Civil Society and Human Rights Advocacy: Beyond Institutional Mechanisms

When a Dalit labourer in rural Rajasthan stood up at a public gathering in 1994 and questioned a local official about missing wages listed in government records – and actually got answers – it was not a courtroom. There was no judge, no lawyer in robes, and no formal order. Yet something profoundly legal happened that day. That gathering was a jan sunwai – a people’s public hearing – organised by the Mazdoor Kisan Shakti Sangathan (MKSS). It is one of the clearest examples of how civil society, working outside formal institutions, can be just as powerful – sometimes more powerful – in protecting human rights.

What do we mean by civil society in the human rights context? 🔗

Civil society refers to the space occupied by organisations and collectives that are independent of both the state and the market. In the human rights context, this includes NGOs, grassroots movements, trade unions, community groups, legal aid networks, and advocacy coalitions. Their role is not simply supplementary to formal mechanisms like the National Human Rights Commission (NHRC) or courts. They are often the first point of contact for victims, the primary investigators of violations, and the loudest voices demanding accountability. In India, given the scale of marginalisation – whether based on caste, gender, religion, or class – civil society’s role becomes indispensable.

Formal institutions like the NHRC have significant limitations. They can only act on complaints; they cannot proactively seek out violations in remote areas. Their jurisdiction is restricted, their enforcement powers are weak, and they are composed of officials whose independence can be questioned. Civil society fills these gaps with on-ground presence, community trust, and a willingness to take on politically sensitive cases that formal bodies often avoid.

Jan sunwai: the public hearing as a rights tool 🔗

The jan sunwai (literally, “people’s hearing”) is one of the most impactful innovations in Indian civil society activism. It functions as a structured public forum where community members can present testimonies, examine official records, and hold local authorities accountable – all in an open, transparent setting.

MKSS organised its first jan sunwai in December 1994 in Rajasthan. Villagers examined panchayat expenditure records, compared them with actual work done, and publicly called out discrepancies – fake muster rolls, overbilling, non-payment of wages. Hundreds of people participated, and local officials found it almost impossible to defend irregularities in front of their own communities. Government officials were invited to attend – and respond.

What made this method so powerful was not just exposure of corruption. It was the process itself. Jan sunwais gave ordinary people – especially those who had never interacted with any formal legal system – a legitimate, structured platform to assert their rights. Researchers studying these hearings as social performance have noted strong parallels with Public Interest Litigation (PIL) in terms of how they mobilise rights claims and engage with the state through legal language and documented evidence, even without any formal judicial proceedings.

The sustained jan sunwai campaigns of 1994-1995 directly contributed to Rajasthan passing a state-level Right to Information law in 1995 – the first of its kind in India – and MKSS’s continued advocacy was central to the passage of the Right to Information Act, 2005 at the national level. This is a concrete instance of civil society advocacy reshaping the legislative framework for human rights in India.

People’s tribunals: justice beyond the courtroom 🔗

While public hearings focus on local accountability, people’s tribunals address larger-scale violations – often those that the formal legal system has failed to investigate or prosecute. A people’s tribunal is an independently organised quasi-judicial body, typically presided over by retired judges, senior lawyers, and respected public figures, that examines evidence of human rights violations and delivers a findings report.

The Indian People’s Tribunal (IPT), co-developed by Senior Advocate and Human Rights Law Network (HRLN) founder Colin Gonsalves, is among the most prominent such bodies in India. It is headed by retired Supreme Court and High Court judges and investigates violations that have not received adequate state response. Fact-findings presented at IPT hearings have subsequently triggered Public Interest Litigations, fuelled social movements, and in some cases led to concrete policy changes.

People’s tribunals operate on the understanding that justice cannot always wait for the state. When victims of communal violence, custodial deaths, or forced displacement have no meaningful access to courts – whether due to cost, fear, or systemic bias – a tribunal provides a public record of their experiences. Even without enforcement power, a tribunal’s findings carry moral authority, attract media attention, and can be submitted as evidence in formal proceedings.

Key civil society organisations driving human rights advocacy in India 🔗

Human Rights Law Network (HRLN) 🔗

Founded in 1989, HRLN has grown into a nationwide network of over 200 lawyers, paralegals, and social activists operating across 26 states and union territories. It provides pro bono legal services to marginalised communities, conducts public interest litigation, runs legal awareness programmes, organises people’s tribunals, and deploys crisis-intervention teams. It also publishes “know your rights” materials and engages in policy advocacy – combining legal expertise with grassroots outreach in a way that no formal commission can replicate.

