Multiplicity of various commissions for the vulnerable sections of the society leads to problems of…

Question

Multiplicity of various commissions for the vulnerable sections of the society leads to problems of overlapping jurisdiction and duplication of functions. Is it better to merge all commissions into an umbrella Human Rights Commission? Argue your case.

Ghissu Editorial · Accepted Answer

Merging all commissions into one Human Rights Commission is not the best answer: overlap is real, but a federated umbrella that keeps specialist mandates removes duplication without diluting protection. The NHRC already seats seven commission chairpersons as deemed members, a base for a statutory coordination council.

**Introduction**

Vulnerable groups are served by the constitutional NCSC, NCST and NCBC (Articles 338, 338A and 338B), statutory commissions for women, minorities, children and persons with disabilities, and the NHRC under the 1993 Act. The overlap is real, but a federated umbrella is a better cure than one merged body.

**Overlap and Duplication Among Commissions**

1. **Overlapping jurisdiction**: An atrocity on a Dalit woman can reach the NCSC, NCW, NHRC and a state commission at once, inviting forum shopping and parallel inquiries.
2. **Shared weaknesses**: Most commissions only recommend, and GANHRI deferred the NHRC's 'A' status in 2023 and 2024 over independence concerns.

**Why a Full Merger Would Hurt the Vulnerable**

1. **Constitutional entrenchment**: Merging the NCSC, NCST and NCBC needs a constitutional amendment, and Article 338(5) gives them a safeguard and planning role beyond rights violations.
2. **Specialist duties**: The NCPCR monitors the RTE and POCSO Acts and the Chief Commissioner enforces the RPwD Act, 2016; a generalist body would dilute this expertise.
3. **Risk of concentration**: One overloaded chairperson is easier to capture than a plural system.

SKETCH: comparison | Full Merger vs Federated Umbrella
a: Full merger
b: Federated umbrella
- Amendment needed :: No amendment
- Specialist focus diluted :: Specialist focus kept
- One overloaded chair :: Plural leadership
- One door :: One door via portal

**Way Forward**

1. **Federated umbrella**: Turn the NHRC's seven deemed-member chairpersons into a statutory coordination council, with one HRCNet complaint window and a first-seized rule.
2. **Teeth and independence**: Follow the Paris Principles and set time limits for governments to act on recommendations.

**Conclusion**

A full merger would trade specialised protection for neatness. A federated umbrella, like Australia's specialist commissioners within one Human Rights Commission, removes duplication while keeping every vulnerable group's voice.

Multiplicity of various commissions for the vulnerable sections of the society leads to problems of overlapping jurisdiction and duplication of functions. Is it better to merge all commissions into an umbrella Human Rights Commission? Argue your case.

Model answer

Practise this question

Mechanisms, Laws, Institutions and Bodies1 question

Ghissu