Sunday, July 10 2005 16:45 Hrs (IST) - World Time -

New Delhi: Against the background of increasing cases of clerics and Panchayats allegedly indulging in human rights violations, the National Human Rights Commission (NHRC) feels it has been hampered by laws from dealing with such cases.

The major stumbling block in the NHRC Act is Section 36 which provides that NHRC, "Shall not inquire into any matter which is pending before a State Commission or any other Commission duly constituted under any law...", sources in the apex human rights body said.

In the recent case of Imrana, who accused her father-in-law of raping her, it was the National Commission for Women (NCW) which swung into action immediately and that barred the NHRC from intervening in the case, a classic example of gross human rights violation.

The NHRC, headed by a retired Chief Justice of India, feels it was more competent to deal with the human rights violation aspect.

The Amendment to Section 36 proposed by the NHRC had suggested that the apex human rights body should be allowed to look into such incidents irrespective of whether or not other statutory had Commission taken cognizance of it.

Under the proposal, NHRC may not exercise jurisdiction only over such incidents when the Government appoints a Commission under the Commission of Inquiry Act.

The NHRC, in proposing the amendments, felt that it should have the overreaching ability to oversee the issues of human rights violations and their remedies in keeping with its pre-eminent status, the sources said.

It also suggested changes in Section 36(2) of the NHRC Act which provided that, "The Commission or the State Commission shall not inquire into any matter after the expiry of one year from the date on which the act constituting violation of human rights is alleged to have been committed."

The NHRC, in its suggestion to the Government, said a provision needs to be added to Section 36(2), which would allow the apex human rights body to "inquire into any matter after the expiry of the said one year period, if it is satisfied, for reasons to be recorded, that these are good and sufficient reasons for taking cognisance."

"The provision is deemed necessary to do justice in deserving cases where for any reason the one year limiting stipulation could not be adhered to," the sources said.

The NHRC also suggested deletion of Section 37 empowering the Government to constitute one or more special investigation teams for the purpose of investigation and prosecution of offences arising out of violations of human rights.

The apex human rights body termed this section as "anomalous" as the primary responsibility to enquire into human rights violation were that of the NHRC and State Human Rights Commissions. "This is also against the spirit of autonomy of the NHRC and SHRCs," the sources said.