The People’s Union for Civil Liberties (PUCL) has condemned the decision of the Centre to nominate Bharatiya Janata Party vice-president Avinash Rai Khanna as member of the National Human Rights Commission (NHRC).
In a statement, PUCL national general secretary V. Suresh said the decision was another ‘sinister’ attempt by the BJP-led government.
It wanted to fill crucial posts in institutions, tasked with the responsibility to critically review, oversee, monitor or examine complaints regarding the functioning of the government, with persons who were “non-meritorious” in terms of their professional credentials.
‘Conflict of interest’He said the PUCL believed that the decision would harm the credibility, impartiality and effectiveness of the NHRC, which had in the past taken up issues of human rights abuse by government functionaries suo motu or on the basis of complaints. Therefore, the appointment of a politician of the ruling party would compromise the independence, objectivity and credibility of the institution and, even more important, create a conflict of interest.
When the NHRC was constituted, it was made clear that apart from former judges of the Supreme Court or High Courts, two other members would be appointed from among persons having knowledge of, or practical experience in, matters relating to human rights.
‘Principle of neutrality’Dr. Suresh said the BJP leader was associated with the party for decades and had no relevant experience in the field of human rights. The principle of neutrality of NHRC members was particularly crucial and important for, many times, the agency was called upon to investigate mass human rights abuses by the security forces with allegations of complicity of the political executive.
Allegations of complicityOrganisations such as the PUCL and other individual rights defenders had often approached the NHRC for speedy and effective intervention in matters involving state functionaries and governments. “If the nomination of Mr. Khanna is not withdrawn, the PUCL, consistent with its approach, will be constrained to take it up in the apex court.”
