The Daily Pulse

World

Indian Envoy Slams U.S. Body Over Post on Sharjeel Imam

Reported by Vivek Joshi (Copy Editor) · The Hindu - International ·

Source: The Hindu
Important
Indian Envoy Slams U.S. Body Over Post on Sharjeel ImamPhoto: Wikimedia Commons

Response To US Body

Indian Ambassador Vinay Mohan Kwatra has strongly criticized an American advisory body and told it to stop lecturing other countries. His sharp reply came on Friday, November 13, 2026, after the U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom posted online about former student activist Sharjeel Imam. The U.S. agency shared Imam's profile on the platform X and described him as a Muslim man detained in India for his religious freedom advocacy. Mr. Kwatra stated that the agency has no locus standi to judge the constitutional rights of Indian citizens. He added that its partisan and ill-informed assessments cannot lower India's commitment to religious freedom and equal rights for all faiths, while advising the body to look at its own prejudices instead.

Background And Charges

Sharjeel Imam is a former scholar from Jawaharlal Nehru University who was arrested in January 2020. He faces charges under the Unlawful Activities Prevention Act, known as UAPA, for allegedly being a mastermind behind the February 2020 riots. That violence resulted in 53 deaths and left more than 700 people injured. The clashes broke out during protests against the Citizenship Amendment Act of 2019 and the National Register of Citizens. India views the U.S. Commission as a biased group that lacks credibility. The advisory body was set up by the U.S. government in 1998 under the International Religious Freedom Act, but its recommendations are not binding on the U.S. State Department.

Context

Diplomatic spats between national governments and foreign advisory panels often arise when international bodies comment on domestic legal cases and internal protests. The U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom regularly monitors religious freedom conditions abroad and issues public reports or statements that frequently draw sharp pushback from targeted nations. Such exchanges highlight ongoing tensions between external human rights monitoring and national sovereignty.

Read more at The Hindu - International →