17 March 2025 : Daily Answer Writing

Q1) The NHRC must not only be a watchdog but also a beacon of hope for the marginalized and oppressed. In this context discuss the role and mandate of the National Human Rights Commission (NHRC) in India. How does the current composition and functioning of the NHRC affect its independence and effectiveness? (250 words, 15 marks)

ANSWER

The National and State Human Rights Commissions were established in India

in 1993. They were given statutory status under the Protection of Human Rights

Act, 1993. The objective of Human Rights Commissions as defined by the Act

is to protect and promote human rights as guaranteed by the Constitution or

embodied in International Covenants.

THE PRIMARY ROLE MANDATE OF NATIONAL HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION ARE

(a) To inquire into human rights violations on its own or on a petition by the victim or anyone on his/her behalf;

(b) To proactively and reactively inquire into complaints against human rights violations by public servants;

(c) To intervene in any proceeding involving any allegation of violation of human rights pending before a court;

(d) To visit jails, hospitals, juvenile homes, mental hospitals and study and inquire about the conditions of the inmates;

(e) To review the safeguards provided under the Constitution or any law in force for the protection of human rights;

(f) To review the factors that inhibit the realisation of enjoyment of human rights and recommend appropriate measures;

(g) To undertake research in the field of human rights and spread human rights literacy;

(h) To encourage the efforts of NGOs and CSOs and work with them in the field of human rights, etc.

CURRENT COMPOSITION OF NHRC 

1. The Commission shall consist of a Chairperson who has been a Chief Justice of India or a Judge of the Supreme Court;
2. one Member who is, or has been, a Judge of the Supreme Court; one Member who is, or has been the Chief Justice of a High Court;
3. three Members, to be appointed from amongst persons having knowledge and practical experience in matters of human rights, one of whom shall be a woman.
4. The Chairpersons of the National Commission of Backward Classes, the National Commission for Minorities, the National Commission for Protection of Child Rights, the National Commission for Scheduled Castes, the National Commission for Scheduled Tribes; the National Commission for Women and the Chief Commissioner for Persons with Disability shall be deemed to be

Members of the Commission for the discharge of all functions except judicial functions.

Recently, the Global Alliance of National Human Rights Institutions (GANHRI) deferred the accreditation to NHRC due to its current composition and working.

THE CURRENT COMPOSITION AND FUNCTIONING OF THE NHRC AFFECT ITS INDEPENDENCE AND EFFECTIVENESS IN THE FOLLOWING MANNER COMPOSITION

1. Poor Representation to Women and Minorities: The NHRC does not give enough representation to women and minorities on its panel. These two groups are the most vulnerable to human rights violations.
2. Appointment of Police to Oversee Investigations: Due to lack of independent investigating agency, NHRC relies on police to oversee human rights violation complaints. However, many times, police are seen to side with the perpetrators which leads to a poor quality of investigation. This can be seen in poor records of conviction based on investigation led by NHRC.
3. Lack of Transparency in Appointment: NHRC lacks transparency in appointments as most of the members are seen to side with the Government. This raises serious concerns over its independence to investigate cases of violations involving politically favored persons or government officials.
4. Lack of Engagement with CSOs: NHRC has remained skeptical to initiate investigations on reports brought by NGOs and CSOs of human rights violation in India which also reflects its bias and lack of independence.
5. Weaker than other Constitutional and Statutory Bodies: The drafting of PHRA Act is such that the recommendations of NHRC and SHRCs remain not binding. Unlike CIC, whose recommendations are binding, NHRC cannot enforce its orders.
6. Inconsistent: NHRC has been alleged to be inconsistent in approach which raises questions of political influence on them. For example, NHRC gravely contested the draconian provisions of TADA while completely ignoring similar provisions of UAP (Amendment) Act.

