What is the term of office of the Chairperson and Members of the National Human Rights Commission?
- (a)5 years or up to 70 years of age
- (b)3 years or up to 70 years of age
- (c)5 years or up to 65 years of age
- (d)3 years or up to 65 years of age
Correct — B, 3 years or up to 70 years of age. The Chairperson and Members of the National Human Rights Commission hold office for three years from the date they take charge, or until they turn seventy, whichever comes first, and they are eligible for reappointment. The three-year figure is recent. Until 2019 the term was five years, and the Protection of Human Rights (Amendment) Act of that year cut it to three while leaving the age ceiling of seventy untouched. That single change is what makes this question worth asking and what makes option (a) the trap, because option (a) is the position that held for the Commission's first twenty-six years.
- (a)5 years or up to 70 years of age — Five years with a ceiling of seventy was the rule from 1993 until the amending Act of 2019 reduced the term to three years. It is the old position, not the current one.
- (c)5 years or up to 65 years of age — Both halves are wrong for this Commission. The term is three years and the age ceiling is seventy, not sixty-five.
- (d)3 years or up to 65 years of age — The three-year term is right, but the ceiling is seventy. Sixty-five is not the retirement age used anywhere in the Protection of Human Rights Act.
The National Human Rights Commission is a statutory body set up under the Protection of Human Rights Act, 1993 to inquire into violations of human rights or the negligence of a public servant in preventing them, to visit jails, to review safeguards under the Constitution and the law, and to recommend remedial action. Its recommendations are not binding, which is the standing criticism of it, but it may approach the courts and it must be told what action a government has taken on what it says.
The way to hold this in memory is to treat 2019 as the hinge and remember what the amending Act changed and what it did not. It reduced the term of the Chairperson and Members from five years to three and allowed reappointment. It widened eligibility for the office of Chairperson, which until then required a former Chief Justice of India, so that a person who has been a Judge of the Supreme Court is also eligible. It raised the number of members appointed for their knowledge of human rights from two to three, with at least one to be a woman. It did not touch the age ceiling of seventy. State Human Rights Commissions were brought into line with the same three-year term. Anchored to the 2022 exam the answer was three years and seventy, and it remains so.
- The Commission was established under the Protection of Human Rights Act, 1993.
- The Chairperson and Members serve for three years or until the age of seventy, whichever is earlier, and may be reappointed.
- The term was five years until the Protection of Human Rights (Amendment) Act, 2019 reduced it to three.
- The 2019 Act also made a former Judge of the Supreme Court eligible to be Chairperson, not only a former Chief Justice of India.
- The Commission's recommendations are not binding, but the authority concerned must report the action taken on them.
Only the term moved, which is exactly why the old five-year figure is the tempting wrong answer.
- Answering five years, which was correct before 2019 and is still printed in older material.
- Assuming the Commission is a constitutional body. It is statutory, created by an Act of Parliament in 1993.
- Believing the Chairperson must still be a former Chief Justice of India. Since 2019 a former Judge of the Supreme Court is also eligible.
As a term-of-office question, as a statement set on the composition of the Commission, or through the statute that created it.
According to the National Human Rights Commission Act, 1993, who amongst the following can be its Chairman?
- (a) Any serving Judge of the Supreme Court
- (b) Any serving Judge of the High Court
- (c) Only a retired Chief Justice of India
- (d) Only a retired Chief Justice of a High Court
Answer(c) Only a retired Chief Justice of India
The same office asked on eligibility rather than tenure, and a useful illustration of how this statute has moved. That answer was right when the question was set; the amending Act of 2019 has since made a person who has been a Judge of the Supreme Court eligible as well.
The National Human Rights Commission was established under the statute of:
- (a) The Protection of Human Rights Act, 1993
- (b) The Protection and Implementation of Human Rights Act, 1993
- (c) The Human Rights Act, 1993
- (d) The Human Rights Commission Act, 1993
Answer(a) The Protection of Human Rights Act, 1993
The same Commission in the next year's paper, asked on the statute that created it. That Act is also the one the 2019 amendment altered, which is where the three-year term in this question comes from.
- practice — not a real PYQ
The National Human Rights Commission of India was established under
- (a)a provision of the Constitution
- (b)the Protection of Human Rights Act, 1993
- (c)an executive order of the Union Government
- (d)a direction of the Supreme Court
Answer(b) the Protection of Human Rights Act, 1993 — it is a statutory body, not a constitutional one.
- practice — not a real PYQ
Which amendment reduced the term of the Chairperson and Members of the National Human Rights Commission from five years to three?
- (a)The amending Act of 2006
- (b)The amending Act of 2019
- (c)The amending Act of 2013
- (d)No amendment; the term has always been three years
Answer(b) The amending Act of 2019 — which also widened eligibility for the office of Chairperson while leaving the age ceiling of seventy alone.