The legislative policy behind the Act is clearly discernible . The statute has conferred very wide ranging powers upon the Human Rights Commission both at the National Level and State Level with far-reaching implications. The statute maker wanted to send a message, loud and clear, that, there will be zero tolerance towards Human Rights violations in this country. It has put in place various remedial measures for prevention of any such violations and hence, conferred power to inquire suo-motu or on a petition, not only of violation of human rights or abatement thereof, or even negligence exhibited by a public servant in prevention of such violation. A mere look at Sub-section (b) of Section 12 clearly brings out the reach of powers conferred upon the National Human Rights Commission by providing for intervention in any proceeding involving any allegation of violation of human rights pending before a Court, of course with the approval of such Court. Powers were also conferred to review the safeguards provided by or under the constitution or any law for the time being enforced for the protection of Human Rights and to recommend measures for their effective implementation. Power was also conferred upon the National Commission to review the factors, including acts of terrorism, that inhibit the enjoyment of human rights and recommend appropriate remedial measures and the intimation to the State Government concerned.
The National Human Rights Commission has got the power to visit any jail or any other institution under the control of the State Government, where persons are detained or lodged for purposes of treatment, reformation or protection to study the living conditions of the inmates and make necessary recommendations obviously for further improvements to be carried out there. The National Human Rights Commission was also conferred power to study treaties and other international instruments on human rights and to make recommendations for their effective implementation in our country. These powers conferred by the statute clearly demonstrate the spread of canvass for securing and putting in place such measures which ensure the maximum protection of human rights for our countrymen.
The best practices adopted world over can also be brought in for securing further improvement of our own practices and standards. When such was the sweep of powers, the Commission is therefore required to be constituted with persons who held very high constitutional offices earlier, so that all aspects of good governance and adjudicatory practices and procedures would be too familiar to them. It does not call for a second opinion, that the extraordinary quantum of maturity achieved through hard grinding work and intellectual application coupled with fiercely independent qualities exhibited for resolving complicated and competing claims over a long stretch of time alone can make one reach the position of the Chief Justice of Supreme Court. The vast quantum of learning and wisdom earned in the process, tempered with an extraordinary balance makes one reach the outstanding position to hold the high office of Chief Justice and discharge the functions to the great satisfaction of all.
This is the obvious reason why the policy of the legislation weird around such a person to be appointed as a Chairperson. Persons who have risen in life to hold such offices seldom look for anything beyond thereafter. If an offer comes their way, may be, they would not be reluctant to stretch their extraordinary working schedule even in their retired life, more for the sake of contributing benefits to the society at large by putting to further use all their experience and wisdom, thus far gained. We are clearly averse to the notion that such men can be ever tempted into accepting those offices quite easily. They may be gently persuaded into accepting another office after their retirement in the best interests of the society.
