Introduction

The United Nations Human Rights Council (UNHRC), founded in 2006, succeeded the previous Commission on Human Rights and was tasked with establishing a more credible and effective institution to report and advance global human rights. The Council consists of 47 member states that are elected by the UN General Assembly and serves as the primary organization to discuss situations of human rights abuses and render recommendations.

India, one of the founding members of the United Nations, has traditionally portrayed itself as a champion of human rights and democracy. Its Constitution incorporates extensive fundamental rights drawn from the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR). Yet, India’s engagement with the UNHRC reflects a contradiction — while it participates actively in multilateral human rights diplomacy, it frequently resists external examination of its own internal issues.

Historical Background: India’s Commitment to Human Rights

India’s involvement with human rights has existed before the country’s independence. The struggle for freedom under Mahatma Gandhi was itself a movement for human dignity — not only for India, but for humanity.

Following independence in 1947, India was a founding member of the United Nations and one of the first countries to promote human rights in the General Assembly. Indian diplomat Hansa Mehta, who was representing the nation on the UN Commission on Human Rights, was instrumental in amending the words “All men are born free and equal” in the UDHR to “All human beings,” so gender equality was interwoven within the document.

Domestically, the Indian Constitution of 1950 is among the most elaborate human rights charters globally. Part III ensures Fundamental Rights like equality before the law, freedom of speech, religion, and safeguarding life and liberty. Part IV, the Directive Principles of State Policy, challenges the State to attain social, economic, and political justice.

Internationally, India has signed most important human rights treaties, such as:

• ICCPR (International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights),
• ICESCR (International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights),
• CEDAW (Convention on the Elimination of Discrimination Against Women), and
• CRC (Convention on the Rights of the Child).
• However, India is not a party to the Convention Against Torture (CAT) or Convention on Enforced Disappearances, demonstrating its resistance towards embracing international oversight mechanisms that could limit domestic sovereignty.

India’s Role in the UNHRC

Membership and Diplomatic Approach

India has had several terms of membership in the UNHRC — 2006–2009, 2011–2014, 2017–2020, and 2022–2025. During these terms, India has broadly promoted:

• Universality and indivisibility of human rights,
• Dialogue and cooperation instead of confrontation, and
• Respect for sovereignty and non-interference in internal affairs.

India tends to vote in favor of resolutions on economic and social rights but votes against or abstains from country-specific resolutions, terming them politically motivated and contrary to the neutral principles. For instance, India abstained from resolutions concerning Syria, Myanmar, and Iran, demonstrating its foreign policy ideology of non-alignment.

This restrained and diplomatic approach, though true to India’s international stance, has also faced criticism for shying away from robust support against human rights violations in other nations.

 Performance in Universal Periodic Review (UPR)

The UNHRC’s core function lies in the Universal Periodic Review (UPR) mechanism. Every four to five years, it evaluates each member state’s human rights record.

India’s Four UPR Cycles:

1. First UPR (2008):
   India adopted majority of the 57 recommendations, with a concentration on poverty reduction, women empowerment, and education.
2. Second UPR (2012):
   India adopted 168 out of 180 recommendations. The main areas were elimination of caste-based discrimination, signing of the CAT, and safeguarding minority rights.
3. Third UPR (2017):
   India received 250 recommendations and adopted 152. Complaints were raised about the Armed Forces (Special Powers) Act (AFSPA), curbs under the Foreign Contribution (Regulation) Act (FCRA), and restrictions on freedom of expression.
4. Fourth UPR (2022):
   India had 339 recommendations accepted by it, of which it accepted 221. Issues that cropped up repeatedly were minorities’ treatment, religious intolerance, and the application of counterterrorism laws to hinder civil liberties.

Although India regularly participates and submits detailed national reports, international observers have noted an implementation gap between commitments made at Geneva and actions taken domestically.

India’s Responses to UNHRC Criticism

India’s reactions to UNHCR remarks show a steady trend — acceptance of difficulties but denial of foreign intrusion.

Major India Position Themes:

1. Sovereignty and Non-Interference:
   India asserts that human rights should be framed within the context of national conditions. It is opposed to country-specific resolutions as politically driven intrusions into affairs within the country.
2. Democratic Accountability:
   India focuses on its independent judiciary, free media, and active civil society as proof of firm democratic protections.
3. Security and Priorities for Development
   India contends that actions in strife-torn regions like Jammu and Kashmir or the Northeast are to preserve national integrity and safeguard civilians.
4. Progressive Legal Reforms:
   India points to judiciary rulings like decriminalizing homosexuality (Navtej Singh Johar v. Union of India, 2018) and legalizing rights of the transgender (NALSA v. Union of India, 2014) as evidence of changing human rights jurisprudence.

In spite of these arguments, global observers argue that the reactions of India tend to sidestep structural and institutional weaknesses in human rights implementation.

 Strengths and Positive Developments

India’s interaction with the UNHRC also reflects various strengths:

• Constitutional Framework: The Constitution of India has strong provisions of equality, liberty, and justice that are highly consistent with international standards.
• Judicial Activism: The Supreme Court has extended human rights by progressive interpretations — such as the right to privacy (2017), environmental rights, and safeguarding of marginalized groups.
• Lively Civil Society: In spite of regulatory restrictions, India still boasts a lively network of NGOs, journalists, and human rights activists.
• Procedural Engagement: India has uninterruptedly engaged with UPR sessions, filed reports on schedule, and interacted diplomatically with fellow member states.

Conclusion

India’s engagement with the United Nations Human Rights Council represents a fine balance between democratic devotion and sovereignty assertion.
Although India’s constitutional vision and institutional structure form a robust bedrock for human rights, ongoing challenges — such as restrictive laws, social discrimination, and a lack of institutional accountability — undermine its global credibility.

As India’s global role increases, its moral standing as a democracy will hinge on translating its domestic practices into the ideals it promotes abroad.
Constructive engagement with the UNHRC must not be seen as a violation of sovereignty but as a chance to go deeper into democracy, reinforce institutions, and make justice more comprehensive for all citizens.

If India closes the gap between constitutional promise and actual practice, it can not only enhance its reputation at the UNHRC but also renew its leadership as an authentic champion of human rights in the 21st century.

Also Read:
Rights of undertrial prisoners in India
How To Send A Legal Notice In India