Though the Human Rights Commissions have contributed immensely to the protection of human rights in India, yet they have failed to assert themselves against the mighty and powerful. Analysing their structural and practical limitations, suggest remedial measures.

The commission is the watchdog of human rights in the country. It works to protect the right 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.

Contribution to Protection of Human Rights:

1. Commission took cognizance of many individual cases of displacement on account of mega projects, disasters and conflicts.
2. The Commission took Suo motu cognizance of the reports about suicide by farmers.
3. The NHRC took cognizance of the issue of inadequate access to health care in Adivasi communities of south Orissa.
4. As the Convention against torture has not yet been ratified by India, the Commission has been advocating early ratification of the Convention.
5. The Commission is also concerned about allegations of impunity of State and non-State players for torture, deaths in custody, abductions and unlawful killings.
6. The NHRC role has been significant in combating encounter killings and custodial deaths. The commissions’ guidelines in 1997 mandates every custodial death and encounter killing be reported to it within 24 hours.

National Human Rights Commission (NHRC) chairman Justice H L Dattu recently said the rights watchdog needed some teeth to enforce its orders on remedial measures in cases relating to violations. He said NHRC is a toothless tiger.

Structural Weakness:

• NHRC can only make recommendations, without the power to enforce decisions.

• Government often outright rejects recommendations of NHRC or there is partial compliance to these recommendations.

• In the process of selection of the members of the Commission, the Chairman is not consulted. 

• National Human Rights Commission powers related to violations of human rights by the armed forces have been largely restricted.

Functional weakness:

• It has been termed as India’s teasing illusion by Soli Sorabjee (former Attorney-General of India) due to its incapacity to render any practical relief to the aggrieved party.

• Non-filling of vacancies: Most human rights commissions are functioning with less than the prescribed Members.

• Non-availability of funds: large chunks of the budget of commissions go in office expenses, leaving small amounts for other crucial areas such as research and rights awareness programmes.

• Too many complaints: NHRC is deluged with too many complaints. Hence, in recent days, NHRC is finding it difficult to address the increasing number of complaints.

• Bureaucratic style of functioning: As human rights commissions primarily draw their staff from government departments either on deputation or reemployment after retirement, the internal atmosphere is usually just like any other government office.

Suggestions.

• The effectiveness of commissions will be greatly enhanced if their decisions are immediately made enforceable by the government.

• A culture of human rights ought to be promoted through education. The strategy for inculcating human rights culture among the people needs to be based on a number of factors: social, legal, political, judicial, and institutional.

• A M Ahmadi Committee: The limitation of 1 year on the NHRC for admissibility of human right abuse casess hould be removed.