addressing the United Nations General Assembly on Tuesday, Indian diplomat Barkha Tamrakar defended India’s constitutional and legal framework, stressing that safeguards including Article 21 of the Constitution protect human rights and guarantee due process.

Tamrakar rejected criticism based on what she described as unverified allegations and incomplete data. She said, “India firmly opposes any attempt to convert unverified allegations, incomplete statistics, or a report that contains no India country observation into a negative characterization of the world’s largest democracy… Human rights should not be used as an instrument of political pressure or selective country targeting.”

She further argued that assessments of human rights issues must remain impartial, evidence-based and free from political considerations, warning against the selective targeting of individual countries.

India’s response followed claims by certain UN experts that authorities had restricted peaceful assembly and engaged in “enforced disappearances”. New Delhi strongly rejected those allegations and questioned the basis on which they were made.

Indian representatives also highlighted what they described as contrasting reactions from international human rights officials to protests in different parts of the world. They pointed to comments by UN Human Rights Chief Volker Türk regarding police action against violent protests in France and elsewhere in Europe, where demonstrators were referred to as “vandals”.

According to India, such differences in tone underscore concerns about double standards in the treatment of democratic nations. New Delhi has maintained that characterisations based on unverified allegations, incomplete statistics or reports lacking India-specific observations do not accurately reflect the realities of the world’s largest democracy.

ANI

Comments

Continue Reading

Marco Rubio Dismisses UN Criticism of India’s Protests as ‘Domestic Political Matter’; Takes A Neutral Stand

US Secretary of State Marco Rubio sharply dismissed criticism from United Nations experts over India’s handling of protests, describing the term “UN experts” as an “oxymoron” while insisting that such issues are matters for Indians to resolve through their own democratic processes.

Responding to questions about protests involving opposition parties, students and activists, Rubio declined to comment on India’s internal political affairs. He said, “The UN experts is an oxymoron,” before stressing that Washington would not interfere in India’s domestic political debates.

Rubio underlined that India is a democracy with regular elections and maintained that political disagreements and public demonstrations are a natural part of democratic life. He said it was for “the Indian people to decide and navigate” their political issues rather than for foreign governments to intervene.

At the same time, Rubio drew a distinction between peaceful demonstrations and violent unrest. He argued that expressing different political opinions is a hallmark of democratic societies, while making clear that riots involving vandalism, arson and the destruction of property should not be confused with legitimate protest activity.

To illustrate his point, Rubio contrasted democratic systems with countries such as Cuba, where opposition voices can face imprisonment, repression or exile. He also referred to violent unrest seen in parts of Europe, separating such incidents from peaceful political expression.

The remarks came amid growing debate over criticism from more than 20 UN human rights experts, who raised concerns about alleged restrictions on peaceful assembly, reported excessive use of force against demonstrators and large-scale detentions linked to recent protests in India. The experts called for accountability and greater protection of civil liberties during demonstrations.

India has firmly rejected those allegations. Indian diplomat Barkha Tamrakar accused UN experts of selectively targeting the country and argued that human rights should not be used as an instrument of political pressure. She emphasised that India’s constitutional framework provides safeguards for human rights and due process, and said international engagement should be guided by dialogue, cooperation, transparency and non-selectivity.

New Delhi has also questioned what it sees as inconsistencies in the UN’s approach, highlighting the contrast between criticism directed at India and comments made by UN Human Rights Chief Volker Türk regarding violent protests in France and elsewhere in Europe. Indian officials have argued that unverified allegations and incomplete statistics should not be used to portray the world’s largest democracy in a negative light.

Agencies

Comments

Continue Reading

India Rebukes UN Rapporteur Over D-Company Description, Reaffirms Dawood Ibrahim's Presence in Pakistan

India has sharply criticised a United Nations special rapporteur over what it described as factual inaccuracies and bias in a counter-terrorism report, while reaffirming its long-standing position that fugitive gangster and terror accused Dawood Ibrahim is based in Pakistan.

Addressing the United Nations General Assembly's Third Committee, Indian diplomat Raghoo Puri expressed concern over a report by UN Special Rapporteur Ben Saul that referred to Dawood Ibrahim's D-Company as an "India-based" criminal organisation with terrorist links.

Puri argued that such descriptions created a misleading impression by omitting crucial context regarding Dawood Ibrahim's status as a wanted terrorist and his association with global terror networks outside India.

