State Human Rights Commissions, Human Rights Courts and NGOs

Human Rights Law and Practice · Unit IV · Topic 14 of 18 · 7 min read

Constitution, appointment, removal, term and jurisdiction of State Human Rights Commissions under sections 21 to 29 of the 1993 Act as amended in 2019, Human Rights Courts and Special Public Prosecutors under sections 30 and 31, special investigation teams, and the role of NGOs in protecting human rights, with a worked problem on which Commission to approach.

← All Human Rights Law and Practice topics Past papers

On this page

1. Constitution of a State Commission: section 21
2. Jurisdiction: section 21(5)
3. Appointment, removal and term: sections 22 to 26
4. Functions, powers and reports: sections 28 and 29
5. Human Rights Courts: sections 30 and 31
6. Problem: which Commission?
7. NGOs and human rights
How this is examined

Cases checked to exist. Read the judgment before quoting a holding.

Every case cited here has been checked to exist — the citation resolves and names the right parties. The propositions attributed to each case have not been verified line by line against the judgment. Case names link through to the full judgment: read it before quoting a holding in an examination answer, and never carry a proposition from notes into court on trust.

The examinable core. “State Human Rights Commission” and “NGOs and human rights” are set as 6-mark notes, and Human Rights Courts belong in any answer on the important provisions of the Act. The points that earn marks: an SHRC is optional for the State (“may constitute”), its jurisdiction is tied to List II and List III, its members are appointed by the Governor but removed by the President, and the Human Rights Court is an existing Sessions Court, not a new court.

1. Constitution of a State Commission: section 21

A State Government may constitute a body known as the (name of the State) Human Rights Commission (s. 21(1)). Most States, including Karnataka, have done so. Under section 21(2), as amended in 2006 and 2019, it consists of:

(a) a Chairperson who has been a Chief Justice or a Judge of a High Court (“or a Judge” added in 2019);
(b) one Member who is, or has been, a Judge of a High Court, or a District Judge in the State with a minimum of seven years’ experience as District Judge;
(c) one Member appointed from among persons having knowledge of or practical experience in matters relating to human rights.

A Secretary, the chief executive officer, exercises all administrative and financial powers subject to the Chairperson’s control (s. 21(3), as amended in 2019). Headquarters are where the State Government notifies (s. 21(4)). Two or more States may appoint the same Chairperson or Member with that person’s consent (s. 21(6)). The Central Government may confer on a State Commission human rights functions relating to Union territories, other than Delhi, Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh, which are dealt with by the NHRC (s. 21(7), (8)).

2. Jurisdiction: section 21(5)

A State Commission may inquire into violation of human rights only in respect of matters relatable to entries in List II and List III of the Seventh Schedule. If the matter is already being inquired into by the NHRC or any other Commission duly constituted under law, the State Commission shall not inquire into it. Matters relatable to List I (defence, armed forces of the Union, foreign affairs, central agencies) are for the NHRC alone. Police and prisons are State List subjects, so most custodial complaints can go to the SHRC.

3. Appointment, removal and term: sections 22 to 26

Appointment (s. 22). By the Governor by warrant under his hand and seal, on the recommendation of a committee of the Chief Minister (chairperson), the Speaker of the Legislative Assembly, the Minister in charge of the Home Department, and the Leader of the Opposition in the Assembly. Where there is a Legislative Council, its Chairman and Leader of the Opposition are also members. A sitting High Court Judge or District Judge can be appointed only after consultation with the Chief Justice of the High Court.
Removal (s. 23). Resignation is addressed to the Governor (s. 23(1)). But removal is by order of the President, on the ground of proved misbehaviour or incapacity after an inquiry by the Supreme Court on a presidential reference (s. 23(1A)), or by the President on the grounds of insolvency, outside paid employment, infirmity, unsoundness of mind or conviction for an offence involving moral turpitude (s. 23(2)). The State Government cannot remove its own Commission’s members, which protects their independence.
Term (s. 24). Three years or until seventy, whichever is earlier, eligible for re-appointment (as amended in 2019); ineligible thereafter for employment under the State or Central Government.
Conditions (s. 26) are prescribed by the State Government and cannot be varied to the member’s disadvantage.
Staff (s. 27): a Secretary not below the rank of Secretary to the State Government, and police and investigative staff under an officer not below the rank of Inspector General of Police.

