Pairvi in association with social work department Lucknow University organized a one day state consultation on strengthening human rights commission at social work department Lucknow University on 23rd June 2007. More than 60 academicians, advocates, human rights defenders, representatives of civil society organizations and students participated in the consultation.

Justice Vishnu Sahai (retd. Chief Justice, Lucknow Bench), Justice Khem Karan (retd. Justice and Ex-chairperson, UP law Commission), Mr. SVM Tripathi (member, UP Human Rights Commission, Mr. K Vikram Rao, noted journalist, Mr. Lal Bahadur Singh, advocate and human rights activist, Prof. Manzoor Ahmed, Ex-VC Agra University, gave their opinions on how to strengthen state human rights Commission. The consultation was chaired by Prof. RP Singh, Vice Chancellor Lucknow University.

Delivering the inaugural address justice Vishnu Sahai provided background to the global human rights movement and the traced the background of the human rights activism in India. He referred to the focus of the United nations on the human rights since its inception and the provisions of UDHR created to make human rights focus of governance in the member countries. Referring to the constitution of India, he added that the constitution is the most rights based document in the world and has made all efforts to ensure that human rights of individuals are protected and promoted. He also referred to the protection of human rights act 1993, saying that the Act has tried to ensure the independence and autonomy of the Commission and has given enough powers to the Commission to work effectively. However, he added that despite the powers endowed on the commission, it has to be kept in mind that Commission is only a recommendatory body and enforcement of its instructions are completely on the mercy of the state government. He wondered that what the use of the powers is when the Commission can only recommend. He suggested that the commission is uniquely placed as far as the human rights administration is concerned and should be given broad powers to make it effective.

The key note speaker, Mr. Ajay K Jha from Pairvi explained the aims and objectives of the consultation. He said that UP Human Rights Commission has failed to live up to expectations of the people, which is manifested by the fact that not many cases are coming to the commission. While NHRC registers more that 40,000 cases from UP every year, UP Commission only registers 6,000 cases every year. He emphasized that civil society cooperation is the key to strengthening the Commission and putting force behind the recommendations of the commission. He added that most of the SHRCs are lying in utter neglect and passivity and facing severe human resources and financial crisis. He added that UP HR Commission has special challenge before itself, as HR violations in UP has been rising every year and it has always led the list of custodial death cases. He added that UP has always been a cause of concern with the NHRC with more than 50% cases coming from UP only, more than half of which are rejected summarily in limini. Should the UP Commission work effectively, it would reduce substantial case load from NHRC and people would also get prompt and effective remedy to their hr violations.

Justice Khem karan, added that Commission is dependant on infrastructure for effective functioning but more than that it is dependant upon the persons who man it. He reckoned that violations are more due to the fact that [people have very less hr awareness. Socio-economic conditions too need to be improved for cessation of violations. He also referred to DK Basu guidelines and said that because of lack of awareness the instructions of the honourable Supreme Court are not being followed. He desisted from commenting on the UP Commission in lack of facts and figures on the working of the commission but he emphasized that Commission needs more powers to be effective.

Mr. SVM Tripathi, member of the UP Human Rights Commission, said that the primary responsibility of human rights protection lies with the state and Commission is only supposed to be a catalyst. Therefore, state govt has to respect the mandate of the Commission, which it generally does. He added that state has complied with the instructions of the Commission and none of his orders have remained unimplemented. He drew participants' attention to some of the factors which are hindering the work of the Commission. He said that the most important factor is the lack of adequate human resources with the commission.

He added that grants too have been reduced causing problems in giving funds to the NGOs by the commission. Another very important factor is the ambivalent attitude of the Commission in filing and deposing in cases. He said that many of the complainants do not turn up when called for deposing before the commission. Amendments in PHR Act in 2006 have also weakened the commission as SHRCs can have only two members now along with a chairperson and that is too small a team for states like UP. The state government too has been somewhat irresponsible in placing the reports of the commission in the legislature and presently 4 reports are waiting to be placed in the legislature. As regards strengthening the commission he said that the commission has to work in close cooperation with the judiciary and SC has been very liberal in this aspect, judiciary in the state also needs to follow suit. He also emphasized that civil society cooperation too is indispensable in this regard. He added that commission has called upon NGOs to come forward to held the Commission but unfortunately, not many have responded. Finally, he said that SHRC is conscious of its role as catalyst in human rights promotion and protection and making all efforts to come up to peoples expectation, however, people should also know the fact that there are serious constraints of ethos and powers and other problems, which it is facing.

Mr. Lal Bahadur Singh, advocate and human rights activist, shared his experiences of approaching the commission. He said that in some cases commission helped him but in some cases he failed to attract the commission to take notice of his cause. He added that the PHR Act has severe limitations which it endows over the SHRCs and therefore they cannot be truly effective. He also drew the consultations attention to the prison conditions and police atrocities and elaborated that the Commission should take notice of it on a priority basis.