He stated that India remained deeply concerned about what it viewed as the unacceptable practice of special rapporteurs releasing reports containing factual inaccuracies without sufficient accountability.

"We express serious concern at the unacceptable situation of the SR releasing reports with factual inaccuracies, while not being held accountable for them. This presents Member States with a fait accompli, which is unfortunate for this organisation that is facing challenges of legitimacy," Puri told the Assembly.

The Indian diplomat specifically objected to the report's reference to the UN Security Council's 2003 listing of the leader of D-Company for links with Al-Qaeda.

According to Puri, reading that reference in isolation failed to reflect the broader reality that Dawood Ibrahim and his criminal syndicate had already been wanted in India for terror-related activities since 1993.

He pointed out that the reasons for Dawood Ibrahim's designation under the UN Security Council's 1267 sanctions regime clearly reference his involvement in terrorism and his links to Al-Qaeda.

"The report mentions that in 2003, the Security Council listed the leader of one criminal group, D-Company, for association with Al-Qaeda. Read in isolation, this line paints a very different picture from the actual reality."

"This organisation and its listed leader, Dawood Ibrahim, has been wanted in India for terror attacks since 1993. This is clearly written in the narrative summary of reasons of listing under the 1267 sanctions regime."

Puri further stressed that Dawood Ibrahim had left India long before the 2003 UN designation and was operating from outside the country when he was listed for his association with Al-Qaeda and Osama bin Laden.

"Let me correct it for the record. This individual fled India much before the 2003 listing, and it was during this period, from outside our country, that he was listed for being associated with Al-Qaeda and with Osama bin Laden."

He added that Dawood Ibrahim continues to be a wanted criminal in India and noted that the UN listing places him in the same country where Osama bin Laden was eventually located and neutralised, an unmistakable reference to Pakistan.

India has for many years maintained that Dawood Ibrahim resides in Karachi and has repeatedly called on Pakistan to hand him over. The fugitive crime boss is accused of orchestrating the 1993 Mumbai serial bomb blasts, one of the deadliest terror attacks in India's history, and has been designated by both the United Nations and several countries for terrorism-related activities.

Puri also accused sections of the report of displaying bias and urged UN mandate holders to maintain the highest standards of neutrality, professionalism and impartiality.

Turning to broader issues of counter-terrorism, he warned against attempts by state or non-state actors to misuse human rights narratives to shield extremist activity or justify terrorism.

"It seems to have become fashionable for sponsors of terror to use human rights and the framework of counterterrorism to justify their misdeeds."

"Human rights framework cannot be the refuge of the perpetrators of terror and those who propagate radicalisation and extremism. Terrorism can never be justified."

Puri also responded to remarks made by Pakistan's representative during the proceedings, rejecting comments concerning Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh. He described the statements as politically motivated propaganda and asserted that both Union Territories remain integral parts of India.

"Regarding the statement just made by the delegate of Pakistan, everyone in this room knows that what has been mentioned against my country, including about the Union Territory of Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh, is pure propaganda made for very narrow political gains."

"I would like to reiterate for the record that Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh are an inalienable part of India, and have been so, and will always remain."

The exchange comes amid continuing debates within the United Nations over balancing counter-terrorism measures with human rights protections.

Earlier in the week, India also told the UN General Assembly that human rights mechanisms should not be used for selective targeting or political pressure against individual countries.

Speaking on the issue of enforced or involuntary disappearances, Ministry of External Affairs Deputy Secretary Barkha Tamrakar highlighted India's constitutional safeguards, legal protections and institutional mechanisms for addressing allegations of human rights violations, while calling for greater accountability, transparency and international cooperation in dealing with such concerns.

ANI

Comments

Continue Reading

India Strongly Rebukes UN Youth Rights Report, Cites Anonymous And Unverified Claims

India has strongly challenged a United Nations report that alleged young people in the country face retaliation or stigmatisation for speaking about issues such as mental health and gender justice.

The criticism was delivered by Indian diplomat Anuj Swarup during an interactive dialogue at the 81st session of the United Nations General Assembly's Third Committee.

Swarup questioned the credibility of the findings and argued that the report relied heavily on anonymous and unverified submissions rather than independently verified evidence.

The report was prepared by UN Special Rapporteur Gina Romero, whose mandate covers the rights to freedom of peaceful assembly and association.

