India’s approach to international human rights treaties is shaped by its constitutional framework, legal commitments, and international relations. Here’s a concise overview: 1. Adherence to International Human Rights Norms India is a signatory to several major human rights treaties and generally supports universal human rights principles. Key treaties include: - The International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) (ratified in 1979) - The International Covenant on Economic, Social, and Cultural Rights (ICESCR) (ratified in 1979) - The Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination (CERD) (ratified in 1968) - The Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW) (ratified in 1993), though with some reservations regarding personal laws related to marriage and family. 2. Reservations and Conditional Ratifications India makes reservations while ratifying international human rights treaties, often based on: - Religious and Cultural Values: For example, reservations to CEDAW regarding personal laws of different religious communities. - Constitutional Sovereignty: India ensures that international treaties don’t override its Constitution. Indian laws and the Constitution, especially fundamental rights, take precedence over international norms unless domesticated by Parliament. 3. Domestic Implementation of International Treaties India follows a dualistic system in which international treaties are not automatically part of domestic law unless incorporated through legislation. Key aspects: - Judiciary: Indian courts, particularly the Supreme Court, have often invoked international human rights standards to expand the scope of fundamental rights. - Parliament: International human rights treaties may lead to domestic legislative changes. For instance, the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 was influenced by international human rights principles. 4. Human Rights Committees and Reports India is required to submit periodic reports to various UN human rights committees regarding its compliance with treaties. These include the Human Rights Committee (ICCPR), Committee on Economic, Social, and Cultural Rights (ICESCR), and the Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination (CERD). 5. Challenges in Implementation Despite ratifying numerous treaties, challenges include: - Diverse Legal Systems: India’s legal system blends common law, personal laws, and customary practices, complicating treaty implementation. - Cultural and Religious Sensitivities: Social and religious traditions sometimes limit the full implementation of international human rights standards. - Poverty and Socio-Economic Issues: Issues like poverty, illiteracy, and gender inequality impact the practical realization of human rights, even when legal frameworks exist. 6. India’s Role in Global Human Rights India advocates for a balanced and inclusive approach to human rights in global forums. It emphasizes: - Global Forums: India engages in the UN Human Rights Council and pushes for equal recognition of both civil-political and economic-social-cultural rights. - South-South Cooperation: India promotes human rights development in the Global South through collaborative efforts and sharing its experiences in tackling human rights in the context of development. Conclusion India’s approach to international human rights treaties is pragmatic. While it actively participates in international mechanisms, it ensures that treaties align with its constitutional values and socio-cultural realities.

Dear Client, India's response to international human rights treaties is hesitant and based on its constitutional foundation. Being a dualist state India insists that international treaties be domesticated into local law via legislation before they can be applied in courts of law.Therefore, although India can ratify a treaty, its contents will not be binding unless enacted into law. India is a party to various significant human rights conventions such as the ICCPR, ICESCR, CEDAW, and CRC, though frequently with reservations or interpretative declarations in order to protect its cultural and legal frameworks—particularly personal laws and federal organization. Indian courts, especially the Supreme Court, have taken a proactive stance in employing international treaties to interpret fundamental rights. The foremost example is Vishaka v. State of Rajasthan (1997), where the Court employed CEDAW to formulate guidelines for workplace harassment in the lack of domestic law. Yet, India is still choosy in embracing all international commitments wholeheartedly. It has failed to ratify such treaties as the Convention Against Torture, arguing for cautious harmonization with local interests. Generally, India endorses international norms of human rights but emphasizes sovereignty, national interest, and gradual implementation on the basis of its own legal and social environment. I hope this answer helps. In case of future queries, please feel free to contact us. Thank you.