Copyright infringement not intended

 

Context - The National Human Rights Commission has asked about the action taken on the report in connection with the “lynching” of two tribal men by a group of people over suspicion of cow slaughter.

 

National Human Rights Commission

• The National Human Rights Commission is a non-constitutional judicial body.
• It is a statutory body established in 1993 under a legislation enacted by the Parliament, namely, the Protection of Human Rights Act, 1993. It was amended in 2006.
• The commission work as the watchdog of human rights in the country.

 

Composition of the Commission

• The commission is a multi-member body consisting of a chairman and four members.
• The chairman should be retired chief justice of India, and members should be serving or retired judges of the Supreme Court, a serving or retired chief justice of a high court and two persons having knowledge or practical experience with respect to human rights.
  • In addition to these full-time members, the commission also has four ex-officio members—the chairmen of the National Commission for Minorities, the National Commission for SCs, the National Commission for STs and the National Commission for Women.
• The chairman and members are appointed by the president on the recommendations of a six-member committee consisting of the prime minister as its head, the Speaker of the Lok Sabha, the Deputy Chairman of the Rajya Sabha, leaders of the Opposition in both the Houses of Parliament and the Central home minister.
• Further, a sitting judge of the Supreme Court or sitting chief justice of a high court can be appointed only after consultation with the chief justice of India.
• The chairman and members hold office for a term of five years or until they attain the age of 70 years, whichever is earlier.
• The salaries, allowances and other conditions of service of the chairman or a member are determined by the Central government. But, they cannot be varied to his disadvantage after his appointment.
• After their tenure, the chairman and members are not eligible for further employment under the Central or state government.
• President can also remove the chairman or any member on the ground of proven misbehavior or incapacity.
  • However, in these cases, the president has to refer the matter to the Supreme Court for an inquiry.
  • If the Supreme Court, after the inquiry, upholds the cause of removal and advises so, then the president can remove the chairman or a member.

 

Functions of the Commission

• Inquire into any violation of human rights or negligence in the prevention of such violation by a public servant, either suo motu or on a petition presented to it or on an order of a court.
• Intervene in any proceeding involving an allegation of violation of human rights pending before a court.
• Visit jails and detention places to study the living conditions of inmates and make recommendations thereon.
• Review the constitutional and other legal safeguards for the protection of human rights and recommend measures for their effective implementation.
• Review the factors including acts of terrorism that inhibit the enjoyment of human rights and recommend remedial measures.
• Study treaties and other international instruments on human rights and make recommendations for their effective implementation.
• Undertake and promote research in the field of human rights.
• Spread human rights literacy among the people and promote awareness of the safeguards available for the protection of these rights.
• Encourage the efforts of non-governmental organizations (NGOs) working in the field of human rights.
• Undertake such other functions as it may consider necessary for the promotion of human rights.
• The functions of the commission are mainly recommendatory in nature.
• No power to punish the violators of human rights, or to award any relief including monetary relief to the victim.
• Recommendations are not binding on the concerned government or authority.
• The commission has a limited role, powers and jurisdiction with respect to the violation of human rights by the members of the armed forces.
• The Central government should inform the Commission of the action taken on the recommendations within three months.
• The commission submits its annual or special reports to the Central government and to the state government concerned.
• These reports are laid before the respective legislatures, along with a memorandum of action taken on the recommendations of the commission and the reasons for non-acceptance of any of such recommendations.

 

Human Rights (Amendment) Act, 2006   

• Reducing the number of members of State Human Rights Commissions (SHRCs) from five to three.
• Changing the eligibility condition for the appointment of members of SHRCs.
• Strengthening the investigative machinery available with Human Rights Commissions.
• Empowering the Commissions to recommend the award of compensation, etc. even during the course of enquiry.
• Empowering the NHRC to undertake visits to jails even without intimation to the state governments.
• Strengthening the procedure for recording evidence of witnesses.
• Clarifying that the Chairpersons of NHRC and SHRCs are distinct from the Members of the respective Commission.
• Enabling the NHRC to transfer complaints received by it to the concerned SHRC.
• Enabling the Chairperson and members of the NHRC to address their resignations in writing to the President and the Chairperson and members of the SHRCs to the Governor of the state concerned.
• Clarifying that the absence of any member in the Selection Committee for selection of the Chairperson and member of the NHRC or the SHRCs will not vitiate the decisions taken by such Committees.
• Providing that the Chairperson of the National Commission for the Scheduled Castes and the Chairperson of the National Commission for the Scheduled Tribes shall be deemed to be members of the NHRC.

