From the Editor's Desk

From the perspective of human rights, the month of December has a special significance. Every year on the 10th December, 'Human Rights Day' is celebrated commemorating the adoption of Universal Declaration of Human Rights by the United Nations General Assembly in 1948. The day also reminds us that human rights are inalienable rights of every human being by birth. People must stand up to raise voice against violation of not only their human rights but also for other's rights. That may be, perhaps, more satisfying experience. And when we have this kind of conscience, there will be no reason for us to say or do things, which may result in violation of others' rights in the first place.
The real essence of the customary functions celebrating Human Rights Day would be, perhaps, to have a churning towards self introspection to desist from being the cause or instrument of human rights violations whether in private or public life.
Justice Shri H.L. Dattu, Chairperson, NHRC, India in his message on the eve of 'Human Rights Day' has very aptly said that the Preamble of the Constitution of India and the Articles relating to the Fundamental Rights and the Directive Principles of State Policy make the protection of human rights a Constitutional obligation of the State as well as the duty of a citizen.
His comment, if one may also like to read it in the backdrop of demonetisation triggered issues of human rights, as reported in a section of media, becomes significant that "any well intended action, policy or law, purportedly for the betterment of the country, will render itself meaningless, if implemented without a humane face and people's co-operation."
We have crossed the salutary effect stage of having the National Human Rights Commission in the country as it has completed over two decades now. Given the experience of the implementability of its recommendations, the chorus is growing to further strengthen it. Such voices become more credible, when similar suggestions to this effect come from eminent jurists.
The former Chief Justice of India and at present the Governor of Kerala, Justice Shri P. Sathasivam, as a Chief Guest on the Human Rights Day function of the Commission, made an impassioned appeal that a serious thought needs to be given to amend the Protection of Human Rights Act, so as to make the Commission empowered enough to be able to execute its recommendations. Last year, the Chief Justice of India, Justice Shri T.S. Thakur, as the Chief Guest on the similar occasion, also said that the NHRC needed to be strengthened by amending the PHR Act.
Justice Dattu himself, a former Chief Justice of India, has also expressed on some occasion that the ultimate choice with the government(s) to accept or not to accept the NHRC's recommendations even for a monetary relief to the victim or his next of his kin, tends to nullifies its efforts towards giving some sense of justice to a victim of human rights violation.
In the light of such observations, over a period time, the issue was also briefly examined and commented upon in the editorial of the November, 2016 edition of this Newsletter, as some sort of a way forward. The NHRC is neither a court of law nor a government department but definitely a quasi-judicial body. The intent of the government to have an institution like the NHRC in place to promote and protect human rights will serve its purpose more, if it is strengthened at least in a manner which, neither may impinge the functioning of courts nor the governments but certainly help in good governance, wherein it is ensured that the victim gets some relief and the persons guilty of his human rights violation do not go scot free.