People’s Union for Civil Liberties (PUCL) 🔗

Formed in 1976 by Jayaprakash Narayan during the Emergency, the People’s Union for Civil Liberties (PUCL) has consistently documented illegal arrests, custodial deaths, censorship, and state overreach. It releases fact-finding reports, takes up legal cases, and advocates for constitutional protections for the most vulnerable. Its independence from political parties has historically given its reports credibility across ideological lines.

Commonwealth Human Rights Initiative (CHRI) 🔗

CHRI, registered as a society in India, specialises in access to information and access to justice – particularly police and prison reforms. It builds civil society coalitions, proposes policy interventions, and engages with both domestic authorities and international bodies like the UN Human Rights Council. Its work on transparency laws and police accountability directly advances the structural conditions necessary for human rights protection.

How civil society initiatives complement formal mechanisms 🔗

The NHRC, State Human Rights Commissions, and courts are crucial – but they are not always accessible. NGOs in India are credited with making government officials accountable through PIL petitions in cases involving corruption and constitutional violations. But beyond litigation, civil society contributes in ways that formal bodies structurally cannot.

First, civil society organisations reach communities that formal institutions do not. A victim of wage theft in a remote panchayat is unlikely to travel to a State Commission to file a complaint – but an MKSS jan sunwai might come to their village. Second, civil society organisations document violations over time, creating the evidentiary base that formal proceedings often require. Third, through awareness campaigns, legal literacy programmes, and community mobilisation, they ensure that people know their rights – a precondition for exercising them. U.S. State Department country reports have consistently noted that civil society in India plays a critical watchdog role, exposing violations that state institutions leave unaddressed.

Challenges facing civil society in India 🔗

Civil society in India operates under growing pressure. The Foreign Contribution (Regulation) Act (FCRA) requires NGOs receiving foreign funding to register with and gain approval from the Ministry of Home Affairs. According to Amnesty International, FCRA licences of at least seven NGOs were cancelled in 2024 alone, cutting off essential funds. Amnesty itself halted its India operations in 2020 after what it described as years of official threats and harassment. Human rights defenders face criminal defamation suits, sedition charges, and surveillance. Activists like Medha Patkar have been sentenced in politically motivated cases – though such sentences have faced legal challenge.

Freedom House and other monitoring organisations note that NGOs investigating human rights abuses in India face legal harassment, threats, and self-censorship. These constraints do not eliminate civil society’s contribution – but they substantially limit its capacity and reach. The shrinking of civic space is itself a human rights issue that civil society organisations are uniquely positioned to document and resist.

The larger significance: legitimacy, participation, and democratic accountability 🔗

What makes civil society initiatives like jan sunwais and people’s tribunals significant is not just their practical outputs – the RTI Act, the PIL petitions, the fact-finding reports. It is what they represent: a model of rights-protection built on democratic participation rather than institutional authority. MKSS’s model of jan sunwais reflects the principle that democracy must be built from the ground up, and that open public dialogue is itself a form of democratic legitimacy. When marginalised people stand up in a public hearing and question a corrupt official – and when that official has to answer – rights are being exercised and enforced in real time, without a court order.

This is the indispensable contribution of civil society. It holds up a mirror to the state. It translates abstract legal rights into lived experience. And it ensures that the human rights ecosystem does not remain the exclusive domain of institutions that the most vulnerable people cannot access.

What do you think? If formal institutions like the NHRC have limited enforcement powers and civil society organisations face increasing legal and financial restrictions, what does that mean for the protection of rights of the most marginalised communities in India? And should people’s tribunals – despite having no binding authority – be given formal recognition in India’s legal framework as a mechanism for documenting and addressing human rights violations?

References

1. https://www.mkssindia.org/
2. https://nhrc.nic.in/
3. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mazdoor_Kisan_Shakti_Sangathan
4. https://documents1.worldbank.org/curated/en/484901468050066053/pdf/514560WP0IN0MK10Box342028B01PUBLIC1.pdf
5. https://journals.openedition.org/samaj/4413
6. https://indiankanoon.org/doc/80616728/
7. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Colin_Gonsalves
8. https://inclo.net/members/hrln/
9. https://www.legalservicesindia.com/article/1275/Realization-of-Human-Rights-and-Role-of-NGO.html
10. https://www.state.gov/reports/2021-country-reports-on-human-rights-practices/india/
11. https://www.state.gov/reports/2023-country-reports-on-human-rights-practices/india/
12. https://www.amnesty.org/en/location/asia-and-the-pacific/south-asia/india/report-india/
13. https://www.congress.gov/crs-product/IF12198
14. https://mkssindia.org/pages/aboutus.html