Introduction
The National Human Rights Commission (NHRC) of India stands as a pivotal institution entrusted with the protection and promotion of human rights nationwide. Governed by a specific legislative framework, its efficacy and international standing are subjects of continuous evaluation. Recent events in 2024 have particularly underscored the significance of its operational autonomy and adherence to global human rights standards.
Context and Recent Updates (2024–25)
In March 2024, the Sub-Committee on Accreditation (SCA) of the Global Alliance of National Human Rights Institutions (GANHRI) deferred the decision on reaccrediting India’s NHRC. This deferral was repeated in September 2024, marking the second consecutive postponement.
India’s NHRC has maintained the highest ‘A’ status accreditation by GANHRI since 1999, signifying full compliance with the Paris Principles. However, the current deferral raises concerns about its adherence to these standards and puts its ‘A’ status at risk. A downgrade to ‘B’ status would impact its international credibility.
According to reports, the reasons for deferral include the NHRC’s perceived lack of independence, limited pluralism in composition, and insufficient responsiveness to human rights concerns. These include the shrinking civic space and the targeting of journalists and critics. Additional issues relate to a lack of transparency in appointments and inadequate staff diversity.
In June 2024, Justice (Retd.) V. Ramasubramanian, a former Supreme Court judge, was appointed as the new Chairperson of the NHRC, succeeding Justice (Retd.) Arun Kumar Mishra.
Statutory Status Under PHRA 1993
The NHRC is a statutory body, not a constitutional one. It was established on October 12, 1993, under the Protection of Human Rights Act (PHRA), 1993.
The PHRA defines human rights broadly as rights relating to life, liberty, equality, and dignity, as guaranteed by the Constitution or embodied in international covenants enforceable by Indian courts. The Act has seen notable amendments, including those in 2006 and 2019.
Composition of the NHRC
The 2019 Amendment significantly altered the composition of the NHRC to reflect evolving concerns:
Chairperson: A former Chief Justice or Judge of the Supreme Court (expanded from only CJIs).
Full-time Members:
One former or sitting Supreme Court Judge.
One former or sitting Chief Justice of a High Court.
Three experts in human rights (up from two), with at least one woman.
Ex-officio Members: Chairpersons of seven national commissions:
National Commission for Minorities (NCM)
National Commission for Scheduled Castes (NCSC)
National Commission for Scheduled Tribes (NCST)
National Commission for Women (NCW)
National Commission for Protection of Child Rights (NCPCR)
Chief Commissioner for Persons with Disabilities (CCoPD)
National Commission for Backward Classes (NCBC)
Appointment Process: The President appoints the Chairperson and members on the recommendation of a six-member selection committee headed by the Prime Minister.
Tenure: The term is three years or until the age of 70, whichever comes first. The 2019 amendment reduced this from five years. Re-appointment is permitted.
Powers and Functions
The NHRC has powers similar to those of a civil court to ensure accountability:
Inquiry Authority: It can initiate inquiries suo motu or based on complaints of human rights violations or negligence by public servants.
Civil Court Powers: It can summon witnesses, demand documents, and take evidence.
Investigation Capability: The Commission can use its own staff or request assistance from government agencies.
Visits and Reviews: It can inspect detention centers and recommend improvements.
Promotion of Rights: It conducts research, promotes human rights education, and raises awareness.
Recommendations: It can suggest actions such as prosecution, compensation, or preventive steps.
Limitations of the NHRC
Despite its importance, the NHRC faces several structural and operational limitations:
Advisory Role: Its recommendations are not legally binding, though responses are mandated.
Limited Jurisdiction over Armed Forces: It cannot directly investigate armed forces; it can only request reports and issue recommendations.
Time Bar: Complaints are inadmissible if filed more than a year after the violation.
Resource Dependence: It relies on government funding, potentially affecting autonomy.
Lack of Enforcement Powers: The NHRC cannot enforce its directives or penalize non-compliance.
Staffing Issues: Investigative staff often include deputed police officers, raising concerns about impartiality.
International Relevance and GANHRI Accreditation
The NHRC was established in line with the Paris Principles, which emphasize independence, pluralism, and a broad mandate.
India’s NHRC is a member of GANHRI, headquartered in Geneva, which accredits NHRIs globally. Accreditation (‘A’, ‘B’, or ‘C’) reflects compliance and determines participation in UN mechanisms.
While India has maintained ‘A’ status since 1999, the dual deferrals in 2024 highlight serious concerns about independence and effectiveness. A downgrade would reduce India’s influence in international human rights forums.
Key Facts for Prelims (MCQs)
NHRC is a statutory body, created under the Protection of Human Rights Act, 1993.
Established on: October 12, 1993.
2019 amendment: Expanded eligibility and changed tenure structure.
Chairperson: Now can be a former Supreme Court Judge (not just CJIs).
Tenure: 3 years or up to age 70.
Three members must have human rights expertise; one must be a woman.
Seven ex-officio members from national commissions.
Appointment by: President, on the recommendation of a high-level committee led by the Prime Minister.
Civil court powers during inquiries.
Recommendations are non-binding.
One-year limit for complaints.
Armed forces oversight is limited.
Aligns with the Paris Principles.
Accredited by GANHRI.
Reaccreditation was deferred in March and September 2024.
Leave a Reply