Does India’s Human Rights Panel Function Independently?

Global Alliance of National Human Rights Institutions Is Not Sure

Newsreel Asia Insight #221
May 14, 2024

The Global Alliance of National Human Rights Institutions (GANHRI), a United Nations-affiliated entity based in Geneva, has for the second consecutive year postponed the accreditation of India’s National Human Rights Commission (NHRC), signalling concerns over its independence. This decision jeopardises India’s voting rights at the Human Rights Council and some UNGA bodies.

The GANHRI’s move was deliberated by the Sub Committee on Accreditation (SCA) with delegates from New Zealand, South Africa, Honduras and Greece on May 1, as reported by The Hindu. The delay in reaccrediting the NHRC, which marks the second year of such an occurrence following a previous suspension in 2016, reflects ongoing concerns regarding the NHRC’s operational independence and its internal governance.

The newspaper reported that the decision to defer accreditation was due to the challenges of implementing the demands from the international peer review report during India’s ongoing election process.

According to a prior report by the SCA, notable deficiencies include the non-transparent process of appointing NHRC members, the controversial assignment of police officers to lead human rights inquiries and a significant underrepresentation of women and minorities within the NHRC’s ranks.

Numerous issues related to alleged human rights violations—including arrests of civil society and rights activists under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA), the crackdown on the ongoing farmers’ protests in north India, violence in Manipur, displacement of tribal people due to commercial projects, and violent attacks on minorities—have been raised, but not by the NHRC. It is primarily civil society that has voiced these concerns.

Established under the Protection of Human Rights Act of 1993, the NHRC has enjoyed “A” status accreditation since the inception of the NHRI accreditation process in 1999, successfully renewing this status in subsequent evaluations in 2006, 2011, and after a temporary deferment in 2017. However, this is the first instance of consecutive annual deferments—a significant deviation from the NHRC’s historical record.

Writing for The Wire in March, M.G. Devasahayam, former Army and IAS Officer, noted that Justice Arun Mishra’s appointment as the chairman of the NHRC in June 2021, marked by a modification of the rules, had been widely criticised as a flagrant violation of fundamental human rights principles. Various activists and human rights organisations described it as a “deliberate blow to the constitution.”

During his tenure as a Supreme Court judge, Justice Mishra was noted for his stringent rulings in matters of personal liberty, often favouring state actions over individual rights, and demonstrated a similar bias in land acquisition cases, siding with government interests, Devasahayam pointed out.

Under his leadership, the NHRC has seemingly prioritised state hegemony and national security over individual liberties, casting a troubling light on the NHRC’s role and effectiveness as a guardian of human rights, the author said, calling the NHRC “a wolf in wolf’s clothing.”

The SCA’s March 2023 report explicitly criticised the involvement of police in the NHRC’s investigations as a conflict of interest and pointed out the insufficient measures taken to safeguard marginalised communities.

Currently, the NHRC’s top body includes only one woman, Vijaya Bharathi Sayani, and its structure is supplemented by ex-officio members like the Chairperson of the National Commission for Minorities, Iqbal Singh Lalpura. However, the representation of India’s largest minority religions remains notably absent, which has drawn criticism for a lack of pluralism.