Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 11 views

    20 - Giving More Tooth To Human Rights Commissions

    Uploaded by

    Ramreejhan Chaudhary
    This document discusses issues facing Human Rights Commissions in India and ways to strengthen them. It notes that while Human Rights Commissions were established to protect citizens, they lack autonomy due to political interference in appointments and investigations. Recommendations are also non-binding. To address this, the document suggests that recommendations be made binding through creative legal interpretation, treating Commissions as quasi-judicial bodies. It also calls for independent staff and promoting a human rights culture.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    20 - Giving More Tooth To Human Rights Commissions

    Uploaded by

    Ramreejhan Chaudhary
    11 views3 pages
    This document discusses issues facing Human Rights Commissions in India and ways to strengthen them. It notes that while Human Rights Commissions were established to protect citizens, they lack autonomy due to political interference in appointments and investigations. Recommendations are also non-binding. To address this, the document suggests that recommendations be made binding through creative legal interpretation, treating Commissions as quasi-judicial bodies. It also calls for independent staff and promoting a human rights culture.

    Original Title

    20_giving-more-tooth-to-human-rights-commissions

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    This document discusses issues facing Human Rights Commissions in India and ways to strengthen them. It notes that while Human Rights Commissions were established to protect citizens, they lack autonomy due to political interference in appointments and investigations. Recommendations are also non-binding. To address this, the document suggests that recommendations be made binding through creative legal interpretation, treating Commissions as quasi-judicial bodies. It also calls for independent staff and promoting a human rights culture.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as pdf or txt
    11 views3 pages

    20 - Giving More Tooth To Human Rights Commissions

    Uploaded by

    Ramreejhan Chaudhary
    This document discusses issues facing Human Rights Commissions in India and ways to strengthen them. It notes that while Human Rights Commissions were established to protect citizens, they lack autonomy due to political interference in appointments and investigations. Recommendations are also non-binding. To address this, the document suggests that recommendations be made binding through creative legal interpretation, treating Commissions as quasi-judicial bodies. It also calls for independent staff and promoting a human rights culture.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as pdf or txt
    You are on page 1of 3

    Giving More Tooth To Human Rights Commissions

    drishtiias.com/printpdf/giving-more-tooth-to-human-rights-commissions

    This article is based on “Giving Human Rights Commissions more teeth” which was
    published in The Hindu on 20/03/2020. It talks about issues pertaining to Human Rights
    commissions.

    In 1993, the UN General Assembly adopted the Paris Principles on Human Rights. This led
    to the constitution of national human rights institutions in almost every country. In this
    pursuit, the Indian Parliament enacted the Protection of Human Rights Act, 1993 (PHR
    Act).

    The Act created a National Human Rights Commission (NHRC), and also, Human Rights
    Commissions at the levels of the various States. The National and State Human Rights
    Commissions are examples of “fourth branch institutions” (other three branches— the
    legislature, the executive, and the judiciary). However, the functioning of the Human Rights
    Commissions has come under scrutiny and criticism, on account of lack of autonomy and
    political interference.

    Moreover, the Supreme Court called the NHRC as "Toothless Tiger". This is because the
    recommendations tendered by the NHRC and other state bodies are not binding on the
    respective governments.

    Fourth Branch Institutions

    Democracy is sustained through the distribution of power between three “branches”


    — the legislature, the executive, and the judiciary, with each branch acting as a check
    and a balance upon the others.
    However, the complexity of governance and administration in the modern world has
    necessitated the existence of a set of independent bodies, which are charged with
    performing vital functions of oversight.
    These independent bodies are termed as fourth branch institutions.

    1/3
    Some of these bodies are constitutional bodies, for example, the Election Commission
    and the Office of the Comptroller and Auditor General. While others have been
    established under law, for example, the Information Commission under the Right to
    Information Act, and Human Rights Commissions under the Protection of Human
    Rights Act.

    Issues Pertaining to NHRC


    Political Interference: The selection committee tasked with appointing the
    chairperson and the members to the Commission is dominated by the
    representatives of the State itself.
    It consists of the prime minister, home minister, Leaders of the Opposition in the
    Lok Sabha and Rajya Sabha, the Lok Sabha Speaker and the Deputy-Chairman of
    the Rajya Sabha. Thus, this creates a conflict of interest.
    Further, the criteria to assess candidates is also not specified
    Lack of Autonomy: Police officials investigating for the NHRC are sent on deputation
    by their forces.
    Their allegiance lies with their home cadre to which they return after their
    tenure at the Commission is over.
    This conflict of interest restricts the scope of their work, as they often are
    charged with investigating abuse of power by law enforcement personnel.
    Non-Binding Recommendations of NHRC: Section 18 of the Protection of Human
    Rights Act empowers the Human Rights Commission to “recommend” to the
    concerned government to take appropriate actions.
    Restricted Jurisdiction: NHRC is not empowered to act when human rights violations
    through private parties take place.
    Also, human rights commissions cannot investigate any human rights violation,
    if the complaint was made more than one year after the incident.
    No cases of Human Rights violation can be investigated by NHRC in case the
    violation is reported against armed forces.

    Significance of Human Rights Commission


    The PHR Act defines Human Rights as the rights relating to life, liberty, equality and
    dignity of the individual guaranteed by the Constitution or embodied in the
    International Covenants and enforceable by courts in India.
    In this context, the Human Rights Commissions aims to ensure the full realisation of
    the constitutional commitment to protecting human rights and act as protector for
    citizens against arbitrary state action.

    Way Forward
    2/3
    The first step in strengthening the Human rights framework in India, the
    recommendations of NHRC can be made binding. This can be done by:
    Creative Interpretation of Law: The term “recommend” in section 18 of PHR
    Act should not be viewed in literal terms.
    For example, the Supreme Court ( in order to maintain judicial independence)
    has held, that “consultation” with the Chief Justice for judicial appointments (as
    set out under the Article 124 of Indian Constitution) be read as “concurrence”
    of the Chief Justice (this is the basis for the collegium system).
    Equal Footing As Another Quasi Judicial Bodies: 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 human rights commissions to be treated as
    quasi-judicial, and like other tribunals, their recommendations should be
    binding upon the state (unless challenged).
    Independent Cadre: Human rights commissions should be provided with their
    independent cadre of staff with appropriate experience, so that they can function
    autonomously.
    Behavioral change: There is a need for promotion of a culture of human rights.
    Human rights education can be made part of school curriculum.
    The Supreme Court, in the past, in order to uphold the spirit of the constitution has
    creatively interpreted the powers of various fourth branch institutions in cases of
    ambiguity.
    For example, the Supreme Court laid down detailed guidelines to ensure the
    independence of the Central Bureau of Investigation; various judgments have
    endorsed and strengthened the powers of the Election Commission to
    compulsorily obtain relevant details of candidates, despite having no express
    power to do so.

    Drishti Mains Question

    Discuss the various issues faced by Human Rights Commissions in


    India.

    3/3

    You might also like