According to India, broad conclusions about the country’s young population cannot be justified on the basis of unnamed sources referenced in footnotes. Swarup described the allegations as unsupported by verifiable evidence and rejected them outright.

He argued that India's Constitution guarantees freedom of speech and expression, as well as the freedoms of assembly and association, to all citizens. He added that these rights are protected through an independent judiciary, a free press and the National Human Rights Commission.

The Indian diplomat further contended that reliance on anonymous submissions to draw conclusions about one of the world's largest youth populations undermines the credibility of such assessments.

Swarup urged greater rigour, verification and fairness in the preparation of UN reports, maintaining that conclusions affecting a country of India's scale should be supported by substantial and transparent evidence.

India also pointed to continued youth engagement initiatives and government interaction with young citizens, including large-scale consultation efforts and action against examination fraud, as examples of institutional responsiveness to youth concerns.

The exchange underscores an ongoing disagreement between New Delhi and the United Nations over the assessment of civic freedoms and youth participation in India, particularly regarding the methodology used to evaluate conditions on the ground.

As a result, the debate has evolved beyond the report's specific allegations, focusing more broadly on standards of evidence, accountability and credibility in international human rights reporting.

Agencies

Comments

Continue Reading

India Reiterates UN Call To Protect Seafarers As Red Sea Attacks Threaten Global Shipping

India has strongly condemned attacks on maritime navigation and commercial shipping amid the escalating conflict across West Asia, describing such actions as legally and morally indefensible. 

Speaking during the United Nations Security Council's quarterly open debate on the Middle East, India's Permanent Representative to the UN, Ambassador Harish Parvathaneni, stressed that the safety of seafarers, including Indian nationals, remains a priority for the Government of India.

India reaffirmed its commitment to Yemen's unity, sovereignty and territorial integrity, while rejecting external interference in the country's internal affairs. It also underlined that safeguarding the Bab al-Mandab Strait and the Southern Red Sea is a shared international responsibility given the region's importance to global maritime trade.

Parvathaneni highlighted a series of recent attacks on commercial vessels, including the India-flagged MV DP World Cauvery, MT Petro Dolphin, MT Valthera, MT On Peace and MT Kazimah III. He noted that several of these ships carried Indian seafarers, making their safety a direct national concern.

India thanked the authorities of Oman and the United Arab Emirates for their assistance in ensuring the safety of Indian crew members affected by recent incidents. The envoy emphasised that attacks on commercial shipping, merchant mariners and civilian maritime infrastructure must cease immediately.

Calling for de-escalation across the region, India urged all parties to pursue dialogue and diplomacy. It also stressed the importance of maintaining freedom of navigation and ensuring the uninterrupted flow of maritime commerce through international waterways in accordance with international law.

Expressing concern over widening regional instability, India strongly condemned repeated attacks on civilian infrastructure, including Saudi Arabian airports. The envoy noted that recent attacks resulted in fatalities, including Indian citizen Mohammad Yousef Ali in Riyadh, and reiterated India's solidarity with Saudi Arabia in defence of its sovereignty.

India underscored its extensive links with West Asia, noting that annual trade with Gulf Cooperation Council countries stands at approximately ₹15.12 lakh crore, cumulative foreign direct investment totals about ₹2.60 lakh crore, and remittances exceed roughly ₹4.37 lakh crore. Around 10 million Indians live and work across GCC nations, making their welfare a key national interest.

Against the backdrop of continued threats to merchant shipping, India highlighted efforts to strengthen global maritime coordination. India and Liberia recently launched the Group of Friends on Safety and Security of Shipping and Seafarers on the sidelines of the UN General Assembly High-Level Week, with 23 countries joining the initiative.

Described as an inclusive and action-oriented platform, the group aims to improve international cooperation, develop practical measures to prevent attacks on vessels and strengthen protection for seafarers.

The envoy also referred to Prime Minister Narendra Modi's proposal at the recent BRICS Summit for a Seafarers Emergency Support Network. The proposed mechanism would enable maritime authorities and embassies to coordinate distress alerts, medical support, communication with families and evacuation assistance during emergencies.

Parvathaneni noted that nearly two million seafarers operate the world's merchant fleet and that maritime transport carries around four-fifths of global trade, underscoring the broader economic implications of shipping disruptions.

Turning to Gaza, India said global concern over threats to shipping and the Strait of Hormuz should not overshadow the continuing humanitarian crisis in the Palestinian territory. The envoy reiterated India's condemnation of the 7 October 2023 terrorist attacks and expressed concern over the heavy civilian toll, particularly among women and children.

