India challenged a UN migrant rights report over its Assam reference, sourcing and legal claims. It sought accurate country references, clear legal distinctions and child protection grounded in due process.
Barkha Tamrakar made the statement on India's behalf at the UN General Assembly's Third Committee. (X/@IndiaUNNewYork)
New Delhi,Oct 22, 2026 23:13 IST
India has strongly rejected what it called “imprecise and unsupported” references to the country in a report by the United Nations Special Rapporteur on the Human Rights of Migrants, questioning its geographical terminology, sourcing and treatment of legal findings.
Delivering India's statement at the Interactive Dialogue with the Special Rapporteur, Deputy Secretary in the Ministry of External Affairs Barkha Tamrakar flagged inaccuracies in the report by Gehad Madi, arguing that unverified allegations and broad policy recommendations should not be presented as established findings of the United Nations.
“India must place on record a serious concern about the report's treatment of law, evidence, and state responsibility,” Tamrakar said. She added that a thematic report must not convert broad policy preferences, unverified allegations or advocacy submissions into settled UN findings.
INDIA QUESTIONS REFERENCE TO 'ASSAN AND NORTHERN INDIA'
Highlighting what she described as a glaring inaccuracy, Tamrakar pointed to paragraph 27, footnote 32, of the report, which states: “For instance, in Assan and Northern India.”
She said this was the complete reference, without identifying any specific case, proceeding, authority, date, law or source.
“Assan is not the name of an Indian state or a recognised jurisdiction. If the intended reference is Assam, the report should say so accurately. Northern India is not a legal or administrative jurisdiction,” she said.
Tamrakar argued that a country-specific allegation could not be made through a typographical error and an unidentified geographical expression. India therefore rejected the reference as “imprecise and unsupported” in its present form.
She added that if the Special Rapporteur intended to refer to citizenship-related processes in Assam, the report should have identified the precise process and distinguished between an allegation, an expert concern, an administrative decision and a judicial finding.
“These are not interchangeable categories,” she said.
India also expects country-specific assertions to be properly sourced and to respect the concerned state's opportunity to respond, Tamrakar said.
INDIA CHALLENGES REPORT'S INTERPRETATION OF CHILD RIGHTS
Tamrakar also addressed the report's treatment of children's rights, noting that India is a state party to the Convention on the Rights of the Child and supports Articles 3, 9 and 10 in their proper context.
Article 3 requires the best interests of the child to be a primary consideration. However, Tamrakar argued that this does not make that consideration the only factor in every case or automatically override lawful decisions relating to public order, border management, criminal conduct, nationality or immigration status.
“India cannot accept the report's categorical propositions as though they were universally binding legal treaty rules,” she said.
India supports humane and lawful migration governance but does not agree that irregular migration should be treated solely as a matter of vulnerability, without recognising that it can also constitute a breach of immigration law.
INDIA CALLS FOR THREE CORRECTIONS
Outlining India's position, Tamrakar called for three key corrections in the treatment of migration and child protection in the report.
First, country references must be accurate, specific and verifiable.
Second, recommendations must be clearly distinguished from binding treaty obligations and the policy preferences of an independent mandate holder.
Third, the protection of children must be advanced through due process, family-sensitive procedures, cooperation between states and child protection authorities, and safe and regular migration pathways. Such protection, she said, should not come at the cost of denying legitimate state functions or relying on generalised allegations.
Tamrakar said India would continue to engage constructively with the United Nations and other states on these objectives.
She stressed that cooperation is strengthened by accuracy and that human rights advocacy is strengthened, rather than weakened, when it is grounded in verifiable facts, applicable law and respect for the sovereign equality of states.
- Ends
With PTI inputs