WORKING 

1. Recommendatory Nature: The recommendations of NHRC are merely recommendatory in nature. The Central and State Governments can either accept the recommendations or reject them. Former NHRC Chief H.C. Dutta said NHRC was a “toothless tiger”, as authorities lament ignored most of the recommendations made by the Commission.
2. No Power to Prosecute: NHRC painstakingly investigates human rights violation cases, sometimes in remote areas. However, at the end of such investigations, there is no power of prosecution available to the HRCs.
3. No Action against Armed Forces or under AFSPA: NHRC does not have power to summon witnesses in case of human rights violation by armed forces. This prevents effective investigation against armed forces in case of human rights violation.
4. Lack of Manpower: NHRC is completely dependent on local police for investigations and thus there is lack of independence in investigations. In cases of custodial deaths, police officials try hard to conceal facts in order to prevent a fair investigation.
5. Poor Funding: Like other quasi-judicial bodies such as NCSC, NCST etc. NHRC is gravely under funded which prevents NHRC from providing relief and rehabilitation support to victims.
6. Dismissal of Cases: One of the primary functions of the NHRC is to handle complaints received from individuals against public servants alleging human rights violations. However, out of the total complaints received, 97% were dismissed even before a preliminary hearing.

7. Bureaucratic Style of Working: The working style of NHRC is full of red-tapism. The procedures are complex and it is very difficult to file a complaint without proper legal aid. Almost 45% of complaints in NHRC were dismissed on the procedural grounds.
8. One Year Deadline: NHRC cannot investigate an event if the complaint was made more than one year after the incident. Hence, a large number of genuine grievances go unaddressed.
9. Decline in Registered Complaints and Suo Motu Complaints: From 2016 to 2020, the number of complaints registered by NHRC has declined by almost 35%. Similarly, the number of suo-motu cases have fallen by 46% from 2016 to 2020. This shows falling public trust in the Commissions.
10. No Effect on Custodial Deaths: NHRC’s 1997 recommendations had almost no effect in reduction of custodial deaths which are on a rise even after the recommendations.
11. Poor Transparency: The investigation process of NHRC is completely opaque.
12. Overburdened with Complaints: Despite a fall in registered complaints, the NHRC is overburdened as there is an acute shortage of manpower in them.

REMEDIAL MEASURES

In order to improving the functioning of NHRC and SHRCs the following steps can be taken:

1. Madras High Court in 2021 declared that the recommendations of SHRC shall  be legally enforceable and binding on the Tamil Nadu Government. Taking inspiration from this judgement, the recommendations of NHRC shall be made legally binding on the Central Government.
2. There should be mandatory establishment of SHRCs in every State and the PHRA must be extended to J&K so as to prevent human rights violation there.
3. The funds of NHRC must be charged upon the Consolidated Fund of India and the funds of SHRCs must be charged on Consolidated Fund of States so as to improve the condition of funding in these commissions.
4. There is a need to develop an open recruitment process for selecting appropriate people having relevant experience and expertise. The HRCs must include people with background in human rights cases and should have representation from diverse backgrounds like judiciary, NGOs, human rights activists, civil servants etc.

5. The NHRC and other SHRCs must be given power to rehabilitate and provide relief on their own to the victims and initiate prosecution against the perpetrators.
6. The procedural complexities of the complaint registration must be reduced so as to improve accessibility of the citizens.
7. The one year timeline must be removed and HRCs must be empowered to investigate any complaint at their disposal irrespective of the time.
8. The political involvement must be reduced and independence must be granted to the NHRC and other SHRCs.

9. The recommendations of A.M. Ahmadi Committee must be implemented to strengthen the status of human rights commissions in India.

Despite all structural and practical shortcomings, NHRC and other SHRCs are important “fourth branch institutions” which thrive to effectively protect, promote and fulfil the fundamental rights and other human rights of the citizens of the country. In order to effectively earn public trust, NHRC must not only be a watchdog but also a beacon of hope for the marginalized and oppressed.

Read More – 15 March 2025 : Daily Answer Writing