India renewed its support for humanitarian relief, diplomacy and a negotiated two-state solution. It stated that a sovereign, independent and viable Palestinian state living alongside Israel within secure and recognised borders remains essential for lasting peace.

The envoy noted growing international backing for the two-state framework and referenced support expressed by BRICS leaders for Palestine's full membership of the United Nations.

Highlighting India's assistance to Palestinians, Parvathaneni said New Delhi has supplied medicines, medical equipment and humanitarian relief during the conflict. India has also supported development projects, including a 200-bed super-speciality hospital, the Palestinian Institute of Diplomacy, a women's empowerment centre, an artificial limb fitment camp and a vocational training institute.

India continues to support Palestinian capacity-building through the Indian Technical and Economic Cooperation program and Indian Council for Cultural Relations scholarships. In August, 32 Palestinian students from Gaza enrolled in colleges in India under the scholarship scheme.

The envoy added that India has contributed more than ₹4,368 crore cumulatively to the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East, supporting the agency's education, healthcare and humanitarian activities.

On Lebanon, India strongly condemned attacks on United Nations Interim Force in Lebanon peacekeepers and stressed that personnel serving under UN mandates must not be targeted. It also called for respect for the sanctity and inviolability of UN premises, while highlighting the importance of preparations for any post-UNIFIL scenario and support for the Lebanese Armed Forces.

Regarding Syria, India reiterated support for a Syrian-led and Syrian-owned political process in line with UN Security Council Resolution 2254, while reaffirming the importance of preserving Syria's sovereignty, independence, unity and territorial integrity.

Concluding his remarks, Parvathaneni said the people of the Middle East require stability, security and lasting peace, stressing that peace involves not only the absence of conflict but also the strengthening of long-term regional stability and prosperity. India reaffirmed its commitment to supporting peace, security and development across the region.

ANI

Comments

Continue Reading

India Slams OHCHR Over Delhi Protest Remarks, Warns Against ‘Selective’ Human Rights Scrutiny

India has sharply criticised the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) over its comments on the detention of protesters in New Delhi, accusing the organisation of displaying an “extremely selective” approach to human rights issues and warning that such conduct risks damaging its credibility.

The latest response from New Delhi follows remarks by UN Human Rights spokesperson Thameen Al-Kheetan, who expressed concern over reports of detentions linked to a Cockroach Janata Party-led protest against Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar.

The demonstration was organised over allegations of irregularities in the Special Intensive Revision of electoral rolls, with protesters seeking Kumar’s resignation.

Responding to the UN statement, Ministry of External Affairs spokesperson Randhir Jaiswal described the OHCHR’s observations as both “unwarranted” and “unacceptable”, arguing that they amounted to interference in India’s internal affairs.

Jaiswal said the UN rights body appeared to adopt an approach of “extreme selectivity”, pointing to what India views as the organisation’s failure to publicly react to protests and law-enforcement actions occurring in other parts of the world.

According to him, a continued pattern of selective criticism could weaken confidence in multilateral institutions and ultimately undermine the credibility of the organisation itself.

He stated that the concerns raised by the OHCHR ignored the broader democratic and legal framework within which Indian authorities operate and failed to recognise that security agencies are required to maintain public order and safety.

The MEA spokesperson also referred to comments he had issued earlier, reiterating India’s position that law-enforcement authorities acted strictly in accordance with the law while handling the proposed demonstration in the national capital.

In a video statement released on X, Jaiswal highlighted that India, as the world’s largest democracy, guarantees the right to peaceful assembly under its Constitution.

He stressed that these rights are protected by independent institutions, including the judiciary and a free media, while also being subject to lawful restrictions relating to public order and public safety.

Jaiswal argued that, as in any democracy, the exercise of civil liberties must be balanced against the authorities’ responsibility to prevent disorder and ensure security in public spaces. He further noted that Indian courts remain accessible to all citizens seeking redress for grievances, making the UN body's intervention unnecessary and inappropriate in New Delhi’s view.

The MEA spokesperson also criticised what he described as double standards in the OHCHR’s public messaging. He observed that violent responses to protests in India’s neighbourhood had not attracted similar comment from the organisation, adding that law-enforcement actions in locations closer to the UN’s own institutional base had likewise gone largely unaddressed.