Mr. K Vikram Rao, senior journalist said that he participated ij the inaugural function of the NHRC and has been witness to the expectations it raised in the people, however, all that has been belied. He listed certain recommendations to strengthen the Commission. he said that since the mandate of the Commission is more important and broader than other commissions, it should also have more powers than other commissions. He also said that Police officers should not be appointed in the commission, as the most common and obvious violation of human rights is committed by the police. He added that bar on interference by the Commission in matters sub-judice and before other commissions should be lifted as Commission should be an umbrella body and relief by the commission should be concurrent and complimentary to relief by other judicial and administrative processes. He also added that violation of human rights be taken as serious offence and be a ground for rejection of nomination for fighting elections. Candidates should file an affidavit at the time of nomination that s/he has never violated human rights. He also stressed on the role of media and RTI in awareness and education of human rights and prevention of violations.

Prof R P Singh, Vice Chancellor of the University, delivering his address said that education esp. higher education is the most critical component in curbing violation of human rights and once ensured, many potential violators turn into protectors. He shared Universities initiatives in curbing violations amongst the students and making the university campus free from goonda elements. He also shared the development Projects University has initiated in the villages providing education and training to girls. He said that university is willing to provide all help is expected of it to strengthen the Commission and looks forward to better protection and promotion of human rights in the state.

The inaugural session was followed by a technical session wherein a number of speakers addressed the issue and provided important suggestions to make the Commission more effective. Two papers were also presented on "Human Rights, RTI and Right to livelihood and Role of Commission" and "Human Rights Violations; causes and Solutions". Victims and human rights defenders also presented a number of testimonies of engagement with the Commission.

Based on the suggestions by the eminent speakers a set of recommendations have been drawn drawing the attention of the state government and the state Human Rights Commission towards certain aspects.

Recommendations for the state government:

1. The concept of national human rights Institutions is based on the presumed cooperation of the state/government. It is supposed to be on-going advisory and recommendatory body supported by the state in promoting awareness and respect for human rights and preventing violations thereof. The cooperation between the state/govt and the Commission is of critical importance for effective functioning of the commission. Therefore, it is recommended that state/govt extend all possible cooperation to the Commission especially in making available adequate resources and infrastructure, and making available cooperation in its functioning, data collection, ensuring response from state officials, fact finding and investigation, implementation of the instructions of the Commission etc.
   
   
2. Special cooperation and urgency is recommended in dealing with the recommendations, instructions and reports of the commission and laying them before the legislature.
   
   
3. It is also recommended to ensure plurality in the Commission and ensuring theoretical independence and autonomy in constitution, appointment, termination, investigations and implementations of the recommendations of the commission, in line with the spirit of the Paris Principles and the Protection of Human Rights Act, 1993
   
   
4. It is also recommended to avoid appointment of retired/police officers in the commission, as police atrocity is the most common human rights violation and people do not generally evince faith in police officers, resulting in hindered society cooperation to the commission.
   
   
5. The state government is also urged to push forward the amendments desired in the Protection of human rights Act, 1993, suggested by the NHRC and SHRCs.
   
   
6. it is also recommended to expedite the process of appointing district courts for speedy trial of human rights violations.
   
   
7. The consultation recommends ensuring the appointment of full time chairperson without any undue delay.
   
   

Recommendations for the State Human Rights Commission

1. The commission is urged to interpret the PHR Act, 1993 creatively and adopt a pro active approach in the awareness, education and promotion of human rights and prevention of violations thereof.
   
   
2. The Commission is recommended to forcefully push its request for sanctioning more posts by the state government and its other recommendations regarding the infrastructure and resources at its disposal as laid down in its Annual Reports.
   
   
3. It is noted with concern that the Commission has huge resources at its disposal which can be used in awareness, education, investigations etc. with better results.
   
   
4. The commission is recommended to adopt a sensitive approach in entertaining complaints of violations, rather than a purely legalistic one.
   
   
5. the lack of civil society involvement is one of major areas of concern and it is recommended that commission seek more involvement with academicians, advocates, students, journalists and media, students and NGOs in planning, awareness, fact finding and investigations
   
   
6. It is recommended that commission adopt a prompt and responsive approach in dealing with victims of violations and especially in the cases of vulnerable/dalit/indigenous people/ complainants a fast track procedure should be adopted.
   
   
7. It is recommended to the commission to avoid appointing the same officer for investigation in the cases where he/she has been charged with committing atrocity.
   
   
8. Prison reforms should be taken on priority basis in view of the fact of huge overcrowding and miserable living conditions in the prisons and other detention centres.
   
   
9. To make the information regarding the commission easily available, the commission should create its own website as soon as possible.
   
   
10. The Commission should get its work reviewed on regular intervals by some external agency to know its shortcomings, strengths and weaknesses and to implement course corrections.