PSIR Syllabus : Statutory Institutions/Commissions : Election Commission, Comptroller and
Auditor General, Finance Commission, Union Public Service Commission, National
Commission for Scheduled Castes, National Commission for Scheduled Tribes, National
Commission for Women; National Human Rights Commission, National Commission for
Minorities, National Backward Classes Commission
Underlying idea about the commissions:
In present time, the concept of governance is changing. There is an increase in realisation
that government alone cannot provide good governance. Governance is changing from
‘government centric to citizen centric’. Without involvement of civil society, it is not possible
to ensure transparency and accountability. Even policy making is becoming so complex and
multidimensional that inputs from bureaucracy is not sufficient.
Hence, keeping above requirement in mind, government of India has created certain bodies
like NHRC, NCM etc. They are expected to perform the role as –
Watchdog bodies
Grievance Redressal Mechanism along with Judiciary
They have the functions that which are of investigative, evaluative, monitoring,
consultative in nature
They are expected to promote the consciousness in the field of civil rights, human
rights
They promote research and are expected to work in a close cooperation with civil
society
The unique nature of these bodies in India is that , they are part of the governmental
institutions, depend on government for funds, functions, functionaries; but at the same
time they have to act as an institution to ensure accountability, answerability.
Some of the commissions like NHRC, National Commission on Minority etc. is a part of
evolving international law, treaties etc., whereas commissions like for SC and ST have their
origin in the Indian constitution itself.
Though government of India has created such an infrastructure but they are often called as
‘Malnourished child of government of India’.
National Human Rights Commission(NHRC)
Statutory
Established in 1993
Protection of Human Rights Act(PHRA), 1993
Objectives
o To strengthen the institutional
arrangements through which human
rights issues could be addressed
o To look into allegations of excesses,
independently of the government, in a
manner that would underline the
government’s commitment to protect
human rights.
Composition: As per Protection of Human Rights Act, 1993
o A Chairperson who has been a CJI or a Judge of the SC.
o 1 Member who is, or has been, a Judge of the Supreme Court;
o 1 Member who is, or has been, the Chief Justice of a High Court;
o 3 Members out of which at least one shall be a woman to be appointed from
amongst persons having knowledge of, or practical experience in, matters
relating to human rights
o The Chairpersons of
1. the National Commission for Backward Classes,
2. the National Commission for Minorities,
3. the National Commission for Protection of Child Rights
4. the National Commission for the Scheduled Castes,
5. the National Commission for the Scheduled Tribes
6. the National Commission for Women and
7. the Chief Commissioner for Persons with Disabilities
o There shall be a Secretary-General who shall be the CEO of the Commission
and shall, subject to control of the Chairperson, exercise all administrative
and financial powers.
Appointment of Chairperson and other Members
As per Protection of Human Rights Act, 1993
The Chairperson and the Members shall be appointed by the President by warrant
under his hand and seal after obtaining the recommendations of a Committee
consisting of
1. The Prime MinisterChairperson;
2. Speaker of the House of the People
3. Minister in-charge of the Ministry of Home Affairs in the Government of India
4. Leader of the Opposition in the House of the People
5. Leader of the Opposition in the Council of States
6. Deputy Chairman of the Council of State
Resignation and removal of Chairperson and Members
The Chairperson or any Member may resign by writing to the President of India.
The Chairperson or any Member shall only be removed from his office by order of the
President of India on the ground of proved misbehaviour or incapacity after the
Supreme Court, on reference being made to it by the President, has, on inquiry by the
Supreme Court.
The President may remove the Chairperson or any Member:
o is adjudged an insolvent; or
o engages during his term of office in any paid employment outside the duties
of his office; or
o is unfit to continue in office by reason of infirmity of mind or body; or
o is of unsound mind and stands so declared by a competent court; or
o is convicted and sentenced to imprisonment for an offence which in the
opinion of the President involves moral turpitude.
Term of office of Chairperson and Members
A person appointed as Chairperson shall hold office for a term of three years from the date
on which he enters upon his office or until he attains the age of seventy years, whichever is
earlier and shall be eligible for re-appointment.
A person appointed as a Member shall hold office for a term of three years from the date on
which he enters upon his office and shall be eligible for re-appointment . No Member shall
hold office after he has attained the age of seventy years.
On ceasing to hold office, a Chairperson or a Member shall be ineligible for further
employment under the Government of India or under the Government of any State.
Functions of the Commission are:
o To inquire into any violation of human rights or negligence in the prevention of such
violation by a public servant, either suo motu or on a petition.
o To intervene in any proceeding involving allegation of violation of human rights
pending before a court.
o To visit jails and detention places to study the living conditions of inmates and make
recommendation thereon.
o To review the constitutional and other legal safeguards for the protection of human
rights and recommend measures for their effective implementation.
o To review the factors including acts of terrorism that inhibit the enjoyment of human
rights and recommend remedial measures.
o To study treaties and other international instruments on human rights and make
recommendations for their effective implementation.
o To undertake and promote research in the field of human rights.
o To spread human rights literacy among the people and promote awareness of the
safeguards available for the protection of these rights.
o To encourage the efforts of nongovernmental organisations (NGOs) working in the
field of human rights.
o To undertake such other functions as it may consider necessary for the promotion of
human rights.
