National Human Rights Commission (NHRC)

N NEWS:

• The 28th foundation day of the National Human Rights Commission (NHRC) was celebrated on 12^th October. It comes at a time when the NHRC is being criticised for maintained silence on the Assam violence.

THE NHRC:

• The National Human Rights Commission is the watchdog of human rights in the country.
• It is a statutory body established under the Protection of Human Rights Act, 1993. The Act was amended in 2006 and 2019.

Composition:

• The commission consists of a chairman and five full time members:

• The chairman and members are appointed by the President on the recommendations of a six-member committee which consists of:

• The commission also has seven ex-officio members, namely the chairpersons of:
  • National Commission for Minorities
  • National Commission for SCs
  • National Commission for STs
  • National Commission for Women
  • National Commission for Backward Classes
  • National Commission for the Protection of Child Rights; and
  • Chief Commissioner for Persons with Disabilities
• Besides, it is empowered to utilize the services of any officer or investigation agency of the Central or any state government. It has also established effective cooperation with the NGOs with first-hand information about human rights violations.

Term & Tenure:

• The chairman and members hold office for a term of three years or till the age of seventy years, whichever is earlier.
• After their tenure, they are not eligible for reappointment or further employment under the Central or a state government.
• The salaries, allowances and other conditions of service of the chairman or a member are determined by the Central government.
• Commission has five Specialized Divisions i.e. Law Division, Investigation Division, Policy Research & Programmes Division, Training Division and Administration Division. The commission has its own nucleus of investigating staff.

Removal:

• The president can remove the chairman or any member from the office:
• • If he is adjudged an insolvent
  • If he engages in any paid employment outside the duties of his office
  • If he is unfit to continue in office by reason of infirmity of mind or body
  • If he is of unsound mind and stand so declared by a competent court
  • If he is convicted and sentenced to imprisonment for an offence.
• In addition to these, the president can also remove the chairman or any member on the ground of proved misbehavior or incapacity.
  • However, in these cases, the president has to refer the matter to the Supreme Court for an inquiry.
  • If the Supreme Court, after the inquiry, upholds the cause of removal and advises so, then the president can remove the chairman or a member.

FUNCTIONING:

The specific objectives of the establishment of the commission are:

• To strengthen the institutional arrangements through which human rights issues could be addressed.
• To look into allegations of excesses, independently of the government, in a manner that would underline the government's commitment to protect human rights.
• To complement and strengthen the efforts that have already been made in this direction.

The functions of the Commission are:

• 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 presented to it or on an order of a court.
• To intervene in any proceeding involving allegation of violation of human rights pending before a court.
• To visit jails and detention places to study the living conditions of inmates and make recommendation thereon.
• To review the constitutional and other legal safeguards for the protection of human rights and recommend measures for their effective implementation.
• To study treaties and other international instruments on human rights and make recommendations for their effective implementation.
• To undertake and promote research in the field of human rights.
• To spread human rights literacy and promote awareness among the people.
• To encourage the efforts of non-governmental organizations (NGOs) working in the field of human rights.

ISSUES WITH NHRC:

• Neutrality of selection committee:
  • The Speaker and Deputy speaker, who form part of the selection committee, are usually members of the ruling party. Hence, along with the Prime Minister and Home Minister, the committee is tilted in favor of the ruling party.
  • The ‘expert members’ criteria have not been clearly defined. Hence, the appointments are often those of retired bureaucrats, thereby raising the allegation that it is a post-retirement post for bureaucrats.
  • Also, there is no judicial representation in the committee.
• Selection process:
  • The selection process is ambiguous as the criteria to assess candidates is not specified. Very often, the government does not publicize vacancies in the Commission or details regarding the selection process.
• Limited powers:
  • The commission can only look into a matter within one year of its occurrence. A genuine grievance that exists in the earlier time period is thus ignored.
  • The commission has limited role, powers and jurisdiction with respect to human right violations by the armed forces. It can only seek a report from the Central government and make its recommendations.
• Only a recommendatory body:
  • It has no power to punish the violators of human rights, nor to award any relief including monetary relief to the victim. Its recommendations are not binding on the concerned government or authority.
• Drop in registered cases:
  • From a total of 96,267 complaints registered in the 2016, the figure fell to 75,064 in 2020, recording a sharp decline of 32.78%. Also, the number of Suo motu cases taken up by the Commission has almost halved between 2012-16 and 2016-20.
• Pendency of cases:
  • As of September 2021, the Commission recorded a pendency of 20,806 cases. A decrease in registration with a subsequent increase in pendency questions the efficiency of the complaint handling mechanism of the commission.
• Impulsive disposal of complaints:
  • In 2020 alone, a total of 68,130 cases have been disposed of, where disposal would not necessarily mean deciding on merit. Most complaints were dismissed on procedural grounds and before being afforded a preliminary hearing on merits.
• Shortage of manpower:
  • Until recently, the NHRC was without a chairman. Also, most of the seats in the state human rights commissions’ posts remain vacant.
  • Also, the NHRC relies on staff on deputation from other Government departments, who often lacks sensitivity and expertise in human rights issues. This is a major hinderance in the investigation of cases, especially those committed by agencies such as the police forces.
• Paucity of funds:
  • The NHRC enjoys full functional autonomy but not financial autonomy. It gets its financial allocation from the Consolidated Fund of India. The paucity of funds has led to limited expenditure on spreading human rights literacy and awareness and poor infrastructural support for investigative purposes.
• Delayed action on reports:
  • There has been an unjustifiable delay in the tabling of NHRC reports in the Parliament and state legislatures. Only those reports that have been tabled before the Parliament are made public. This limits accountability of the Executive and efficacy of the NHRC.
• Non signatory to key conventions:
  • India is yet to ratify and sign several key conventions that will strengthen the human rights regime. These include the Convention Against Torture (signed in 1997, not ratified), Convention on the Protection of Rights of All Migrant Workers (not signed) and Convention for the Protection of All Persons from Enforced Disappearance (signed in 2007, not ratified)

REMEDIES:

• Diversification in selection committee:
  • Political representatives should be limited in their engagement with NHRC so as to ensure independence. Also, judicial members and civil society members with proven track record in human rights should be included in the committee.
• Bing greater transparency:
  • The ‘expert members’ criteria should have clear definition and well-defined benchmarks so as to ensure its status as an autonomous agency rather than an extension of the bureaucracy. Also, details regarding the selection process should be given wide publicity.
• Develop human resource:
  • The NHRC should develop a dedicated cadre of officers who ae adept in human rights issues to carry out independent investigations. The government should supplement these efforts with funds, functionaries and infrastructure.
• Enhance powers:
  • There is a need for a greater role of NHRC in alleged human rights violations by the armed forces.
  • There should be mechanisms to ensure that the recommendations of the commission are adhered by the government. In this regard, granting contempt powers to the commission can be looked into.
• Ratification of major conventions and enactment of enabling laws will help strengthen NHRC s powers.

CONCLUSION:

• The definition of human rights changes with transformations in society and polity through time. Today, the challenges to human rights are numerous including those of refugees fleeing from persecution (E.g.: Rohingya), gender violence as well as environmental refugees.
• It is thus crucial that the NHRC function properly so as to secure the rights to life, liberty, equality and dignity of the individual guaranteed by the Constitution, so that each human can enjoy the opportunity to grow and realize their maximum potential.

PRACTICE QUESTION:

Q. What are the functions of the National Human Rights Commission? Examine the issues faced by the commission and suggest remedial measures?