USCIRF report sparks backlash: 275 former judges, officials reject ‘biased’ findings on India

Bengaluru, : A major controversy has erupted over a report by the USCIRF, with as many as 275 retired judges, bureaucrats, and military officials from India strongly condemning its observations on religious freedom in the country. The group has termed the report “misleading” and “far removed from ground realities,” accusing the US-based body of presenting a distorted picture of India.

The USCIRF report had alleged a decline in religious freedom in India, claiming that minorities—particularly Muslims and Christians—were facing increasing pressure. It also raised concerns over laws such as the Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA) and anti-conversion legislations, suggesting that these could be discriminatory towards certain communities. Additionally, the report flagged incidents of hate speech and violence, alleging inadequate action by authorities in some cases.

However, the strong rebuttal from India came in the form of an open letter signed by prominent personalities, including retired Supreme Court judges, former civil servants, and defence personnel. Among them were former judge Adarsh Kumar Goel, ex-DGP P. Chandrasekharan, and former diplomats Bhaswati Mukherjee and Shyamala B. Kaushik.

In their letter, the signatories described the report as “confused and off-the-mark,” and objected strongly to its recommendation of sanctions against Indian institutions like the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh and the country’s external intelligence agency Research and Analysis Wing. They argued that such suggestions reflected a lack of understanding of India’s democratic and institutional framework.

To counter the allegations, the group cited official census data, pointing out that the Muslim population in India grew from 9.8% in 1951 to 14.2% in 2011, while the Christian population remained stable at 2.3% during the same period. They said this demonstrated a long-standing pattern of demographic stability and growth among minority communities under India’s constitutional system.

The letter also questioned the credibility and intent of the USCIRF, noting that its commissioners are appointed by the US government and funded by American taxpayers. The signatories urged Washington to examine the backgrounds of those involved in preparing such reports, alleging that they may be influenced by “anti-India interests.”

Echoing similar sentiments, Ministry of External Affairs spokesperson Randhir Jaiswal dismissed the report as “baseless” and accused the USCIRF of repeatedly presenting a selective and biased narrative about India. He further suggested that the commission should instead focus on issues within the United States, including attacks on Hindu temples and concerns faced by the Indian diaspora.

The controversy has once again highlighted tensions between India and certain international bodies over internal policy matters, especially those linked to religion and governance. While the government maintains that India remains a robust democracy with strong constitutional safeguards, critics of the report argue that external assessments must be grounded in objective data and balanced analysis.

With both sides holding firm positions, the debate over religious freedom and international scrutiny is likely to continue, reflecting the complexities of global perceptions and domestic realities.