NHRC gets ‘B’ grade, setback to India!

By Vanaja Jasphine

Madurai, April 28, 2025: The National Human Rights Commission (NHRC) of India is a statutory body established on October 12, 1993, under the Protection of Human Rights Act 1993.

Its primary function is to protect and promote human rights and acts as a watchdog for human rights in India. It has all the powers of a civil court and can investigate human rights violations either suo moto or based on petitions to uphold the rights relating to life, liberty, equality, and dignity, as guaranteed by the Constitution and international covenants.

The Global Alliance of National Human Rights Institutions (GANHRI) which is a global network of National Human Rights Institutions (NHRIs) plays a crucial role in accrediting and recognising National Human Rights Commissions (NHRCs) globally, including the National Human Rights Commission of India (NHRC).

GANHRI, through its Sub-Committee on Accreditation (SCA), assesses, reviews and accredits the NHRC, India, based on its compliance with the Paris Principles 1992 to award “A Status to a Fully compliant with the Paris Principles; and “ B” status to a Partially compliant with the Paris Principles every five years to ensure continued compliance. GANHRI accreditation provides international recognition and protection to the NHRC. A-status accreditation allows the NHRC to participate fully in the UN Human Rights Council and other UN bodies.
The Reality of NHRC India in Accreditation.

India’s National Human Rights Commission (NHRC) was first awarded ‘A’ status in 1999 and reaccredited with the same status in 2006. In 2011, changes to the GANHRI Statute allowed civil society groups to participate in the accreditation process. That year, AiNNI and ANNI (NGOs) submitted a report to the Sub-Committee on Accreditation (SCA), which was followed by NHRC’s response. Based on this, the NHRC was reaccredited with ‘A’ status for a second time in 2011.

However, the NHRC failed to implement the SCA’s recommendations from 2011. As a result, in 2016, when it was up for a third review, its accreditation was deferred for one year, marking the first such deferral in its history. The SCA issued further recommendations, and in 2017, during NHRC’s 25th anniversary, its accreditation was reviewed again. The NHRC regained its ‘A’ status, promising to amend the Protection of Human Rights Act, 1993.

By 2019, the NHRC had several opportunities to implement the SCA’s recommendations from 2011, 2016, and 2017—but no substantial action was taken. In June 2024, the SCA deferred the NHRC’s accreditation for another year and recommended that the NHRC advocate for amendments to the PHRA to remove the capacity for government to second police officers to act as investigative staff, remove the capacity for the Government to make a senior civil servant available for the position of Secretary General, ensure that the NHRC can independently appoint suitably qualified staff, ensure a pluralistic balance in its composition and staff, and provide for a formalized, transparent, participatory and open selection and appointment process. It also recommended that the NHRC takes additional steps to ensure constructive engagement and cooperation with civil society and HRDs, and address systemic violations of human rights while ensuring effective follow up with the State and making its positions publicly available. The SCA noted that most of its past recommendations remain unaddressed and warned that this ongoing lack of action may be seen as a sign of unwillingness to comply with the Paris Principles, raising concerns about its independence and operational effectiveness.

Inadequate efforts to address human rights violations at a systemic level

For Example, Prof. Gokarakonda Naga Saibaba, a 90% disabled academic and human rights advocate, was subjected to severe violations of his rights during arrest and imprisonment, prompting repeated appeals to the National Human Rights Commission (NHRC) by Human Rights Defenders Alert – India (HRDA). However, NHRC’s response reflected a consistent pattern of inaction and non-intervention. NHRC, continuously dismissed the urgent appeal sent by the HRDA for inquiry and protection, another one for independent investigation and intervention after the solitary confinement in an ‘Anda’ cell, another one in 2016 concerning the denial of bail and inhuman treatment. Despite a critical report by S. Jalaja, a retired IAS officer and former NHRC special rapporteur, highlighting Saibaba’s deteriorating health and recommending independent medical evaluation, the NHRC chose to rely solely on police reports and dismissed the appeal. Even after Saibaba’s death on October 12, 2024, attributed to inhuman custodial torture, NHRC rejected an appeal for compensation, continuing its stance of denial and detachment from the case.

Likewise in Bima Koregaon-16, Since June 2018, 16 Human Rights Defenders have been jailed under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, bail was denied repeatedly, despite facing severe health complications. NHRC has never used its power under section 12 (b) of the Protection of Human Rights Act, 1993, to intervene before the trail court on behalf of any of these HRDs.

The incarceration of 84-year-old Jesuit priest Fr. Stan Swamy for nine months despite immediate concerns raised by human rights defenders following the NIA raids serves as a chilling reminder of the National Human Rights Commission’s (NHRC) inaction. Despite public outrage and appeals, the NHRC stood silent, failing to intervene meaningfully.

Equally alarming is the Andhra Pradesh police encounter of 20 woodcutters, where justice has remained stagnant since July 3, 2015, due to a stay by the Andhra Pradesh High Court — a stay the NHRC has been unable to lift even to this day.

These are not isolated instances. In the past, NHRCI had consistently stayed on the sidelines of major constitutional challenges involving grave human rights concerns — even in the landmark Manipur case, which shocked the conscience of the nation.

The Consequence: NHRC Downgraded to ‘B’ Status

In light of third-party assessments and its failure to act on the recommendations of the Sub-Committee on Accreditation (SCA), the NHRC has been downgraded from ‘A’ to ‘B’ status — a significant blow to India’s credibility on the international stage.

Why This Matters to Every Indian

• Global Reputation at Risk: The downgrade undermines India’s image as a democratic nation committed to upholding human rights, particularly at global forums like the UN Human Rights Council.
• Loss of International Influence: India may lose its voice and voting power in crucial global human rights discussions.
• Weakened Accountability: A diminished NHRC may no longer have the strength to hold state actors, police, or security forces accountable for human rights violations.
• Silencing the Marginalized: Communities like Dalits, Adivasis, women, and LGBTQ+ individuals, who rely on the NHRC to amplify their voices, may be left unheard.
• Increased Vulnerability of Human Rights Defenders (HRDs): With little institutional support, HRDs may feel exposed and unsafe when raising issues that challenge state actions.
• Erosion of Public Trust: When institutions fail to act, citizens lose faith in justice mechanisms, resulting in civic disengagement.
Restoring Trust and Action.

This is not just about international embarrassment — this is about us. The NHRC belongs to the people. It was created to be our sentinel — defending rights, ensuring justice, and promoting accountability.

The downgrade is a reflection of years of institutional neglect and past passive leadership. But today, with the new leadership of Justice Ramasubramanian, we are presented with a chance to rebuild. The current Commission has shown openness to engage with civil society and recommit to its mandate.

We need an NHRC that truly works, truly independent, one that responds, protects, and uplifts. It’s time for all of us — citizens, activists, lawmakers — to come together and ensure that India’s human rights watchdog is not just symbolic, but truly effective.

(Vanaja Jasphine is a Human Rights Lawyer at Madurai High Court in Southern Indian State of Tamil Nadu)