The Congress party has sharply criticized the selection process for the new chairperson of the National Human Rights Commission (NHRC), calling it “fundamentally flawed” after the appointment of Justice V. Ramasubramanian as the NHRC chief. The party also raised concerns about the appointments of Priyank Kanoongo and Dr. Justice Bidyut Ranjan Sarangi as members of the rights panel, highlighting the lack of consensus in the process.
In a dissent note issued a day after President Droupadi Murmu appointed Justice Ramasubramanian, Congress leaders Rahul Gandhi and Mallikarjun Kharge expressed their dissatisfaction with how the selection committee handled the appointments. The two leaders argued that the meeting, held on Wednesday, was a “pre-determined exercise” that failed to uphold established traditions of mutual consultation and consensus.
Congress Slams Selection Committee’s Lack of Transparency
In the dissent note, Gandhi and Kharge emphasized that the appointment of the NHRC chief and members should have been a collaborative process that respected diverse viewpoints. They contended that the committee’s reliance on its numerical majority to finalize the names undermined the principles of fairness and impartiality.
“The committee disregarded the legitimate concerns raised during the meeting, and instead of fostering deliberation, it opted for a process that did not reflect true collective decision-making,” the leaders stated. According to them, this lack of inclusivity could harm the credibility of the NHRC, a key institution that plays a vital role in protecting the human rights of all citizens, particularly marginalized communities.
The Congress leaders stressed that the NHRC’s effectiveness hinges on the diversity and representativeness of its leadership. They argued that a diverse group at the helm of the commission would ensure that it remains attuned to the specific challenges faced by various sections of society, including the most vulnerable.
A Push for Inclusivity: Congress’s Alternative Nominations
In their dissent note, Gandhi and Kharge made it clear that their objections were not aimed at the individuals who had been appointed but at the flawed process. They proposed alternative names for the NHRC chairperson position, which they believed better aligned with the values of inclusivity and merit.
The Congress suggested the names of two former Supreme Court judges, Justice Rohinton Fali Nariman and Justice KM Joseph, for the position of NHRC chairperson. Both judges, the Congress leaders argued, would bring a wealth of experience and a deep commitment to human rights, making them ideal candidates for the role.
Justice Nariman, a distinguished jurist from the minority Parsi community, is renowned for his intellectual rigor and unwavering adherence to constitutional principles. His inclusion, the Congress argued, would send a powerful message about the NHRC’s commitment to representing India’s pluralistic society.
Similarly, Justice Joseph, a former Supreme Court judge from the minority Christian community, has consistently delivered judgments emphasizing the protection of individual freedoms and marginalized groups. The Congress leaders described him as “an ideal candidate” for the NHRC chairperson position due to his long-standing advocacy for human rights.
The Role of the NHRC in Safeguarding Human Rights
The NHRC is a statutory body tasked with protecting the human rights of citizens in India. Its role is especially crucial for those from marginalized sections of society, who often face systemic discrimination and violations of their basic rights. The Congress party emphasized that the NHRC’s ability to fulfill this important mandate depends on the diversity and inclusiveness of its leadership, ensuring that the commission is sensitive to the varied needs of the country’s most vulnerable communities.
Both Gandhi and Kharge expressed concern that the current appointments could impact the NHRC’s impartiality and its capacity to safeguard the rights of all citizens. They reiterated that the commission must be led by individuals who are not only qualified but also representative of the country’s pluralistic social fabric.
Political Fallout and Future Implications
The Congress’s sharp response to the NHRC appointments has set the stage for a deeper political debate on the independence of such statutory bodies. The party’s objections are likely to continue in Parliament, especially as the Opposition works to hold the government accountable for what it perceives as a departure from democratic norms.
For the government, this controversy may raise questions about the transparency and fairness of the selection process for key institutions that are tasked with protecting democratic values and fundamental rights. While the government maintains that the process was legitimate, the debate surrounding the NHRC appointments is expected to persist, with both sides defending their respective positions.
