India Dismisses USCIRF Report, Defends Sovereignty Against Foreign Interference

India has firmly rejected a report by the United States Commission on International Religious Freedom (USCIRF) that expressed concerns over religious freedom in the country. The Ministry of External Affairs (MEA) has criticized the report as biased and an attempt to interfere in India’s sovereign affairs, particularly in the context of the upcoming general elections.

Key Points of the Controversy:

• USCIRF’s Claims: The USCIRF, an independent US federal government agency, published its 2024 report expressing “ongoing concerns” about India’s religious freedom. The report recommended that the US State Department designate India as a “Country of Particular Concern” (CPC), citing alleged deteriorations in religious freedom and discriminatory policies.
• India’s Rebuttal: MEA spokesperson Randhir Jaiswal dismissed the report, accusing the USCIRF of harboring a political agenda and indulging in propaganda. He stated, “The USCIRF is known as a biased organization with a political agenda. They continue to publish their propaganda on India masquerading as part of an annual report.” Jaiswal emphasized that such reports do not accurately reflect India’s diverse, pluralistic, and democratic ethos.
• Allegations of Interference: Jaiswal argued that the USCIRF’s efforts are an attempt to interfere in India’s electoral process, saying, “Their efforts to interfere in the largest electoral exercise of the world will never succeed.”

Concerns Over Sovereignty:

• Accusations of Bias: The Indian government has consistently rejected reports from organizations like USCIRF, accusing them of being biased and lacking an understanding of India’s social fabric. The MEA’s response highlighted that the report relies on selective facts and biased sources to project a one-sided narrative.
• Questioning of Legal Judgments: The report’s criticism extends to Indian laws and court judgments, challenging the validity of regulations such as the Unlawful Activities Prevention Act, Foreign Contribution Regulation Act, and anti-conversion laws. Jaiswal pointed out that these criticisms undermine the authority of Indian legislatures and judiciary.
• Highlighting US Issues: In its defense, the MEA also pointed to incidents of hate crimes and vandalism targeting Indian nationals and places of worship in the US. Jaiswal noted that India has officially raised these issues with US authorities, calling for a balanced and respectful dialogue on human rights and diversity.

Impact on India-US Relations:

• Strong Bilateral Ties: Despite the public criticism, the MEA reaffirmed the strength of India-US relations. The spokesperson emphasized that human rights and respect for diversity remain legitimate subjects of discussion between the two democracies, but foreign reports should not be used as a tool for political interference.
• Ongoing Dialogue: India continues to engage in dialogue with the US on various issues, including religious freedom and human rights. However, the MEA stressed that such dialogue should not be misused to infringe upon India’s sovereignty.

Conclusion

India’s dismissal of the USCIRF report underscores the importance of respecting national sovereignty and the integrity of domestic legal and political processes. While maintaining a dialogue on human rights, India remains firm in defending its diverse and democratic social fabric against biased foreign narratives.