According to Jaiswal, such inconsistencies weaken the standing of international institutions and contribute to a broader erosion of trust in multilateral mechanisms. The UN Human Rights Office, however, maintained its concerns regarding events in Delhi and called upon Indian authorities to respect the right to peaceful assembly.

In its statement, the organisation voiced concern over reports of mass detentions involving demonstrators, protest organisers, members of civil society groups, lawyers and journalists before and during the demonstrations.

The UN body urged authorities to immediately and unconditionally release anyone alleged to have been arbitrarily detained in connection with the protests.

It also called for restraint in the handling of demonstrators and emphasised that any restrictions imposed on peaceful assemblies should satisfy strict tests of necessity and proportionality under internationally recognised human rights principles.

Furthermore, the organisation encouraged the authorities to engage in meaningful dialogue with protesters in order to address the concerns that had prompted the demonstrations. The controversy emerged after widespread preventive detentions were reported across Delhi ahead of the planned march towards Jantar Mantar.

According to Delhi Police sources, approximately 1,000 protesters were detained across the national capital while attempting to reach the designated protest location.

The exchange marks the latest episode in a recurring disagreement between India and international human rights bodies over the interpretation of civil liberties, public order requirements and the scope of external commentary on domestic law-enforcement actions.

New Delhi has consistently maintained that democratic institutions, judicial oversight and constitutional safeguards provide adequate mechanisms for addressing such issues, while international organisations have continued to emphasise the importance of protecting freedom of assembly and expression.

ANI

Comments

Continue Reading

India Urges UN To Classify Major Terrorist Acts As Crimes Against Humanity

R Mythili, Counsellor (Legal Adviser) at India's Permanent Mission to the United Nations

India has called on the United Nations to ensure that terrorist acts meeting the requisite legal threshold are recognised within the framework of crimes against humanity, arguing that such offences should be appropriately reflected in any future international legal instrument on the subject.

Speaking during the 81st session of the United Nations General Assembly's Sixth Committee, R Mythili, Counsellor (Legal Adviser) at India's Permanent Mission to the United Nations, outlined New Delhi's position during discussions on the proposed international framework for the prevention and punishment of crimes against humanity.

India stressed that while international cooperation remains essential, the primary responsibility for preventing, investigating and prosecuting crimes against humanity must rest with sovereign states through their own legal and judicial systems.

The country underscored the importance of preserving the primacy of territorial and national jurisdictions, while maintaining respect for state sovereignty and the principle of non-interference in the internal affairs of nations.

New Delhi argued that any future convention on crimes against humanity should complement existing international legal mechanisms rather than duplicate them. It cautioned against simply transferring provisions from existing international regimes into a new treaty without careful consideration of their suitability and effectiveness.

India further advocated the use of broadly accepted principles of international law, stronger national institutional capacities, and transparent, inclusive negotiations as the basis for developing an effective and widely accepted international framework.

The intervention reflects India's long-standing position that terrorism remains one of the gravest threats to international peace and security and that serious terrorist offences should not escape accountability under evolving international legal norms.

India's remarks also align with its wider counter-terrorism strategy pursued over the past decade, marked by stronger legal frameworks, institutional reforms and enhanced intelligence coordination between central and state authorities.

Efforts to combat cross-border terrorism, dismantle terror-financing networks and modernise policing and security capabilities have strengthened the country's national security architecture. Expanded cyber-security capabilities have also improved preparedness against emerging digital threats.

According to the government's stated assessment, these measures have contributed to improvements in internal security indicators, including reductions in terrorist incidents and lower casualties among civilians and security personnel, while supporting broader public safety, development and national resilience objectives.

Through its statement, India reiterated support for an international convention on crimes against humanity that respects national jurisdiction, avoids duplication of existing legal mechanisms and is developed through transparent and inclusive negotiations, while ensuring that qualifying terrorist acts are appropriately addressed within the crimes against humanity framework.

ANI

Comments

Continue Reading

India Tells UN Pakistan Cannot Lecture On Rule of Law While Army Dominates State Institutions

India delivered a sharp rebuttal to Pakistan at the United Nations after Islamabad raised issues relating to the rule of law during discussions in the UN General Assembly's Sixth Committee on Rule of Law at National and International Levels.

Exercising its Right of Reply, India argued that Pakistan was in no position to offer lessons on the rule of law, asserting that the country's military continues to wield dominant influence over its political and institutional framework.

