Finding its hands tied to deal with complaints of fake encounters, the National Human Rights Commission has asked the Supreme Court to consider examining the legal bar that prevents it from probing human rights violations against armed forces.
The present legal framework contained in Section 19 of the Prevention of Human Rights Act only allowed NHRC to seek a report from the Centre on any complaint against armed forces.
In a note presented to court, the commission said, “Section 19 of the Protection of Human Rights Act places egregious restrictions on the NHRC vis-à-vis the armed forces…This section which confers a unique immunity on the armed forces needs to be read down.”
The apex human rights body justified itself to recommend so by stating, “The NHRC must be able to monitor violations of human rights by the Army and paramilitary as rigorously as it does in respect of allegations against all other public servants.”
The note filed by advocate Shobha has come in wake of extra-judicial killings by Army in Manipur following a court-constituted judicial committee headed by Justice Santosh Hedge examining six encounters conducted by the Army in State. The bench of Justices Aftab Alam and Ranjana Desai had supplied a copy of the report to NHRC for its recommendations.
In the note, the NHRC asserted its right as the protector of human rights to make far-ranging recommendations which included pinning culpability on the guilty officers involved in the incidents, waiving immunity under the Armed Forces Special Powers Act (AFSPA) to pave way for their prosecution and importantly, to review all medals or other awards given to personnel involved in extra-judicial killings.
When the note was taken on record by the court, the NHRC counsel submitted that commission’s guidelines and instructions are not honoured by State Governments and Centre. Under Section 19, once the NHRC receives a report from Centre on a complaint against armed forces, it is faced with the option of either closing the case or make its recommendation to the Centre, often in the form of monetary compensation.
In most cases, the commission informed the court, even the compensation was not paid. The NHRC note recommended the court to consider that in all future cases where a fake encounter is established, the Ministry of Defence and Ministry of Home (for paramilitary forces) should pay the monetary relief to the next of victim’s kin, appoint court of inquiry and allow prosecution of the concerned member of armed forces.