Why did the UN committee urge India to address ‘hate speech’ and ‘hate crimes’?

The story so far: On August 25, in a press note, the UN Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination (UNCERD) issued its findings on India at the end of a review of the country’s recent human rights track record. This session of the committee reviewed Finland, Honduras, Kuwait, and India. The UNCERD said that it was “gravely concerned” about “reports of large-scale violations perpetrated by law enforcement officials against ethnic, and ethno-religious groups indigenous and Tribal peoples, including Scheduled Tribes, Scheduled Castes, particularly Dalits and non-citizens”. The committee said that India’s law enforcement officials had carried out “extra-judicial killings, arbitrary and prolonged detention without due process, torture, ill-treatment and sexual violence” against these communities. India responded with the Ministry of External Affairs (MEA) stating that the Indian delegation, led by Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, had “already rejected the sweeping generalisations”.What are the key takeaways from the periodic review of India at the Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination (UNCERD)?The UNCERD, in its final observations issued on August 25, recommended that India should “review the Special Intensive Revision [SIR] to ensure ethno-religious minorities’ right to participate in the electoral process and to independently investigate any reported irregularities in the conduct of the process”. It also urged India to “ensure that public officials do not use the Special Intensive Revision process to spread racist rhetoric and take measures to curb incitement to hatred”. The UNCERD noted that since it was rolled out across 12 States and Union Territories, approximately 52 million names have allegedly been removed, with West Bengal particularly affected, where a total of 9.1 million names were reportedly deleted from the register ahead of the State elections that took place in April 2026.The Committee expressed concern that “Bengali-speaking Muslim voters were reportedly disproportionately impacted by the Special Intensive Revision process in West Bengal and Assam”, where a similar process was conducted. The Committee also expressed concern conflating “lawful Indian Muslim citizens with foreign nationals” in West Bengal and Assam where statements were made by “high-level officials” “which would indicate official endorsements of discriminatory treatment on ethno-religious grounds”.What does the Committee say about hate speech, hate crimes, discrimination against asylum seekers, Rohingya refugees and non-citizens?The UNCERD recommended that India “as a matter of urgency, acknowledge the discriminatory nature and seriousness of the problem of racial discrimination, hate speech and hate crimes targeting Rohingya and Bengali-speaking Muslims, migrants and asylum seekers, and take effective measures to address the root causes thereof and to protect their rights”. It further recommended that India should “refrain from collective expulsion” of migrants and asylum seekers who are in need of international protection “in respect of the principle of non-refoulement”.It called upon India to “ensure the public condemnation of racist hate speech targeting migrants and asylum-seekers, and condemn racist hate speech by politicians and influential public figures”. It urged India to “take measures to ensure accountability and end impunity by conducting effective, thorough and impartial investigations into all reports of human rights abuses and violations perpetrated against migrants and asylum-seekers, particularly Rohingya and Bengali-speaking Muslims, migrants and asylum seekers, including racial discrimination, hate speech, dissemination of negative stereotypes, systematic use of racial profiling and racially motivated excessive use of force during law enforcement operations, arbitrary detention, unlawful killings and torture and ill-treatment”.It further recommended that India should review its “legislative framework, namely the Immigration and Foreigners Act, to align it with the Convention [International Convention on Elimination on All Forms of Racial Discrimination]”.The Committee has recommended that India should “suspend the National Register of Citizens (NRC) and review its legislative framework, namely the Citizenship (Amendment) Act, to align it with the objectives and purposes of the Convention [International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination]: that it combats statelessness, address the complexity of the procedure and ensure oversight and access to available and effective remedies”. The Committee called on India to “ratify the Convention relating to the Status of Stateless Persons and the Convention on the Reduction of Statelessness”. The Committee took note of the fact that the Indian delegation presented facts before it on the basis of the census of 2011 and called on India “to collect and provide to the Committee comprehensive and disaggregated statistics on the demographic composition of the population, while respecting the principle of self-identification and anonymity in the 2027 census, particularly ethnic and ethno-religious groups, Indigenous/Tribal Peoples”.What has the Committee suggested for Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes and for protecting the rights of the indigenous communities?The Committee has called for protection of the rights of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes and called for protection of the rights of Naga, Kuki, Chakma and Hajong peoples. It called on India to “suspend the implementation of the projects on the Great Nicobar and Andaman Islands until a full and independent environmental, economic, social, cultural and spiritual impact study has been completed”. It called for strengthening of the National Human Rights Commission (NHRC) of India and “enable it to carry out its mandate, fully effectively and independently, in accordance with the Paris Priciples”. It also called on India to “ensure” NHRC’s “institutional independence and pluralistic balance in its composition and staff, in accordance with the diversity of India’s population”.What does the Committee have to say on hate crimes and hate speech in India?The Committee called on India to “review its legislative framework, particularly the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita and Information Technology [Intermediary Guidelines and Digital Media Ethics Code] Rules to explicitly criminalise hate speech and hate crimes, in line with article 4 of the Convention [International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination] to include all grounds of discrimination recognised in Article 1 of the Convention, and to recognise racist motivation as an aggravating circumstance”. It called on India to “prevent impunity for human rights violations and abuses by law enforcement officials against ethnic and ethno-religious groups, indigenous/Tribal peoples,. Including scheduled tribes, scheduled castes, particularly Dalits and non citizens”.The Committee called on India to “undertake public education campaign on the rights enshrined in the Convention and on how to file complaints of racial discrimination, particularly among ethnic and ethno-relgious groups, Indigenous/Tribal Peoples, including Scheduled Tribes and Scheduled tribes…”The Committee said that Indian “legislative framework does not contain provisions that expressly criminalise or effectively address all acts of racist hate speech and hate crime in accordance with Article 4 of the Convention and on all the grounds recognised in Article 1…”. The Committee further said that India should collect information on “quantitative and qualitative trends in complaints” on hate speech and hate crimes and include such date in its next report to the Committee.