Read Original Article
here
(THE HINDU EDITORIAL simplified keeping in mind the demands for UPSC GS paper 2.
Enjoy reading and donot forget to leave your comments. )
Context -Appointment of Ex CJI P.Sathasivam as Chairperson Of NHRC(now Governor of Kerela )
National Human Rights Commission;
- Set up under the Protection of Human Rights Act, 1993
- consists of nine members. Four are ex-office appointments — serving Chairpersons of the National Commissions for Minorities, Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes and Women. Two are persons who have done work in the area of human rights. And three are from the judiciary: a sitting or retired judge of the Supreme Court; a Chief Justice of a High Court;
- CHAIRPERSON- a former Chief Justice of India (CJI)
- investigates abuses and violations of human rights in India.
- has wide-ranging powers to investigate, recommend prosecutions, and award compensations for human rights violations
WHAT IS THE CONTROVERSY
1.Human rights violence often preperted by high level political leaders or state authority.In such case
independence of investigating agency from the state must for delivery of justice
2 For the Public to have unquestionable faith on The Commission,it's face that is Chairperson must have
untinted public record.That is why Ex CJI is chosen.
3.CJI is considered as the icon of independence, has received no favour from the government and is fearless about tackling the powers.
4.But exCJI accepted the post of Governor of Kerela setting a dangerous precedent.Now the Judges at the verge of retirement might treat sensitive cases against government with a view seeking post retirement positions.
5.Critcised because, CJI is considered as the part of as part of a constitutional triumvirate of power along with the President and the Prime Minister and therfore accepting the post of Governor is going below the rung.It also means accepting adantages from executive brings it under the influence of the executive raising the question on its Independence.
6.Sathasivam defended his decision saying that this doesnot aply to retired CJIs.
7.To avoid any scrutiny after retirement,Judges have stayed away from accepting appointments that are decided purely by politicians. Even the eminent Justice M.C. Chagla received strong condemnation from leaders of the Bar for accepting the posts of Union Minister and Ambassador.
WHY APPOINTMENT OF P.SATHASIVAM AS NHRC CHAIRMAN WILL BE INAPPROPRIATE
1.Primary quality required is independence fromthe government -but once being benifitted by th government after retirement it is doubtful that he would be completely free from government influence.
2.Statuory qualification does not does not specify that the candidate should not have held previous office at the hands of the government but it is the first instance that CJI has taken up role of Governor .Framersof the Costitution would not have visualised this situation.
3,Since he is now Governor of Kerela he ought not to be treated as a former CJI, but as a Governor of a State, and hence not qualified to be Chairperson of the NHRC.
CONCLUSION
The position of the head of the NHRC is a crucial one for protecting human and democratic rights. These rights and the Commission are primordial for all citizens, especially for those who fall foul of the powerful in government. The appointment to this office must not be tainted in any way. Justice Sathasivam committed one mistake in accepting governorship and lowering the office of the CJI. One hopes that another such mistake will not be committed.
