Navigating the Future: Addressing the Multifaceted Challenges of India’s Human Rights Movement

India’s human rights movement stands at a critical juncture. While the country boasts a vibrant Constitution and independent judiciary, those fighting for justice and equality face mounting obstacles. From restrictive funding laws to state surveillance, from ideological divides to shrinking civic spaces, these challenges demand urgent attention and collective action.

The tightening grip on civil society funding 🔗

One of the most significant challenges facing India’s human rights movement is the Foreign Contribution Regulation Act (FCRA), which regulates how non-governmental organizations receive foreign funding. While governments have legitimate interests in financial transparency, the FCRA has become a tool to silence dissent.

The 2020 amendments to the FCRA imposed severe restrictions. Organizations can no longer transfer funds to other NGOs, administrative expenses are capped at 20% of foreign contributions, and all foreign funds must flow through a single State Bank of India account in New Delhi. These provisions violate international law and threaten civil society’s ability to function effectively.

The impact has been devastating. At least seven NGOs had their FCRA licenses cancelled in 2024 alone. High-profile organizations like Amnesty International India were forced to halt operations after their bank accounts were frozen. Thousands of smaller organizations working on human rights, environmental justice, and social welfare have been similarly affected.

Political weaponization of regulatory powers 🔗

The selective enforcement of the FCRA reveals its true purpose. Organizations critical of government policies face scrutiny and license cancellations, while those aligned with state interests operate freely. Human rights defenders and activists working on sensitive issues-from environmental protection to religious minority rights-find themselves labeled as threats to national security.

This pattern extends beyond funding restrictions. Financial investigation agencies have been weaponized to target civil society leaders. Income tax registrations are cancelled, offices are raided, and activists face criminal investigations, all designed to create a chilling effect on dissent.

State power and the criminalization of dissent 🔗

India’s human rights movement confronts an increasingly hostile state apparatus. Colonial-era laws like sedition provisions remain on the books, repurposed to silence modern critics. Between 2018 and 2020, 4,690 persons were arrested under the Unlawful Activities Prevention Act (UAPA), with only 149 convictions-revealing how these laws are used more for detention than justice.

The Armed Forces Special Powers Act (AFSPA) continues to grant security forces sweeping powers in designated areas, including the authority to shoot to kill and arrest without warrants. Despite decades of criticism from human rights organizations and independent commissions, successive governments have refused to repeal this draconian law.

Digital surveillance and internet shutdowns 🔗

Technology has become both a tool for activism and a weapon of control. Authorities imposed 40 internet shutdowns across nine states in 2024, ostensibly to maintain law and order. These blanket shutdowns disrupt not just activism but daily life, affecting education, healthcare, and business.

Reports of mercenary spyware targeting activists, journalists, and political leaders raise serious concerns about privacy and surveillance. When the state can monitor communications and movements at will, the space for organizing and advocacy contracts dramatically.

Ideological divides within the movement 🔗

The human rights movement in India has evolved through distinct phases. The 1970s saw the civil liberties phase, working within a framework of state-civil society complementarity. The 1980s shifted toward a democratic rights phase, positioning civil society in opposition to state power. Today’s movement struggles to find ideological coherence.

Some groups advocate for working within existing systems, using courts and institutions to advance rights. Others argue that meaningful change requires confronting power structures directly. These divisions weaken collective action and allow authorities to exploit differences between organizations.

The challenge of intersectionality 🔗

India’s diversity demands an intersectional approach to human rights, yet the movement often struggles to address overlapping identities and vulnerabilities. Dalit women face discrimination based on both caste and gender. Religious minorities in conflict zones experience violence compounded by geographic marginalization. Tribal communities resisting displacement confront state power, corporate interests, and development narratives simultaneously.

Building solidarity across these diverse struggles remains an ongoing challenge. Organizations focused on specific issues sometimes fail to recognize connections with broader human rights concerns, fragmenting efforts and reducing overall impact.

