"Counter-terrorism must be anchored in the Rule of Law." Evaluate the place of human rights within India's national counter-terrorism strategy.

The UN Global Counter-Terrorism Strategy treats respect for human rights and the rule of law as "the fundamental basis" of the fight against terrorism [1]. PRAHAAR is India's first National Counter-Terrorism Policy & Strategy, released by MHA in February 2026. It makes human rights one of its seven pillars [2]. This is a real doctrinal step, but it has not yet shown the same weight in practice.

Place of human rights in PRAHAAR: strengths

• Explicit pillar: the "H" in PRAHAAR stands for "Human rights and Rule of Law based processes" for dealing with threats [2][3].
• Normative anchoring: the strategy refers to the Protection of Human Rights Act, 1993, the UDHR and India's ratification of the ICCPR [2].
• Proportionality: the Response pillar asks for responses that are swift and proportionate to the threat [3].
• Beyond force: the Attenuating pillar targets the conditions that lead to terrorism, including radicalisation, and not just the symptoms [3].
• Written doctrine: a codified text gives Parliament, courts and citizens a standard to hold the State to.

Gaps and concerns

• One pillar among seven, not the foundation: the UN model runs rights through every pillar [1]. PRAHAAR's public summary does not say how the rights pillar limits the Prevention and Response pillars [3].
• Executive designation: under UAPA Section 35, the Centre adds organisations to the First Schedule by notification [4]. The Shahzad Bhatti network was banned this way [5]. The executive acts first, and courts review only afterwards.
• Output metrics over justice: official releases count 350 arrests and 100+ FIRs [5]. They do not report chargesheets or convictions, which are the real test of whether the rule of law held.
• Slow investigations: the Parliamentary Standing Committee on Home Affairs (2016) found that the NIA had not finished its Pathankot probe more than a year after the attack [6]. Delay is itself a rule-of-law failure.
• Vague oversight: the strategy promises "layered oversight mechanisms" but does not name who oversees [3].

Evaluation: human rights now have a formal place in India's counter-terrorism doctrine. Their operational place is still unclear.

Overall, PRAHAAR gives human rights formal recognition but has not yet given them structural force. MHA should publish conviction and chargesheet data alongside arrest figures. It should also name an independent oversight body and set time limits for investigations. These steps would move India toward the UN's rights-first model [1] and meet the Article 21 guarantee of fair procedure. That is how security and liberty can reinforce each other.