The Impactful Role of Human Rights Commissions in India

Human rights violations continue to challenge democracies worldwide, and India is no exception. From custodial deaths to discrimination against marginalized communities, the protection of fundamental freedoms requires constant vigilance. This is where India’s institutional safeguards step in. Established in 1993 under the Protection of Human Rights Act, the National Human Rights Commission and its state-level counterparts have emerged as critical watchdogs in safeguarding the rights guaranteed by the Constitution and international covenants.

Understanding the mandate of human rights commissions 🔗

The National Human Rights Commission was created to protect rights relating to life, liberty, equality, and dignity of individuals as guaranteed by the Constitution and embodied in international covenants. The Commission’s establishment aligned India with the Paris Principles adopted by the United Nations in 1991, which provide guidelines for effective national human rights institutions worldwide.

State Human Rights Commissions operate at the state level with similar objectives. Currently, 25 states have constituted their SHRCs to address violations within their jurisdictions. These commissions handle matters related to subjects in the State List and Concurrent List of the Seventh Schedule of the Constitution.

Core functions that define their role 🔗

Human rights commissions in India perform multiple critical functions that extend far beyond simple complaint handling. Their work encompasses investigation, policy advocacy, and public education.

Investigation and inquiry powers 🔗

The NHRC can investigate complaints of human rights violations either suo motu or based on petitions from victims or their representatives. This investigative authority applies to cases involving public servants and government agencies. The commissions possess powers equivalent to civil courts, including the ability to summon witnesses, requisition documents, and visit detention facilities.

State commissions exercise similar powers within their territorial jurisdictions. However, both NHRC and SHRCs face a significant limitation: they can only investigate matters within one year of occurrence, which sometimes prevents justice for delayed complaints.

Policy review and recommendations 🔗

Beyond individual cases, these commissions examine constitutional provisions, laws, and government policies to ensure compliance with human rights standards. The NHRC studies international treaties and instruments on human rights and makes recommendations for their effective implementation to the government.

This function allows the commissions to identify systemic issues and advocate for legislative reforms that strengthen human rights protection across sectors.

Awareness and education initiatives 🔗

Spreading human rights literacy forms a crucial part of the commissions’ mandate. The NHRC is responsible for spreading human rights awareness among the masses through publications, media, seminars, and other means. These educational efforts target diverse audiences including judicial officers, police personnel, government officials, and civil society organizations.

Landmark interventions and achievements 🔗

Over three decades, human rights commissions have made tangible contributions to justice and accountability in India.

Addressing custodial violence 🔗

Custodial deaths and torture represent grave violations of human dignity. The NHRC’s guidelines in 1997 mandate that every custodial death and encounter killing be reported within 24 hours. This requirement has increased transparency and accountability in law enforcement.

The NHRC has significantly contributed to bringing national attention to underreported cases of custodial torture and death, recommending monetary compensation to victims’ families, and issuing guidelines for arrest procedures and medical examination of detainees.

Compensation and relief to victims 🔗

Financial compensation cannot undo violations, but it provides acknowledgment of suffering and some measure of justice. The NHRC has recommended over 263 crore rupees as monetary relief to victims across nearly 9,000 cases since its inception. These recommendations, while not legally binding, have often been implemented by governments.

Campaign against discrimination 🔗

The commissions have actively intervened in cases involving discrimination and violations against vulnerable groups. Famous interventions include campaigns against discrimination of HIV patients and advocacy for the rights of women, children, Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes, and other marginalized communities.

State commissions complement these efforts by addressing local issues. Their proximity to affected communities often enables quicker response and more contextual understanding of regional human rights challenges.

Prison and institutional reforms 🔗

The NHRC has flagged overcrowded and degrading prison conditions and issued comprehensive guidelines on various aspects of detention. Regular inspections of prisons, detention centers, juvenile homes, and protection homes have led to improvements in living conditions and treatment of inmates.

