Examine the objective and role of the National Human Rights Commission. (2016, 15 Marks)
The National Human Rights Commission (NHRC) is a statutory body created by the Protection of Human Rights Act, 1993 (PHRA) and constituted on 12 October 1993. In the same year the UN General Assembly adopted the Paris Principles (Resolution 48/134), the template for such national institutions. Its purpose is sound, and the Act assigns it a wide set of roles. In practice, however, it has performed those roles only partly.
The objective
The Act’s Statement of Objects and Reasons cited growing concern in the country and abroad about human rights and sought better protection machinery. Read with the Paris Principles, this implies three aims:
- Watchdog: scrutinise abuses by the state’s own agents.
- Adviser: counsel government on laws, policies and treaty obligations.
- Credible NHRI: be autonomous and plural, so its findings carry weight a departmental cell’s could not.
The objective was also defensive: facing UN criticism over Punjab and Kashmir, India could argue that complaints were handled at home.
The role under Section 12, examined
| Function | How it has worked |
|---|---|
| Inquiry, including suo motu (12(a)) | After Gujarat 2002 it reported a climate of fear and sought transfer of key trials. The Supreme Court later ordered the Best Bakery retrial outside the state. |
| Litigation and intervention (12(b), s.18) | It petitioned the Supreme Court for the Chakmas. In NHRC v. State of Arunachal Pradesh (1996) the Court held that Article 21 protects non-citizens too. |
| Custodial visits (12(c)) | It inspects jails, juvenile homes and shelter homes, the places where state power is least visible. |
| Review of safeguards (12(d)–(e)) | It opposed renewing TADA and enacting POTA. TADA lapsed in 1995 and POTA was repealed in 2004, though the Supreme Court had upheld both. |
| Treaties and research (12(f)–(g)) | It has pressed for ratification of the UN Convention against Torture, which India signed in 1997. |
| Human rights literacy and support for NGOs (12(h)–(i)) | It trains police and prison staff and funds research and awareness programmes. |
The advisory and norm-setting role has outperformed the enforcement role.
Limits that blunt the role
- Dependence. Its budget and staff flow through the Ministry of Home Affairs, the ministry that commands the central police forces.
- Recommendatory findings. Section 18(e) requires the government to send comments and an action-taken report within a month, and Section 20 requires reasons for non-acceptance in reports laid before Parliament. Both duties are honoured late or loosely, and annual reports reach Parliament years afterwards.
- Time bar. Section 36(2) excludes any matter more than a year old, which closes the door on victims who dare to speak only later.
- Borrowed investigators. Police officers on deputation investigate the police.
- Weak independence. A three-year renewable term and an executive-majority selection committee weaken it, a pattern that GANHRI flagged in 2025.
Conclusion
The NHRC’s objective of independent, plural oversight remains valid, and its role on paper matches the Paris Principles. In practice it has been effective in advice, documentation and litigation but weak in enforcement. Closing that gap requires financial autonomy, its own investigators and statutory consequences for ignoring its findings.