India calls out Pakistan’s ‘hypocrisy’ at UN for justifying terrorism as ‘freedom struggle’

India has sharply criticised Pakistan at the United Nations (UN) for attempting to legitimise cross-border terrorism under the guise of a "freedom struggle" and portraying terrorists as "freedom fighters."

The exchange took place during an interactive dialogue with Ben Saul, the UN Special Rapporteur on Fundamental Freedoms, while Countering Terrorism.

During the session, Muhammad Jawad Ajmal, Counsellor at Pakistan's UN Mission, urged nations to “distinguish between terrorism and the exercise of the legitimate right of people to resist foreign occupation.”

Responding to this, Raghoo Puri, First Secretary at India’s Permanent Mission to the UN, condemned Ajmal’s remarks and accused Pakistan of “doublespeak and hypocrisy.” Puri said, “Terrorism is among the gravest of offences that fundamentally violates the core of humanity. It represents the worst of bigotry, violence, intolerance, and fear, and terrorists are the worst of the worst in humankind.”

He further said, “Islamabad's doublespeak and hypocrisy stand exposed,” calling Pakistan “a well-known epicenter of terrorism with established links to multiple terror attacks across the world targeting innocent civilians.”

Puri also noted that terrorism remains “the gravest threat to humanity,” adding that its “abettor and aider, like Pakistan, remains the worst violator of human rights.”

During the dialogue, Pakistan’s representative also attempted to misinterpret international law, claiming that international conventions distinguish between terrorism and freedom struggles. Ajmal cited the General Assembly resolution 46/51 to support his argument, stating that “the distinction is duly observed in International Law, International Humanitarian Law, and General Assembly resolution 46/51, which also endorses this position.”

However, the 1994 General Assembly declaration explicitly rejects any justification for terrorism, stating that “criminal acts intended or calculated to provoke a state of terror in the general public, a group of persons or particular persons for political purposes are in any circumstance unjustifiable.”

This stance is reaffirmed in the 2004 Security Council resolution and the 1999 International Convention Against Financing Terrorism.

The 1991 resolution 46/51, which Ajmal referenced, only makes a passing mention of liberation struggles but still “unequivocally condemns as criminal and unjustifiable all acts, methods, and practices of terrorism wherever and by whomever committed.” It also calls on nations to “fulfil their obligations under international law to refrain from participating in terrorist acts in other states.”

India also pointed out that negotiations for the Comprehensive Convention on International Terrorism, first proposed by New Delhi, have been stalled for nearly two decades due to Pakistan and a small group of countries insisting on classifying certain terrorists as “freedom fighters.”

Ajmal accused India’s counterterrorism measures of violating human rights, to which Puri responded by saying that Pakistan’s accusations were hollow given its own record. Puri added that Pakistan’s attempts to claim “Islamophobia” to justify its actions were nothing but “futile attempts to take cover of Islamophobia to hide its atrocities.”

Ajmal also criticised the UN’s counterterrorism initiatives, alleging that the organisation “has regrettably singled out one religion for affiliation with terrorism.” India dismissed this argument, reiterating that Pakistan continues to use religion as a shield to conceal its role in promoting terrorism.