Navigating limitations and challenges 🔗

Despite their achievements, human rights commissions face structural constraints that affect their effectiveness.

Recommendatory nature of functions 🔗

The most significant limitation is that commissions can only make recommendations without the power to enforce them. Governments may delay or ignore these recommendations, reducing the commissions’ impact on actual outcomes. The Protection of Human Rights Act does not provide mechanisms to compel compliance.

Resource constraints 🔗

Limited funding and staff hinder the NHRC’s ability to manage cases and raise public awareness. Many State Human Rights Commissions operate with even more severe resource limitations, affecting their investigative capacity and outreach effectiveness.

Jurisdictional restrictions 🔗

The NHRC has limited jurisdiction over cases involving armed forces, which restricts its ability to investigate violations in conflict-prone areas. This gap in oversight has been a subject of ongoing debate regarding accountability and the scope of human rights protection.

Independence concerns 🔗

The NHRC’s accreditation with the Global Alliance of National Human Rights Institutions was deferred in 2024 due to concerns about transparency in appointments, inclusion of police officers in investigations, and inadequate gender and minority representation. These issues raise questions about institutional autonomy and credibility.

The path forward for stronger protection 🔗

Enhancing the effectiveness of human rights commissions requires both institutional reforms and broader systemic changes.

Granting enforcement powers would significantly improve compliance with recommendations. Better coordination between NHRC and State Human Rights Commissions can enhance their outreach and effectiveness in protecting human rights across different levels of governance.

Increasing budgetary allocations and appointing additional qualified personnel would address capacity constraints. Technology adoption through online complaint systems, digital case tracking, and virtual hearings can improve accessibility and efficiency.

Strengthening transparency in the appointment process and ensuring adequate representation of diverse communities would enhance institutional credibility. Expanding the mandate to cover emerging areas like digital rights, environmental justice, and climate-related human rights concerns would keep the commissions relevant to contemporary challenges.

Recognizing the indispensable role 🔗

The National Human Rights Commission and State Human Rights Commissions have undeniably contributed to India’s human rights landscape. Through systematic investigations, policy recommendations, and sustained awareness campaigns, they have addressed critical issues from custodial violence to discrimination against marginalized groups.

Their work has brought greater accountability to government actions, provided relief to thousands of victims, and fostered a culture of human rights consciousness across society. While structural limitations persist, these institutions represent India’s commitment to protecting fundamental freedoms and human dignity.

The commissions’ continued evolution, supported by adequate resources, genuine independence, and enforceable powers, will determine their future effectiveness. As India confronts emerging human rights challenges, these watchdog institutions remain essential pillars in the nation’s democratic framework.

What do you think? How can human rights commissions balance their advisory role with the need for enforceable outcomes to ensure justice reaches victims promptly? Should citizens engage more actively with these institutions to strengthen accountability mechanisms?

References

1. https://nhrc.nic.in/about-the-organisation
2. https://nhrc.nic.in/vision-&-mission
3. https://www.nextias.com/blog/state-human-rights-commission-shrc/
4. https://byjus.com/free-ias-prep/national-human-rights-commission/
5. https://vajiramandravi.com/current-affairs/state-human-rights-commission/
6. https://vajiramandravi.com/upsc-exam/national-human-rights-commission-nhrc/
7. https://theprint.in/india/governance/nhrc-turns-25-and-thats-pretty-much-all-it-has-achieved/132716/
8. https://www.lawjournals.net/assets/archives/2025/vol7issue2/7059.pdf
9. https://vajiramandravi.com/current-affairs/protection-of-human-rights-act-1993/
10. https://forumias.com/blog/answered-what-are-human-rights-how-far-do-you-think-the-nhrc-has-been-able-to-fulfill-its-mandate-in-preserving-these-rights/
11. https://spmiasacademy.com/currentaffairs/national-human-rights-commission-nhrc/
12. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Human_Rights_Commission_of_India
13. https://uppcsmagazine.com/role-of-the-national-human-rights-commission-nhrc-in-india/