Intervention by India during the informal consultation of the Coordination Committee of Special Procedures, delivered by Mr. Gaurav Kumar Thakur, Counsellor, Permanent Mission of India, Geneva, 5 December 2025

Thank you Professor Deva

Let me first thank you for your candid remarks, both to the clarifications to last set of intervention and what you mentioned regarding challenges being faced by SPMHs. You have raised substantive points, and we appreciate your approach towards open dialogue.

India reaffirms its strong support for the Human Rights Council and its mandate holders in advancing human rights globally, including the Right to Development. It is unfortunate that the annual meeting of the SPMHs could not happen, and we support that these meetings continue without interruption in future.

SPMH are a critical pillar of Human Rights Ecosystem and their independence and integrity has to be fully preserved.

Responding to today's guiding questions on strengthening the SPMH system's efficiency and impact, we would like to make following points:

First, on Research, Rigour and Verification, we are concerned by instances of ‘unverified media sources’ and ‘unsubstantiated stakeholder submissions’ in the reports.

While acknowledging resource constraints in the wake of current budget crisis, such practices compromise factual accuracy and undermine credibility.

Given the Council's emphasis on combating misinformation and disinformation, SPMH reports themselves risk becoming vehicles of factually incorrect information or politically biased commentary, rather than a technically sound analysis, grounded in established human rights jurisprudence, if we encounter such instances.

Second, on Working Methods and Transparency. As domain experts tasked with assessing state obligations under international human rights law, Mandate Holders must uphold highest verification standards and follow the code of conduct scrupulously. Enhanced transparency in information gathering, prior two-way state engagement before publication, and robust fact-checking are essential to preserve credibility, particularly given that mandate holders operate under the UN imprimatur and carry the Organization's global standing.

Such ‘unverified’ references in the reporting also generate skepticism among national agencies and ministries, with whom we have to coordinate with, for implementation of 

human rights obligations, gradually corroding trust and even the desire to engage with these mandates.

Third, on timely engagement, early sharing of reports would enable member states to conduct inter-ministerial consultations and provide substantive responses, thus enhancing the quality of interactive dialogue. We understand there are financial constraints, but then we need to do what we need to do in the timelines given to us.

Fourth, on Impartiality and System Rationalization, we emphasize the imperative of consistent standards across all countries and a uniform application of human rights principles regardless of geopolitical considerations and free from personal opinions and prejudices that affect us all and grounded in applicable international human rights law.

My delegation also welcomes comments made by SR on Modern Forms of Slavery on maintaining private channel of communication. This is something that would be an effective way to ensure that a certain situation is remedied in a more productive fashion and trust is generated. Building trust and generating respect for SMPH institutions is critical to ensure that work of the SPMH have a positive impact.

To conclude, India remains committed to constructive engagement with all mandate holders and welcomes discussions to address these concerns related to working methods.

Thank you.