Speaking on behalf of India, Counsellor R. Mythili of India's Permanent Mission to the UN said it was ironic for Pakistan to speak about the rule of law when, according to New Delhi, its own record raises serious concerns about democratic governance, judicial independence and civil liberties.

Mythili stated that while Pakistan presents itself internationally as a defender of legal norms, the reality within the country is that the Army effectively determines political outcomes and institutional authority.

India further criticised Pakistan's 26th Constitutional Amendment, describing it as a major setback for judicial independence.

The amendment, adopted in 2024, introduced significant changes to Pakistan's judicial structure and appointment mechanisms. Critics, including international legal organisations, have argued that the changes increased political influence over judicial processes and weakened institutional safeguards designed to preserve judicial autonomy.

Mythili also raised the issue of former Pakistani Prime Minister Imran Khan's imprisonment.

She argued that a country where elected governments have historically struggled to complete full terms, and where a former prime minister has allegedly been denied rights despite court directions, cannot credibly claim adherence to the rule of law.

India additionally accused Pakistan of preventing a popular political party from fully participating in elections, trying civilians in military courts, restricting judicial independence and suppressing human rights.

In a pointed remark directed at Islamabad, Mythili urged Pakistani representatives to "listen to your people".

The Indian diplomat also rejected Pakistan's allegations regarding the treatment of religious minorities in India.

According to India, such accusations are intended to divert attention from Pakistan's own record on minority rights and democratic freedoms.

Mythili argued that the proportion of minorities within Pakistan's population has steadily declined since the country's creation, and said Islamabad should focus on addressing concerns within its own borders rather than making allegations against others.

India further highlighted concerns over Pakistan's media environment.

Mythili referred to Pakistan's Foreign Media Facilitation Guidelines, under which foreign journalists require a no-objection certificate for reporting assignments outside Islamabad, Lahore and Karachi.

She questioned how press freedom could flourish under such restrictions, describing the media as a crucial pillar of democracy.

The exchange also touched on security issues and counter-terrorism.

Defending Operation Sindoor, India's military action launched in May 2025 following the Pahalgam terror attack, Mythili described the operation as a measured, proportionate and targeted response against terrorist infrastructure located in Pakistan and Pakistan-occupied Kashmir.

She dismissed Pakistani claims regarding the outcome of the operation and remarked that Islamabad was free to interpret damaged airfields and destroyed hangars as a success if it wished to do so.

Concluding India's response, Mythili said repeatedly presenting what she termed a catalogue of false allegations against India would not absolve Pakistan's leadership of its responsibilities towards its own citizens.

The latest confrontation at the UN reflected the continuing diplomatic contest between the two neighbours, with debates extending beyond security concerns to questions of governance, judicial independence, political freedoms, minority rights and media liberty.

PTI

Comments

Continue Reading

India Rejects UN Rights Office Criticism Over Delhi Detentions, Calls Remarks 'Internal Interference'

India has strongly rejected concerns raised by the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) over the detention of hundreds of Cockroach Janata Party (CJP) supporters in Delhi, describing the comments as an unwarranted interference in the country's internal affairs.

In a sharply worded response posted on the India at UN account on X, New Delhi said the OHCHR's concerns were misplaced and suggested that the UN body should devote comparable attention to large-scale protests in other parts of the world.

India stressed that it is the world's largest democracy and said the right to peaceful assembly is protected by the Constitution and supported by robust institutions, an independent judiciary and a free media.

The government noted that, as in all democracies, the exercise of this right is subject to reasonable restrictions in the interest of public order. It further stated that authorities act in accordance with the law and that Indian courts remain available to address grievances and provide legal remedies when required.

The response came after large-scale detentions in the national capital linked to protests organised by the Cockroach Janata Party.

According to reports, nearly 3,000 individuals, including CJP leaders, supporters and opposition figures, were detained by Delhi Police while attempting to reach Jantar Mantar for a planned sit-in demonstration.

The protest sought the resignation of Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar.

To prevent supporters from converging on Delhi, police imposed restrictions affecting internet connectivity and transportation networks. Measures included curbs on Delhi Metro services, bus operations and railway connectivity.

In a statement issued on Saturday, UN human rights spokesperson Thameen Al-Kheetan said the OHCHR was concerned by reports of mass detentions involving demonstrators, protest leaders, members of civil society organisations, lawyers and journalists before and during the demonstrations.

