Human Rights Commission should be made powerful

25 years of National Human Rights Commission are being completed in 2018 Commission was formed on the basis of the 1993 Human Rights Protection Act. From the beginning of its formation the commission is surrounded by controversies. In the forthcoming winter session of Parliament, the government has planned to present an amendment proposal.

A look at formation

In 1993, the United Nations General Assembly adopted the principles of Paris on human rights. Thereafter, a human rights organization was formed in almost every country. In these five years, these institutions have to renew the recognition by the UN Human Rights Council. Like other areas, grading is also done in the field of human rights. If India gets A-grade, then it will get place in the policy-making process of the United Nations Human Rights Council and other international organizations.

In view of political interference in the Human Rights Commission of India, the International Council had reduced its grading in 2016. But considering the commitment of the Government to the rise of the Commission, it was granted A grade in 2017. The Amendment Act of 2018 is a reward for the commitment shown by the government. In fact, this Act expands the nature of the Commission, but there is no effort to bring about concrete changes in the Commission.

Deficiencies of commission

• The selection process of the members in the commission is erroneous. Its president and members elect the ruling party. Firstly, members of the selection committee should be brought from different areas.

The selection process of the members of the second commission is also very ambiguous. Often the government does not reveal its vacancies. There is no definite scale for the qualifications of the elected members. This is the reason that the elections to be made are controversial. The government should increase the transparency in the selection process.

• The judicial representation in the Commission has been a priority. The argument behind this is that since the judicial party has an important role in the commission, so it is appropriate. But in reality, only 10 of the commission's activities are linked to the same judicial sector.

In the favor of judicial representation, an argument is also given that it is trustworthy for the government. Despite this, pending pending demand of the Commission's additional funding, it is beyond understanding.

• Through the Amendment Act, the government wants to achieve the objectives of human rights, it can be achieved by adding dignitaries of the society and such educationists who have contributed substantially to the development of human rights. For this, the institutions and individuals working at the grassroots level should be reached.
• There is also a great need for improvement in the investigation of human rights issues. In these cases, the policeman who is sent on deputation, their allegiance remains attached to their original cadre. While working in the absence of integrity, these officers are often blamed by law enforcement officials. The situation is further worsened by the officers of the Intelligence Bureau involved in this kind of investigation. Therefore, the National Human Rights Commission has a strict requirement for its own officers, which can be conducted fairly.
• In some situations where the Central and State Governments do not take any action under section 17 of the Human Rights Protection Act, the National Human Rights Commission has the right to independent investigations. But the Commission has rarely used this power.

This is the reason that the Supreme Court gave the commission the title of 'Dentless Tiger' to the Commission. Now the entire commission to give power to the commissioner is on the government.

Based on the article of A.P.Geekendra Reddy published in The Indian Express October 11, 2018