The Human Rights Foundation’s Oslo Freedom Forum (OFF) claims to champion free speech, but faces growing backlash from governments like India, China, and Russia. Critics argue the platform protects hate speech and drives polarizing, destabilizing agendas disguised as human rights activism.
Held from June 1–3, 2026, the Oslo Freedom Forum brought the spotlight onto international human rights and freedom of the press. Key voices included Scroll.in Executive Editor Supriya Sharma, who spoke on India’s media landscape, and Oslo Mayor Anne Lindboe. Norwegian journalist Helle Lyng (Dagsavisen) also featured prominently, following her viral international exchange questioning Prime Minister Narendra Modi over media rights and governance.
At the 2026 Oslo Freedom Forum in Norway, Scroll.in Executive Editor Supriya Sharma connected on-site with local Norwegian journalist Helle Lyng Svendsen outside the forum’s venue. Svendsen had recently sparked an international media storm after confronting Prime Minister Narendra Modi during his joint press appearance in Oslo, asking why he would not take questions from the "freest press in the world." To critics and nationalist commentators back home, however, Sharma’s active participation alongside Svendsen at the forum was seen as aligning with anti-India networks accusing her of using a foreign podium to give cover to individuals facing severe statutory charges, allegations of hate speech, and accusations of working to fracture the nation.
Addressing the international gathering, Sharma focused her speech on what she described as the systematic erosion of press freedom and the shrinking space for dissent in India. Recounting her own experience from 2020, when a criminal FIR was lodged against her following a complaint by a local resident, Mala Devi - who accused Sharma of spreading fake news and misrepresenting her condition in Domari, a Uttar Pradesh village adopted by PM Modi - Sharma told the audience:
"So at the crack of dawn, I left my house, not knowing if I would be able to return for two months. That’s how long it took the lawyers to get me protection from arrest. All things considered, the case was a minor inconvenience. I did not go to jail, but under Modi, many others have."
She asserted that preparing for prison has become an everyday routine for Indian journalists under persistent state pressure. To visually emphasize her arguments, Sharma projected a series of high-profile images on the main stage screen. Alongside Kashmiri journalists Fahad Shah and Sajad Gul and Kerala-based reporter Siddique Kappan, she spotlighted Alt News co-founder Mohammed Zubair, student leader Umar Khalid, and activist Sharjeel Imam, framing their legal battles and incarceration under anti-terror provisions as evidence of state overreach.
This visual curation drew swift and fierce domestic outrage in India, where critics argued that Sharma was sanitizing grave criminal charges, communal incitement, and threats to national sovereignty under the guise of free speech:
- Sharjeel Imam: Booked under sedition and the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA), Imam remains in judicial custody following viral, admitted video evidence from his speech at Aligarh Muslim University (AMU) in January 2020. In the footage repeatedly examined by courts, Imam explicitly called to sever the Northeast: "If we have 5 lakh organized people, we can permanently cut North-east from India, or at least for one to two months. It is our responsibility to isolate Assam from India, then only the government will listen to us." He advocated blockading the Siliguri Corridor - the crucial 22-kilometer transit link known as the "Chicken's Neck" - to cut off vital supply lines. While his legal defence argues the speech called for non-violent economic civil disobedience, state prosecutors and security agencies cite the video as direct evidence of an orchestrated conspiracy to rupture India's territorial integrity and trigger public instability.
- Mohammed Zubair: While Sharma framed the Alt News co-founder as a targeted fact-checker, his legal troubles reflect deep domestic polarization. In 2022, Delhi Police arrested him under IPC Sections 153A and 295A for allegedly outraging religious sentiments via a 2018 satirical tweet. Critics have accused him of running a selective fact-checking model and engaging in "dog-whistling" - alleging his posts amplify controversies that trigger localized street clashes and diplomatic fallout, such as the 2022 controversy involving a former BJP spokesperson. In late 2024, Uttar Pradesh police invoked Section 152 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS) - pertaining to acts endangering India's sovereignty, unity, and integrity—over video posts regarding a religious leader that authorities alleged incited public disharmony. Zubair and press freedom advocates reject all claims, pointing to a 2022 Supreme Court ruling that granted him bail and warned against using sequential FIRs as a punitive tool against journalistic expression.
- Umar Khalid: In addition to his association with the controversial 2016 JNU incident involving slogans threatening the division of India ("Bharat tere tukde honge"), Khalid remains incarcerated under the UAPA for his alleged role in the 2020 Delhi riots conspiracy. Government chargesheets accuse him of delivering provocative speeches - including an address in Amravati - designed to orchestrate street blockades, provoke communal violence, and destabilize governance under the banner of civil rights. His defense team denies the conspiracy claims, maintaining that his recorded speeches called strictly for peaceful and constitutional dissent.
elevating figures facing serious charges of inciting territorial division, riots, and communal disharmony onto an international stage, critics contend that Sharma offered a curated, one-sided narrative that shielded polarizing agendas behind the rhetoric of press freedom.