The UN office called on Indian authorities to ensure that the right to peaceful assembly is fully respected and protected.

It also stated that any restrictions on peaceful protests should satisfy strict tests of necessity and proportionality.

Al-Kheetan urged law enforcement personnel to exercise the utmost restraint in dealing with peaceful demonstrators.

The spokesperson additionally encouraged authorities to engage in meaningful dialogue to address the concerns being expressed by protesters.

India, however, firmly rejected the criticism and reiterated that the OHCHR's observations amounted to unwarranted interference in domestic affairs.

New Delhi further argued that the UN rights office should maintain impartiality and non-selectivity by paying similar attention to major protests elsewhere.

Delhi Police had earlier denied permission for the pressure group's proposed protest at Jantar Mantar.

On Saturday morning, CJP founder Abhijeet Dipke and fellow leaders Saurav Das and Ashutosh Ranka were detained shortly after arriving in Delhi on a flight from Mumbai. Most of those detained during the operation were subsequently released.

Agencies

Comments

Continue Reading

J&K Remains Integral To India, New Delhi Rebukes Pakistan At UN Over False Claims

India strongly rejected Pakistan's remarks on Jammu and Kashmir at the United Nations, accusing Islamabad of misusing the global platform to spread what it described as false and misleading claims regarding the Indian Union Territory.

The response was delivered during discussions on Decolonisation in the UN General Assembly's Fourth Committee by Member of Parliament Mahima Kumari Mewar under India's Right of Reply.

Mewar said it was regrettable that Pakistan continued to use the UN platform to circulate what India termed as lies and falsehoods about Jammu and Kashmir. Reaffirming New Delhi's longstanding position, she stated that Jammu and Kashmir is, and will always remain, an integral and inalienable part of India.

India also turned the focus on territories under Pakistan's control, alleging continuing human rights violations, political repression and the illegal exploitation of local resources. Mewar asserted that residents in these areas had been openly protesting against military rule and restrictions on their freedoms.

She further alleged that Pakistani security forces and associated groups had killed dozens of civilians in recent months during demonstrations related to basic rights, freedoms and essential services.

Criticising Pakistan's domestic political landscape, Mewar pointed to what she described as a history of military rule, disputed electoral processes, imprisonment of popular political leaders, religious extremism and the use of terrorism as a state policy tool. She said such a country should refrain from lecturing others on these issues in international forums.

The exchange formed part of the broader and longstanding disagreement between India and Pakistan over Jammu and Kashmir. India maintains that the entire former princely state is an integral part of the country, while Pakistan continues to raise the issue in international forums despite India's position that it is a bilateral matter.

Separately, India called for stronger mechanisms to ensure criminal accountability for United Nations officials and experts on mission during the 81st session of the UN General Assembly's Sixth Committee.

Representing India, Member of Parliament Priya Saroj reiterated the country's zero-tolerance approach towards criminal conduct and misconduct involving UN personnel. She stressed that accountability is essential to maintaining the credibility, integrity and public trust of the United Nations.

Saroj welcomed the UN Secretary-General's efforts to strengthen accountability systems and noted ongoing work to improve reporting, investigations, referrals and follow-up procedures across the organisation.

She highlighted that between 1 July 2025 and 30 June 2026, the UN Office of Legal Affairs referred 93 cases involving UN officials and experts on mission to their respective states of nationality for investigation and possible prosecution.

According to Saroj, the effectiveness of the accountability framework depends on timely action by member states after such referrals and on close cooperation between national authorities and the United Nations. She encouraged countries to conduct prompt investigations and pursue prosecutions where appropriate while keeping the UN informed of progress.

India also urged states to consider strengthening legal jurisdiction over serious crimes committed abroad by their nationals serving as UN officials or experts on mission, in accordance with their domestic legal systems.

Emphasising the importance of fairness, Saroj said accountability measures must be accompanied by due process protections, respect for the rights of all parties involved, safeguards for victims and witnesses, and preventive measures such as training and awareness programs.

She noted that India's Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 includes provisions relating to certain offences committed outside India by Indian citizens, while the Extradition Act, 1962 provides a legal framework for extradition where applicable.

Saroj also underlined the importance of continued contributions to the UN Secretary-General's Trust Fund supporting victims of sexual exploitation and abuse, while reaffirming India's commitment to working with member states and the United Nations to strengthen accountability, cooperation and effective implementation of international standards.

ANI

Comments

Continue Reading