4. Functions, powers and reports: sections 28 and 29

Section 29 applies to State Commissions sections 9, 10, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17 and 18, with modifications: “Commission” reads as “State Commission”; clause (f) of section 12 (study of treaties) is omitted, since treaties are a Union matter; and in section 17 the State Commission calls for reports only from the State Government and its authorities. So an SHRC has the same inquiry powers, civil court powers and post-inquiry steps as the NHRC, including the power to recommend compensation and to approach the High Court or Supreme Court. Section 36, including the one-year bar, applies to it in terms. Annual and special reports go to the State Government and are laid before the State Legislature with a memorandum of action taken (s. 28).

5. Human Rights Courts: sections 30 and 31

Section 30. For the purpose of providing speedy trial of offences arising out of violation of human rights, the State Government may, with the concurrence of the Chief Justice of the High Court, by notification, specify for each district a Court of Session to be a Human Rights Court. This does not apply where a Court of Session is already specified as a special court, or a special court is already constituted, for such offences under another law.

Section 31. For every Human Rights Court the State Government shall specify a Public Prosecutor, or appoint an advocate of not less than seven years’ practice, as a Special Public Prosecutor.

Criticism. The Act does not define “offences arising out of violation of human rights”, lays down no special procedure and creates no new offences, so the Human Rights Court is an ordinary Sessions Court with a new label and the same backlog. Many States have notified such courts only on paper.

Section 37 allows the Government to constitute special investigation teams of police officers to investigate and prosecute offences arising out of violations of human rights.

6. Problem: which Commission?

A labourer in Mysuru is beaten in police custody in March. In the following May his family complains to the NHRC. Separately, a soldier stationed in Belagavi is alleged to have assaulted a civilian. Advise on the forum.

Issue. Which Commission has jurisdiction, and what are the limits?
Law. Police is a State List subject, so the Karnataka SHRC has jurisdiction under s. 21(5); the NHRC also has jurisdiction under s. 12(a) and may transfer the complaint to the SHRC under s. 13(6). Whichever takes it first excludes the other (s. 21(5) proviso, s. 36(1)). The complaint must be within one year of the act (s. 36(2)). Complaints against members of the armed forces go only to the NHRC, which may seek a report from the Central Government under s. 19.
Application. The custodial assault complaint is in time and may be heard by either; if the NHRC entertains it, the SHRC cannot. The soldier’s case is outside the SHRC (List I) and the NHRC is limited to the section 19 procedure.
Conclusion. The family should approach the SHRC (or the NHRC, which may transfer it); the civilian should go to the NHRC, and may separately file a criminal complaint or a writ petition, which section 19 does not bar.

7. NGOs and human rights

Non-governmental organisations are private, non-profit bodies independent of government. Their roles:

Documentation and reporting of violations: Amnesty International (1961), Human Rights Watch (1978), and in India the People’s Union for Civil Liberties (1976) and the People’s Union for Democratic Rights.
Litigation. Public interest litigation by NGOs produced many of the leading cases: People’s Union for Democratic Rights v. Union of India, 1982 INSC 67 (Asiad workers); Bandhua Mukti Morcha v. Union of India, 1983 INSC 203, (1984) 3 SCC 161 (bonded labour in stone quarries); PUCL v. Union of India, 1996 INSC 1509 (telephone tapping).
Participation in UN processes. Consultative status with ECOSOC under Article 71 of the Charter; “shadow reports” to treaty bodies; stakeholder submissions in the Universal Periodic Review; information to special procedures.
Standard-setting. NGOs drove the drafting of the Convention against Torture, the CRC and the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court.
Relief, legal aid and education at the local level.
Statutory recognition. Section 12(i) of the 1993 Act requires the NHRC to encourage the efforts of NGOs, and the Paris Principles call for co-operation with them.

Limits. Dependence on funding, regulation of foreign contributions under the Foreign Contribution (Regulation) Act, 2010, questions of accountability, and occasional partisanship.

How this is examined

August 2024: “State Human Rights Commission” (6 marks). June 2025: “NGOs and human rights” (6 marks). For the SHRC note, sections 1 to 4 with section numbers and the 2019 changes. For NGOs, section 7. In an essay on the “important provisions” of the Act, sections 2 and 5 of this note supply the SHRC and Human Rights Courts parts.

Now try the real questions: Human Rights Law and Practice past question papers.