Violence and impunity 🔗

Human rights defenders increasingly face physical threats. Attacks on religious minorities have increased, with vigilante groups acting with apparent impunity. Journalists investigating corruption or rights violations face harassment, arbitrary arrests, and violence.

The lack of accountability for security forces and police creates a culture of impunity. Extrajudicial killings, torture, and custodial deaths continue, yet prosecutions remain rare. The National Human Rights Commission receives complaints but lacks jurisdiction over military detention centers and struggles to ensure state governments implement its recommendations.

Restricted spaces for peaceful assembly 🔗

The right to peaceful protest faces increasing restrictions. Police frequently use excessive force against demonstrators. Tear gas deployed from drones, mass detentions, and criminal cases filed against protesters have become common responses to dissent.

The 2024 farmers’ protests saw thousands detained. At least 51 people across seven states faced criminal charges simply for organizing pro-Palestine rallies or posting supportive content on social media. Such actions send a clear message: certain forms of solidarity and political expression carry serious risks.

The need for inclusive approaches 🔗

Moving forward requires expanding democratic spaces and building broader consensus. The human rights movement must become more inclusive, incorporating voices from marginalized communities not just as beneficiaries but as leaders and strategists.

Organizations need sustainable funding models less dependent on foreign contributions vulnerable to FCRA restrictions. Domestic philanthropy, crowdfunding, and membership-based support can provide more stable foundations, though developing these alternatives requires time and strategic investment.

International solidarity and pressure 🔗

Global attention matters. When the Financial Action Task Force examined India’s anti-money laundering efforts, it called for risk-based analysis of restrictions on non-profit organizations. UN special rapporteurs have repeatedly criticized India’s treatment of human rights defenders. Such international scrutiny, while not always immediately effective, creates pressure for reform.

Building transnational networks allows Indian activists to share experiences, strategies, and support with movements facing similar challenges elsewhere. These connections also provide some protection, as attacks on activists with international profiles attract greater attention.

Strengthening institutional protections 🔗

Despite challenges, India’s judiciary has occasionally defended rights. Courts have struck down unconstitutional provisions, granted bail to detained activists, and ruled against arbitrary demolitions. Strengthening judicial independence and ensuring access to justice remain crucial priorities.

The National Human Rights Commission needs greater autonomy and enforcement powers. Currently, it can investigate and recommend but cannot compel action. Reforming such institutions to make them truly independent and effective would significantly strengthen human rights protections.

The path forward 🔗

India’s human rights movement faces formidable challenges, but the cause remains vital. The struggle for justice, equality, and dignity continues through countless small acts of courage-lawyers defending unpopular clients, journalists reporting uncomfortable truths, activists documenting violations, and ordinary citizens standing up for their rights and those of others.

Success requires sustained effort on multiple fronts: legal reform to repeal draconian laws, institutional strengthening to ensure accountability, coalition-building across diverse groups, and persistent advocacy to expand democratic spaces. The movement must adapt strategies while maintaining commitment to core principles of human dignity and universal rights.

What remains clear is that India’s democratic future depends on protecting those who defend rights. A vibrant civil society isn’t a threat to national security-it’s essential to democracy’s survival. The question isn’t whether India can afford a strong human rights movement, but whether it can afford to suppress one.

What do you think? How can civil society organizations build resilience against state restrictions while maintaining their independence and effectiveness? What role should international pressure play in protecting domestic human rights defenders?

References

1. https://www.icnl.org/post/assessment-and-monitoring/indias-foreign-contribution-regulation-act-fcra
2. https://www.icnl.org/post/analysis/indias-2020-fcra-amendments-impact-on-association
3. https://www.amnesty.org/en/location/asia-and-the-pacific/south-asia/india/report-india/
4. https://monitor.civicus.org/explore/authorities-harass-and-squeeze-funding-ngos-while-activists-journalists-targeted-india/
5. https://www.state.gov/reports/2022-country-reports-on-human-rights-practices/india/
6. https://www.hrw.org/news/2016/06/07/challenges-opportunities-advancement-human-rights-india
7. https://www.state.gov/reports/2021-country-reports-on-human-rights-practices/india/