Analysis
NHRC is an expression of India’s concern for protection of human rights.
In 1993 the Indian govt. passed the protection of human rights act which defined human
rights more broadly to include legally recognized rights under domestic laws including
fundamental rights but also talks about rights recognized under international conventions
which are yet to be domestically recognized or constitutionalized.
Under the PHRA act 1993 and in accordance with the ‘Paris principles’,
an organization which
A. Could play an advisory role with respect to govt. policies
B. Must or could monitor allegations of violation of human rights by
the state.
C. Must be independent and autonomous with a pluralistic
composition.
The NHRC was also formed in 1993 in accordance with above ideas.
Achievements of NHRC.
1. Chakma refugees: In 1998 the NHRC recommended against the deportation of
Chakma refugees and argued that it violates their right to life. Ultimately forcing the
state to withdraw from considering deportation.
2. TADA and POTA Act: NHRC argued against granting vast policing powers over terror
related matters to be covered under TADA and POTA act. NHRCs recommendations
became a crucial component in the SC striking down these acts as unconstitutional
3. 2002 Gujrat riots: It saw NHRC recommending the
transfer of cases of riot victims from Gujrat to other
states on NHRCs findings about the atmosphere of fear
and intimidation that could deny a fair trial to the victims.
Issues related to NHRC
Justice V R Krishna Iyer called NHRC as “the biggest post office in India”
(forwarding complaints to the government and its replies to complainants).
Famous lawyer Rajeev Dhavan said it had
“assumed a stance far too grandiose not
commensurate with its resources and internal will”
and was “a mere showpiece to convince the world that the
government is committed to human rights protection.”
1. The autonomy of NHRC has been a matter of concern as it is dependent for its
administrative and financial requirements upon the law ministry.
2. The commission is not eligible to enquire into any matter after one year from the
date of occurrence of the incident. Many activists have argued that this is too small a
time period where oppressed individual or groups may be facing an immediate threat
to their lives and thus may not be willing to report these violations.
3. The advice of the NHRC is merely recommendatory and not binding. The Commission
cannot penalize any authority or department for not following its orders or
directions.
4. The overlapping nature of the jurisdiction between NHRC and other agencies can
often lead to a situation where victims of human rights violations may find it tough to
obtain grievance redressal by approaching any one agency.
5. Lack of Jurisdiction: The NHRC is failing at primarily reaching all the parts of the
country.Eg- Jammu and Kashmir.
6. Shortcomings in Investigations: The NHRC does not have the means to carry out any
investigations with its own agenda and mode, but has to redirect such a request to
the Central or State Government so that they can appoint an Officer to undertake
such an investigation. Further, the time limit placed on the investigation hampers
the working of the NHRC, since they can only investigate a case for one year after its
admission in the Commission. This affects the work and quality of investigation
undertaken by the NHRC, and a great number of grievances may go unaddressed.
7. Ceremonial Figure: The NHRC is commonly treated as a post-retirement platform for
judges, officers and bureaucrats.
8. Inadequacy of funds severely compromises its activities.
9. Excess representation of judges and lack of human right experts and civil liberty
experts.Further, its functioning is bureaucratic, as most of the members in it are
there due to their political clout.
Recommendations for NHRC
The Human Rights Commission has the powers of a civil court, and proceedings before it
are deemed to be judicial proceedings. This provides strong reasons for its findings to be
treated — at the very least — as quasi-judicial, and binding upon the state .
The commission should be empowered to provide interim and immediate relief
including monetary relief to the victim.
The commission should be empowered to punish the violators of human rights, which
may act as deterrent to such acts in the future.
The interference of the government and other authorities in the working of commission
should be minimum, as it may influence the working of commission.
Armed forces: The definition should be restricted to only army, navy, and air force.
Further, even in these cases the Commission should be allowed to independently
investigate cases of violation of rights.
Commission’s membership: Members of NHRCs should include civil society, human rights
activists, etc. rather than only ex-bureaucrats.
Amending law: Misuse of laws by the law enforcing agencies is often the root cause of
human right violations. So, the weakness of laws should be removed and those laws
should be amended or repealed if they run contrary to human rights.
Independent Staff: NHRC should have its independent investigating staff recruited by
itself, rather than the present practice of deputation.
Conclusion:
NHRC began its journey with much promise. But along the way, it seems to have lost all its
teeth. Over the years, there have been cases of human rights abuse across the country,
particularly in Jammu and Kashmir, Chhattisgarh, Jharkhand and the northeast region which
prompted its contemporary chief HL Dattu to call it as "toothless tiger" .
SOLI SORABJEE, former Attorney General called NHRC as ‘TEASING ILLUSION’.
NHRC needs immediate changes like making it obligatory for the government to immediately
enforce the decisions of NHRC. It also needs to undergo diversification of scope and potential
pool of members of NHRC by ensuring greater representation of women in the governing
body of NHRC.
