India Rejects US State Dept’s Biased Report on Religious Freedom

Image for: India Rejects US State Dept's Biased Report on Religious Freedom

📷 Image Credits: The Indian Express

The Ministry of External Affairs in India has strongly refuted the United States’ annual report on international religious freedom for 2023. In a recent statement, MEA Spokesperson Randhir Jaiswal criticized the report, calling it ‘deeply biased’ and lacking an understanding of India’s social fabric. Jaiswal highlighted that the report appears to be driven by votebank considerations and a prescriptive outlook, leading India to reject it outright. The MEA representative emphasized that the report contains imputations, misrepresentations, and selective usage of facts, all of which contribute to a one-sided projection of issues.

Moreover, Jaiswal criticized the report for questioning the validity of Indian laws and regulations, as well as the integrity of legal judgments made by Indian courts. The report also targeted financial monitoring regulations in India, suggesting that the burden of compliance is unreasonable. Jaiswal pointed out that the US itself has stringent laws and regulations but would not prescribe similar solutions for its own country.

The MEA statement highlighted the importance of human rights and diversity in the dialogue between India and the United States. While acknowledging legitimate discussions on these matters, India expressed concern about the report’s interference in domestic policies. The US report raised issues related to anti-conversion laws, hate speech, and demolitions of homes and places of worship belonging to minority communities in India.

In light of the increasingly biased reports from the US State Department, India stands firm in defending its constitutional provisions and laws. The rejection of such reports underscores India’s commitment to addressing human rights within its own framework, without external interference. The relationship between India and the United States remains a critical aspect of international diplomacy, but reports like these continue to strain the bilateral dialogue on key issues of mutual interest.