India votes against a UN General Assembly resolution seeking a death penalty moratorium.
New Delhi says sovereign states can determine their own legal systems and penalties.
India backs resolution against extrajudicial killings but objects to equating capital punishment with torture.
India has voted against a United Nations General Assembly draft resolution calling for a moratorium on the use of the death penalty, arguing that there is no international consensus against capital punishment and that sovereign states have the right to determine their own legal systems and penalties.
At the Third Committee's 43rd plenary meeting of the 81st UN General Assembly, India also supported a separate resolution on extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary executions. However, it disassociated itself from a specific paragraph that described the death penalty as torture or ill-treatment, Hindustan Times reported.
Representing India, Bhavika Mangalanandan, First Secretary at India's Permanent Mission to the United Nations, said capital punishment was imposed after due legal process and should not be equated with unlawful killings.
“There is no international consensus against capital punishment, and Article 6 of the ICCPR permits its use with restrictions. Capital punishment is meted out after rigorous and due legal process,” she said.
Calling the characterisation of capital punishment as state-inflicted death a “travesty”, Mangalanandan said linking it to extrajudicial and arbitrary executions was “disingenuous and mischievous”.
India's Stand On Death Penalty
Explaining India's position, Mangalanandan said the country opposed extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary executions as violations of human rights and the right to life.
“Extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary executions are unlawful and a clear violation of human rights. They deeply affect the families of victims and violate the most fundamental human right, the right to life,” she said.
She added that India supported the broader resolution calling on countries to eliminate such violations.
However, India's objection was limited to Operational Paragraph 6 (OP 6) of the resolution, which refers to a report by the UN Special Rapporteur presented at the 62nd session of the Human Rights Council and urges countries to consider its recommendations.
Mangalanandan said India disagreed with the report's assertion that the death penalty inherently constituted torture or ill-treatment.
“In India, the death penalty is a statutory provision exercised exclusively in the rarest of rare cases,” she said, adding that the country's legal framework provided several procedural safeguards.
These include the presumption of innocence, mandatory confirmation of death sentences by a higher court and consideration of mitigating circumstances before a sentence is imposed.
“In view of the above, my delegation is constrained to disassociate from OP six of the resolution,” she said.
India's vote against the separate draft resolution seeking a moratorium on the death penalty is consistent with its position in previous UN sessions, including those held in 2016, 2018 and 2024.
