India’s human rights situation, particularly in the Illegally Occupied Jammu and Kashmir (IIOJK), has been a topic of international concern. The removal of Article 370 in August 2019 led to restrictions on communication and arbitrary detentions, resulting in arbitrary imprisonment and torture. The Armed Forces Special Powers Act has created a culture of impunity, causing fear and alienation. India’s record on minority rights and free expression is also disputed. The Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA) has been condemned for excluding Muslims from citizenship processes, causing societal tensions. Journalists and environmental activists face harassment and intimidation. The international community, particularly the United Nations, must hold India accountable for its human rights obligations.
In recent years, India’s stance to human rights, notably in the region of Indian Illegally Occupied Jammu and Kashmir (IIOJ&K), has sparked widespread international attention and tension. The decision to remove Article 370 in August 2019 was watershed moment, with far-reaching implications towards regional government and human rights. This unilateral decision, along with its limitations such as extended communication bans and mass detentions of political personalities and activists, has sparked considerable outrage.
International human rights organizations have documented worrying cases of arbitrary imprisonment, torture, and disproportionate use of force by security forces, compromising their fundamental freedoms. The implementation of legislation such as the Armed Forces (Special Powers) Act (AFSPA) has led to a culture of impunity, protecting security personnel from accountability for actions, which are frequently deemed necessary for keeping order but have instilled fear and alienation in the local masses.
Beyond IIOJK, India’s record on minority rights and free expression remains disputed. The Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA) of December 2019, epitomizes this problematic space; it was condemned for excluding Muslims from accelerated citizenship processes, sparking large demonstrations in India besides causing international alarm. This law highlighted profound societal tensions further aggravated by community violence, and frequently fuelled by provocative speeches and legislative initiatives. Vigilante groups claiming Hindutva ideology have been implicated in cases, where mobs had attacked and killed individuals, mostly Muslims, on suspicion of cow slaughter or beef eating. These acts highlight bigger concerns of intolerance and religious divisiveness for international community. Furthermore, attacks on Christian communities and churches by extremist groups affiliated with Hindutva organizations have also resulted in casualties and property damages, thus creating a climate of fear and insecurity among religious minorities in India. The 1992 destruction of the Babri Masjid by Hindu nationalists, who claimed it was Lord Ram’s birthplace sparked severe communal rioting across India, highlighting historical tensions. And later on, building Hindu mandir by demolishing the mosque clearly depicts the Modi’s Hindu supremacy. In 2020, deadly riots between Hindu and Muslim groups in northeast Delhi were sparked by insulting remarks and amplified by Hindutva ideas, resulting in over 50 deaths and widespread property destruction, reflecting continued sectarian unrest.
Furthermore, environmental activists and journalists face increasing harassment, intimidation, and legal difficulties. Laws criminalizing contrarian speeches have reduced the space for free expression, creating considerable challenges to independent journalism and civic action. Notably, Ms. Rana Ayyub, a distinguished investigative journalist recognized for her critical reporting on the Indian Government and human rights concerns, has disclosed that the Modi regime has threatened and harassed her because of her work. Most recently, few das back, Indian government targeted the acclaimed author- Arundhati Roy, because she speaks to the most foundational corruptions that underlie the socioeconomic and political pillars of the Indian state. Similarly, journalists such as Siddique Kappan, who was arrested in 2020 while covering sensitive cases under strict anti-terrorism laws, and Masrat Zahra, who was jailed in Kashmir under security legislation, demonstrate the difficulties that journalists confront while reporting on problematic matters. Prolonged internet shutdowns in crisis zones and during protests have also been criticized for limiting access to information and inhibiting democratic participation, aggravating India’s human rights situation.
These examples demonstrate the complexities and intensity of human rights and communal violence issues in India, as well as the ongoing challenges and concerns expressed by many human rights groups and foreign observers. Despite constitutional guarantees and international commitments, India’s human rights safeguards have considerable loopholes. Civil society organizations in India continue to campaign for changes aimed at improving accountability systems, increasing openness in government, and ensuring the rule of law.
Recent changes in administrative rule in IIOJK have concentrated authority under central monitoring, while ignoring international demands for discussion, besides exacerbating local discontent and harming prospects for peaceful resolution. Such activities contradict long-standing United Nations resolutions that advocate for self-determination and dialogue as critical components of conflict resolution.
It remains critical that the international community, especially the United Nations, hold India responsible for its human rights obligations. Genuine discussions, rather than repression, provides a viable way to resolving complaints and promoting long-term stability in conflict-affected areas like IIOJ&K.
When human rights crimes continue under the cover of national security or governance imperatives, India’s character as a democratic and pluralistic society suffers substantially. The world community’s scrutiny highlights India’s urgent need to protect the rights and dignity of all of its residents, regardless of regional or religious identity. In summary, building a just and inclusive society in India requires a strong commitment to human rights, strengthened accountability systems, and meaningful communication with impacted people. Only via these steps can India reconcile its domestic policies with its international duties, therefore fulfilling its position as a worldwide leader in advancing democratic ideals and human dignity.
Leave a Reply