 

What is Lynching?

• Any act or series of acts of violence or aiding, encouraging such act/acts by a mob on the grounds of religion, race, caste, sex, place of birth, language, dietary practices, sexual orientation, political affiliation, ethnicity or any other related grounds.

 

Concern

• It is against the rule of law, against human rights.
• It fuels Communalism and Casteism, with no database to analyze trends.
• It reflects the loss of faith of people in the judicial/democratic system.
• Misinformation and Propaganda spread through platforms like Facebook, Whatsapp.
• Covered by International Media, giving India a bad image and can hurt tourism and also a foreign investment.

 

Steps need to be taken

• Focus needed on social/attitudinal change.
• Strengthening administration and governance to ensure public confidence in state institutions.
• Holding Social media platforms accountable.
• Designate a senior Police officer in each district for taking measures to prevent incidents of mob violence and lynching.
• Identify districts, sub-divisions and villages where instances of lynching and mob violence have been reported in the recent past.
• Broadcast on radio, television and other media platforms about the serious consequences of mob lynching and mob violence.
• State Governments shall prepare a lynching/mob violence victim compensation scheme.
• Need for an anti-lynching law, at present there is no law that Criminalizes mob killings.

 

To end mob lynching, Supreme Court gives an 11-point prescription:

• The State governments shall designate a senior police officer in each district for taking measures to prevent incidents of mob violence and lynching.
• The state governments shall immediately identify districts, sub-divisions and villages where instances of lynching and mob violence have been reported in the recent past.
• The nodal officers shall bring to the notice of the DGP any inter-district coordination issues for devising a strategy to tackle lynching and mob violence related issues.
• It shall be the duty of every police officer to cause a mob to disperse, which, in his opinion, has a tendency to cause violence in the disguise of vigilantism or otherwise.
• Central and the state governments should broadcast on radio and television and other media platforms including the official websites that lynching and mob violence shall invite serious consequences.
• Curb and stop the dissemination of irresponsible and explosive messages, videos and other material on various social media platforms. Register FIR under relevant provisions of law against persons who disseminate such messages.
• Ensure that there is no further harassment of the family members of the victims.
• State governments shall prepare a lynching/mob violence victim compensation scheme.
• Cases of lynching and mob violence shall be specifically tried by designated court/fast track courts earmarked for that purpose in each district. The trial shall preferably be concluded within 6 months.
• To set a stern example in cases of mob violence and lynching, the trial court must ordinarily award the maximum sentence upon conviction of the accused person.
• If it is found that a police officer or an officer of the district administration has failed to fulfill his duty, it will be considered as an act of deliberate negligence.

 

Way forward

• The National Crime Records Bureau (NCRB) does not maintain specific data with respect to lynching incidents in the country.
• ‘Police’ and ‘Public Order’ are State subjects under the Seventh Schedule to the Constitution of India.
• The responsibility to maintain law and order and protect life and property, therefore, rests with the respective State Governments. The State Governments are competent to deal with such offenses under the extant provisions of laws.
• Manipur became the first to pass a law against lynching. Manipur’s Anti-Lynching law laid down the duty and responsibility of the State Government to make arrangements for the protection of victims and witnesses against any kind of intimidation, coercion, inducement, violence etc.
  • It prescribes the duty of the State officials to prevent a hostile environment against people of the community, who has been lynched.
• Intolerant citizens violating the freedoms of fellow citizens have no right to be ‘Indians’ as it goes against the Core values and ethos of India, Core Indian values and ethos have no place for intolerance due to which all the major religions of the world are flourishing in India.

 

https://epaper.thehindu.com/Home/ShareArticle?OrgId=GFE9PMM5F.1&imageview=0