The most basic problem with the International Human Rights Law is that it is hopelessly ambiguous. This ambiguity is born out of the consensus that is required to approve and ratify treaties. By the time sufficient states are on board, the idealism of the genesis has already given way to the pragmatism of the hour. Some provisions are watered-down, others are phrased in a rather abstruse manner. When I say that the International Community has been complicit in violence enacted against underprivileged groups in India, I mean that the major powers of the world are “choosing” to turn a blind eye towards the atrocities committed by the Indian administration.

Some groups like Human Rights Watch notice these incidents and bring them to the attention of their governments, international NGOs, and the United Nations but they deliberately choose to ignore them to favour India because she is one of their strongest strategic partners in the region of South Asia. Sometimes their excuse for this behaviour is that these incidents are rare and are not a result of any official policy. They find solace in the defence of solitary incidents; whereby they disclaim responsibility in the garb of practical impossibility. Even if the Indian government has been oblivious to everything happening under its watch, it is still the administration’s responsibility to keep citizens safe. Therefore, absolving it of any and all responsibility is definitely criminal.

Lok Sabha passed a new law titled the Citizenship Amendment Act in December 2019. The act provides fast track citizenship for certain religious minorities from Afghanistan, Bangladesh and Pakistan who entered India before 2015. Minorities include Hindus, Sikhs, Buddhists, Jains, Parsis and Christians. However, the act does not extend to Muslim minorities. The passage of this act led to countrywide protests and several clashes with police across different cities. The Indian diaspora living in different countries also led protests in their respective countries but even that failed to get any concrete statement or reaction out of International Community. In February 2020, the UK Government was asked about its views on the Act and the treatment of protestors in India. The Government said that they were in talks with the Indian government and that:

“India has a proud history of inclusive government and religious tolerance. Post-election, Prime Minister Modi promised to continue this under the guiding principles of “together with all, development for all, trust of all”. We trust the Government of India will provide reassurances to its citizens who are expressing concern about the impact this legislation may have. We will continue to monitor the situation.”

A discriminatory policy like the said Act being given legal status should have justifiably caused unease in the Western capitals, but the aforementioned quote is a curious case of the Western countries bending over backwards to justify this blatant violation of human rights.

In August 2019, the Indian Government revoked article 370 of the Indian Constitution. This removed constitutional autonomy from the state of Jammu and Kashmir which is a predominantly Muslim region. This article provided the state with the right to draft its constitution and make its laws, removal of which led to unrest and several protests in Jammu and Kashmir. Thousands of Indian troops were deployed, phone and internet services were shut down, and certain politicians and public figures were arrested. All of this was a clear effort to curtail freedom of expression and stop protests which are the basic block of modern democracy. A country that prides itself on being the largest democracy in the world punishing everyone with critical thoughts and opposing beliefs like this, once again, did not raise any considerable concern amongst the “civilized” world.

India’s caste system is one of the world’s oldest forms of social stratification. This hierarchal classification of Hindus has existed in India for many centuries but it got many times worse under the British Raj when it divided people based on their work and professions, rewarded those of higher status and ostracized the lower caste groups. Now that the West has been through several movements of racial and ethnic justice and has admittedly become far better for its citizens, you’d expect them to wish to undo the long-lasting effects of their history but they are still overlooking India’s systematic hatred for its minorities; and it isn’t the case with only caste minorities, same is happening with religious minorities too. International NGO “Open Doors” published a report in June 2021 on this issue. Key findings in the report said that:

“Daily life for many Christian and Muslim communities in urban and rural India has become an excruciating struggle to earn a living and practice their faith, while also remaining alive and under the radar of the far-right Hindutva organizations that now dominate the Indian public and political sphere.”

Despite several reports by Human Rights groups and NGOs, western countries haven’t done anything other than subtle and soft protests or claims of “talks” with India’s ambassadors to their countries. The Indian Government disputed all those allegations of human rights violations and that was the end of it. They’re still in business with India, there’s not even a threat of sanctions. Meanwhile, other countries occasionally get admonished or directly threatened on International forums, sometimes even sanctions are imposed on them due to allegations of religious persecution. This biased and hypocritical approach to human rights has no place in the modern civilized world we hope and claim to be a part of.

 

Ayesha Iqbal
Latest posts by Ayesha Iqbal (see all)

Facebook comments

RELATED ARTICLESMORE FROM AUTHOR