India voted against a United Nations General Assembly (UNGA) resolution calling for a global moratorium on the use of the death penalty. The resolution, introduced by Mexico, was adopted by the UNGA's Third Committee on Friday, November 13, 2026, with 133 countries voting in favour, 33 against, and 16 abstentions.
Representing India, Bhavika Mangalanandan, first secretary at India’s Permanent Mission to the UN, stated that there is no international consensus against capital punishment. She noted that Article 6 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) permits the use of the death penalty, provided it is subject to legal restrictions. India argued that capital punishment is a statutory provision in the country, imposed only in the "rarest of rare" cases, and following a rigorous legal process.
In addition to the moratorium resolution, India addressed a separate draft regarding extrajudicial, summary, or arbitrary executions. While supporting the broader goal of eradicating unlawful killings, New Delhi formally disassociated itself from specific paragraphs that sought to link the death penalty with torture and ill-treatment. India explicitly objected to Operational Paragraph 6 of this resolution, which referred to recommendations from the UN Special Rapporteur that characterized the death penalty as inherent torture.
Mangalanandan described the attempt to equate lawful capital punishment with state-inflicted death as a "travesty" and criticized the approach as "disingenuous and mischievous." She stated that the UN discussions appeared to be presenting "personal ideological preferences as settled international law."
Key facts
- The resolution on the death penalty moratorium was adopted with 133 votes in favour, 33 against, and 16 abstentions.
- India voted alongside countries including the United States, Japan, Pakistan, Egypt, Iran, Iraq, and Saudi Arabia.
- The resolution expressed concern over a significant surge in reported executions globally during 2025.
- India’s legal framework includes safeguards such as the presumption of innocence and mandatory confirmation of death sentences by higher courts.
- The UN resolution called for restricting the death penalty for pregnant women, older persons, and individuals with mental or intellectual disabilities.
Why it matters
The vote highlights a persistent divide in international legal standards regarding the use of capital punishment. By maintaining its position, India signals that it will continue to rely on domestic judicial review and statutory law to determine its penalty structure, rather than aligning with the evolving global push toward mandatory abolition.
Background
India’s vote aligns with its historical stance on this issue, having also voted against similar resolutions in 2016, 2018, and 2024. The country maintains that decisions regarding appropriate legal penalties are a matter of state sovereignty, provided they are in accordance with international law.
Source: Times of India, The Hindu
Comments