At the 61st Session of the United Nations Human Rights Council, India sharply rejected Pakistan’s allegations on Jammu and Kashmir, asserting that the region’s development trajectory contrasts starkly with Pakistan’s internal economic crisis and accusing Islamabad of spreading propaganda.

India’s Right to Reply at UNHRC

Speaking during India’s Right to Reply, Anupama Singh:

Rejected allegations made by Pakistan and the Organisation of Islamic Cooperation
Accused the OIC of acting as an “echo chamber” for one member state
Called Pakistan’s statements “incessant propaganda”

India reiterated that Jammu and Kashmir “was, is, and will always remain an integral and inalienable part of India.”

Legal & Territorial Position

India maintained that:

Jammu and Kashmir’s accession in 1947 was legal and irrevocable
The only outstanding issue is Pakistan’s “illegal occupation” of certain territories

New Delhi urged Islamabad to vacate territories under its control.

‘La La Land’ Remark & Development Push

In a pointed response, India referenced the inauguration of the Chenab Rail Bridge, described as the world’s highest railway bridge.

Singh remarked that if such infrastructure progress is dismissed, Pakistan must be “hallucinating or living in La La Land.”

India also contrasted:

Jammu and Kashmir’s development budget
Pakistan’s recent bailout package from the International Monetary Fund

The statement framed governance and infrastructure growth in J&K against Pakistan’s economic challenges.

Democracy & Security Argument

India responded to democracy-related criticism by:

Highlighting voter turnout in recent elections in Jammu and Kashmir
Claiming citizens have rejected terrorism and violence
Accusing Pakistan of state-sponsored destabilization efforts

India argued that Pakistan should focus on resolving its domestic crises instead of raising allegations at global platforms.

Diplomatic Context

The exchange marks the latest diplomatic confrontation between India and Pakistan at multilateral forums, particularly at the UNHRC, over Jammu and Kashmir.

Such rebuttals have become a recurring feature of India–Pakistan engagements in international bodies.

Key Entities

United Nations Human Rights Council – Forum where the exchange took place
Organisation of Islamic Cooperation – Group referenced in India’s rebuttal
Chenab Rail Bridge – Infrastructure project cited as development example
International Monetary Fund – Referenced in economic comparison

Final Verdict

India’s response at the UNHRC underscores its firm diplomatic stance on Jammu and Kashmir, combining legal assertions, infrastructure achievements, and economic contrasts to counter Pakistan’s claims. The exchange reflects continued high-intensity diplomatic sparring, with both nations leveraging global forums to reinforce their narratives.