Those cooperating with the UN and those other civil society representatives who may be deterred from coming forward
Cases- Case status
- Unknown
- Location of case in SG report
- 2021-038-001
- Relevant SG report
- Year of the report
- 2021
- From Country
- Country Geolocation
Latitude: 20.593684
Longitude: 78.96288
- Country Geolocation (linked Cases)
- India
- From Region
- UN body that raised the case prior to the SG report
- UN (Dep.) High Commissioner on Human Rights
- Dates of prior UN action
- 20 October 2020
- Type of record
- General situation addressed
- Gender
- Gender unclear
- Was the victim a foreign national?
- No
- Was the victim a minor?
- No
- Individual's/organization's activity
Those cooperating with the UN and those other civil society representatives who may be deterred from coming forward
- Type of rights defended
- Unclear in SG Report
- Was the victim a civil servant or member of the security forces or of the judiciary?
- No
- Reported trigger of reprisal
Those cooperating with the UN and those other civil society representatives who may be deterred from coming forward
- Engagement with UN body
- Unclear
- Type of attempted engagement
- Unclear
- Reprisal information
Concerns relating to the use of the Foreign Contribution (Regulation) Act of 2010 (FCRA) to hinder UN cooperation have been included in successive reports of the Secretary- General (see Annex II).30 On 20 October 2020, the High Commissioner for Human Rights expressed concern about the use of vaguely worded laws that constrain NGOs’ activities and restrict foreign funding, including the FCRA.31 She stated that the FCRA “has been invoked over the years to justify an array of highly intrusive measures, ranging from official raids on NGO offices and freezing of bank accounts, to suspension or cancellation of registration, including of civil society organizations that have engaged with UN human rights bodies.”32 As regards 2020 amendments to the FCRA, the High Commissioner further expressed concern that “actions based on the grounds of vaguely defined ‘public interest’ leave this law open to abuse, and that it is being used to deter or punish NGOs for human rights reporting and advocacy that the authorities perceive as critical in nature.”33 She urged the authorities to carefully review the FCRA for its compliance with international human rights standards.
- Types of reprisals suffered
- Administrative reprisal
- Property damage/raid/search/confiscation
- Threats/Intimidations (incl. "fear of reprisal")
- Alleged/likely perpetrators
- State actors
- Was the reprisal based on new legislation?
- Yes
- Does the report make general comment about country’s environment for engagement with UN?
- Yes
- Was the case raised by a State at the UN?
- No
- Is the country cited for a "pattern of reprisal" in the context of this case?
- No
- Is a pattern of reprisals mentioned otherwise in the context of this case?
- No
- Does the report cite "self-censorship" as an issue in the context of this case?
- Yes
- How many times has the case been followed up in subsequent SG reports?
- 0