Activists shout slogans as they burn a copy of the Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA) bill during a protest rally in Kolkata on March 12.
| Photo Credit: AFP
The story so far: The Washington DC-based United States Commission on International Religious Freedom (USCIRF) on October 2 released a country update on India, flagging “collapsing religious freedom conditions”. Among other things, the report highlighted how throughout 2024, individuals from minority communities have been killed and lynched by vigilante groups, religious leaders have been arbitrarily arrested, and places of worship have been demolished. The Indian government has rejected the report as coming from a “biased organisation”.
What is the USCIRF?
The USCIRF is an independent, bipartisan U.S. federal government agency created under the 1998 International Religious Freedom Act (IRFA). It monitors the universal right to freedom of religion or belief (FoRB) in countries other than the U.S. Its assessments of countries are based on international human rights standards, and in particular, Article 18 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, which states, “Everyone has the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion; this right includes freedom to change his religion or belief, and freedom, either alone or in community with others and in public or private, to manifest his religion or belief in teaching, practice, worship and observance.”
The USCIRF is distinct from the Office of International Religious Freedom (IRF), which is part of the U.S. State Department. The IRF also releases annual reports on religious freedom. While the USCIRF’s reports could have a bearing on a country’s image, the IRF’s stance is more consequential for bilateral relations.
What does the USCIRF do?
As per its mandate under the IRFA, the USCIRF monitors religious freedom conditions across the world through travel, research and meetings with representatives of international human rights groups, NGOs, victims of persecution, and foreign officials with the aim of putting out a report every year, listing the countries that meet the threshold for designation by the U.S. State Department as a “Country of Particular concern” (CPC). It also shares another list of countries that, in its assessment, ought to be included in the State Department’s ‘Special Watch List’ (SWL).
Countries that “commit systematic, ongoing, and egregious violations of religious freedom” would be designated as a CPC. Countries “whose governments engage or tolerate in severe religious freedom violations, but do not rise to the CPC standard of “systematic, ongoing, and egregious” would be included in the SWL. If the U.S. State Department accepts the USCIRF’s recommendation and designates a country as a CPC, then under the IRFA, it has a range of policy options, including sanctions, to address such kind of violations.
What does USCIRF’s country update on India state?
The report, authored by Sema Hasan, Senior Policy Analyst with the USCIRF, says that religious freedom in India in 2024 has been on a “deteriorating and concerning trajectory”. It stated that the Indian government, through legislations such as the Citizenship (Amendment) Act, 2019 for which the rules were published in May this year, and “through the enforcement of discriminatory legislation like anti-conversion laws, cow slaughter laws, and antiterrorism laws”, continued to “repress and restrict” religious minorities. It also details how “Indian officials have repeatedly employed hateful and derogatory rhetoric and misinformation to perpetuate false narratives about religious minorities, inciting widespread violence, lynchings, and demolition of places of worship.” In its 2024 annual report, the USCIRF designated India as a CPC.
How did India respond?
Spokesperson of the Ministry of External Affairs Randhir Jaiswal rejected the report, stating, “Our views on the USCIRF are well known. It is a biased organisation with a political agenda. It continues to misrepresent facts and peddles a motivated narrative about India. We reject this malicious report, which only serves to discredit USCIRF further.” He further added, “We would urge USCIRF to desist from such agenda-driven efforts.”
Is the USCIRF ‘biased’ and ‘agenda-driven’?
Its reports are backed by research and numerous citations sourced from credible domestic and international media, besides direct testimonies. In the case of the country update on India, there is no evident instance of misrepresented facts, with every claim backed by publicly verifiable documentation. However, the timing of this update has raised eye brows, and opened it up to concerns such as those voiced by the MEA, about the report being “agenda-driven”.
The USCIRF, as a body that works with the U.S. government, and notwithstanding its ‘independent’ status, is considered by many countries as a tool of U.S. foreign policy.
Are the USCIRF’s recommendations binding?
No, they are not. It is up to the U.S. Statement Department whether or not to accept them, and typically, calculations related to bilateral relations and larger foreign policy goals come into play.
Published – October 09, 2024 08:30 am IST
