State Human Rights Commission (SHRC)

This comprehensive guide explores the structural framework of the State Human Rights Commission, an essential body established under the Protection of Human Rights Act, 1993. Understanding the powers, composition, and removal process is vital for students preparing for competitive examinations and civil services, as it highlights the statutory mechanisms protecting civil liberties at the state level.

State Human Rights Commission: Statutory Framework and Role (1993-Present)

• The genesis of localized human rights protection began with a landmark legislative move to decentralize the oversight of civil liberties in India.

  The journey of human rights advocacy in India reached a pivotal milestone when the Protection of Human Rights Act, 1993 was enacted. This legislation did not merely stop at the national level; it laid the foundation for State Human Rights Commissions. To date, 25 states have embraced this mandate, officially establishing these bodies through Gazette notifications to ensure that the cry for justice is heard closer to home.

  • (i) The Act provides a dual-tier protection system involving both the National Human Rights Commission and its state counterparts.
  • (ii) The establishment is formalized via executive action in the form of official government notifications.
  • (iii) 25 states have already functionalized these commissions to address local grievances.

• Jurisdictional Boundaries and Constitutional Authority

  Defining the legal playground where the Commission operates is essential to avoid overlapping authorities and ensure administrative clarity.

  • Functional Scope within the Seventh Schedule

    The State Human Rights Commission is empowered to delve into human rights violations that fall specifically under the legislative domain of the state. This includes matters categorized within the State List and the Concurrent List as outlined in the Seventh Schedule of the Constitution.

    • (i) Authority is restricted to subjects where the state has the power to legislate.
    • (ii) Concurrent List matters allow for state-level intervention unless preempted by central action.

    • The Rule of Non-Interference

      • (i) If a case is already under the active review of the National Human Rights Commission, the State Commission must step back.
      • (ii) Any other statutory commission already seized of a matter prevents the State Commission from pursuing the same case further.

• The Architecture of Leadership: Composition and Appointment

  A multi-member body designed to bring legal expertise and practical experience to the forefront of human rights advocacy.

  • Membership Qualifications and Judicial Expertise

    The Commission is structured as a multi-member body, ensuring a balanced perspective between the judiciary and social expertise. It is led by a Chairperson who must have held the prestigious office of Chief Justice of a High Court.

    • (i) The Chairperson: Specifically a retired Chief Justice of a High Court.
    • (ii) The Judicial Member: A serving or retired High Court judge or a District Judge with a minimum of 7 years’ experience.
    • (iii) The Expert Member: An individual possessing proven knowledge or practical experience in matters relating to human rights.

  • The Selection Process and the Governor’s Role

    While the Governor formally signs the appointment letters, the true power of selection lies with a high-powered Recommendation Committee, ensuring political transparency and multi-party representation.

    • (a) The Chief Minister serves as the Head of the Committee.
    • (b) The Speaker of the Legislative Assembly and the State Home Minister play crucial roles.
    • (c) The Leader of the Opposition in the Legislative Assembly ensures a check on executive power.
    • (d) In bicameral states, the Chairman of the Council and the Leader of Opposition in the Council are also included.
    • (e) Judicial Consultation: Any sitting judge can only be appointed after the Chief Justice of the concerned High Court is consulted.

• Tenure, Security of Office, and Removal Protocols

  To remain independent and impartial, the members are granted a fixed term and a rigorous protection against arbitrary removal.

  • Service Tenure and Post-Retirement Restrictions

    Members are appointed for a period of 5 years or until the age of 70 years. To prevent any future influence or "carrot-dangling," they are strictly ineligible for any further employment under the Central or State Government once their term ends.

    • (i) Tenure limit: 5 years or 70 years of age (whichever is earlier).
    • (ii) Employment ban: Ensures no conflict of interest post-tenure.

  • The President’s Sole Authority for Removal

    In a unique constitutional twist, though the Governor appoints them, only the President of India has the power to remove them. This aligns the SHRC’s security with that of the NHRC.

    • Specified Grounds for Removal

      • (i) Being adjudged insolvent.
      • (ii) Engaging in paid employment outside the office.
      • (iii) Physical or mental infirmity or being declared of unsound mind.
      • (iv) Conviction and imprisonment for a criminal offense.

    • Proved Misbehaviour or Incapacity

      • (i) Removal on these grounds requires a mandatory inquiry by the Supreme Court.
      • (ii) The President acts only upon the recommendation of the Supreme Court.

• Service Conditions and Financial Autonomy

  Financial independence is the backbone of functional autonomy for any statutory commission.

  • Salaries, Allowances, and Non-Variation Clauses

    The State Government is responsible for determining the salaries and allowances. However, to maintain impartiality, the law ensures these conditions cannot be altered to their disadvantage once they have taken office.

    • (i) Salaries and allowances are fixed by the State Government.
    • (ii) Protection against disadvantageous changes ensures the members can work without fear of financial retaliation.

• Summary of the State Human Rights Commission Framework

  The State Human Rights Commission serves as a vital statutory guardian of human rights at the grassroots level. By understanding the Protection of Human Rights Act, 1993 and the stringent appointment and removal processes, students can appreciate how independence, impartiality, and autonomy are baked into the Indian democratic structure. This topic is a cornerstone for exam preparation, emphasizing the balance between state and central oversight.