Even as India rejected the report prepared by the UN Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR), it was not alone in doing so.

During the 'General debate on the overall update of the High Commissioner on the situation of Human Rights worldwide and on the activities of his office' at the Human Rights Council, the Kashmir report was discussed, and six nations rejected the report authored by Zeid Raad Al Hussein.

There were two from Asia (Bhutan, Afghanistan), one from Africa (Mauritius), one from Eurasia (Belarus), and two from Latin America (Cuba, Venezuela).

While Pakistan's permanent representative to UN in Geneva, Farukh Amil, made an ardent appeal on behalf of his own country to establish a commission of inquiry in Jammu and Kashmir, he did not have much to add when he spoke on behalf of the OIC (Organisation of Islamic Cooperation).

"The OHCHR report on Jammu & Kashmir also points to a grave situation in Indian Administered Kashmir and needs appropriate follow up by this council," said the Pakistan envoy on behalf of OIC.

Not a single country came out in support of either Pakistan or the OHCHR report on Kashmir, while many questioned the timing and the veracity of the report itself.

In its first-ever human rights report on Kashmir, the UNHRC has called for international inquiry into multiple violations in the undivided Jammu and Kashmir.

The 49-page report details human rights violations and abuses on both sides of the Line of Control, and highlights a situation of "chronic" impunity for violations committed by security forces.

Also Read | China declines to back envoys offer on India, Pakistan trilateral talks

The situation is not a comfortable one for India since Pakistan is a member of the Human Rights Council and can affect change whereas India is not.

As former Ambassador to the UN Asoke Mukherjee says,"We have to see that Pakistan is in the Council and in the Working Group on Situations of the Council. India is not in the Council from this year till 2020. Therefore, we cannot vote or influence any proposal to take action on the HCHR report in the Council or its working group."

Many have called the methodology of collecting data for this report a "fallacious" one.

First, the report was drafted on using remote monitoring, without any rigorous cross-verification on the ground, amounting to biases of individuals and media reports creeping into the report.

Also Read | UN report says over 7,000 Indians applied for asylum in US last year

Bhutan's representative Kinga Singye made a very strong statement against the OHCHR report raising the issue of terrorism which the High Commissioner seemed to have missed out in his report on the ground situation. Bhutan also requested the HRC to not take action on the report.

"My delegation would like to refer to the report issued by the High Commissioner on the situation of human rights in Kashmir. Given the complex historical background, political issues involved which the report has acknowledged; the report is not going to be helpful to the situation that is fuelled by terrorism among others," he said.

The Mauritian representative, Israhyananda Dhalladoo, questioned the assessment on Kashmir and stood with India rejecting any third party intervention.

This report of OHCHR in respect of the human rights situation in Kashmir does not provide a balanced assessment of the situation on the ground," said the Mauritian envoy.

The timing of the report and the purpose is being questioned. Zeid Raad al-Hussein, a Jordanian diplomat, was recently seen in pictures with the Pakistani Hurriyat faction leader Syed Faiz Naqshbandi and some other leaders from Pakistan which leads to the question of where his facts were coming from.

The report is clearly a violation of the High Commissioner's mandate which says that he should conduct his work respecting "sovereignty, territorial integrity and domestic jurisdiction of member states".