A controversy has erupted over the December 18 appointment of the new National Human Rights Commission (NHRC) chairman, with Opposition leaders Rahul Gandhi and Mallikarjun Kharge submitting a note of dissent and alleging there was no consultation and that the choice did not take into account inclusivity.
The dissent note made it clear that its authors harboured no prejudice against the choice of Justice V. Ramasubramanian, a retired Supreme Court judge, as NHRC chairperson. The selection committee is headed by the Prime Minister (Narendra Modi) and has as members the Union home minister (Amit Shah), the leaders of the Opposition in the two Houses of Parliament (Rahul and Kharge), the Lok Sabha Speaker (Om Birla) and the Rajya Sabha Deputy Speaker (Harivansh of BJP ally JDU). Justice Ramasubramanian’s name was cleared by a 4:2 majority.
Rahul’s and Kharge’s note reveals that the four other names for chairman and NHRC members that were rejected were those of former Supreme Court judges Rohinton Fali Nariman and Kuttiyil Mathew Joseph and former high court chief justices S. Muralidhar and Akil Abdulhamid Qureshi. All four have at one point or the other delivered judgments that have hurt the BJP’s interests.
Justice Nariman had revived the conspiracy charges against BJP veterans L.K. Advani, Murli Manohar Joshi and Uma Bharti in the Babri Masjid demolition case. The judge is also known for his liberal views that are not in sync with the BJP’s ideology.
Justice Joseph’s transfer from Uttarakhand High Court to Andhra Pradesh High Court, recommended by the Supreme Court collegium in 2016, had been turned down by the NDA government months after the judge had quashed President’s rule in the hill state, which led to the return of the Congress government. Later, the NDA government kept stalling Justice Joseph’s elevation to the Supreme Court and when he finally made it, he had to concede seniority to several judges junior to him.
Justice Qureshi had as Gujarat High Court judge remanded Amit Shah to police custody in 2010 in connection with the alleged fake encounter of gangster Sohrabuddin Sheikh by the state police. This was cited by the Centre in 2019 to quash his transfer as Madhya Pradesh High Court Chief Justice.
Justice Muralidhar’s collegium-recommended transfer from Delhi High Court to Punjab and Haryana High Court in February 2020 had been criticised by social activists who had drawn attention to the judge pulling up Delhi police, which reports to the Union home ministry, over the riots in the capital that month that claimed 53 lives. Justice Muralidhar later retired as Chief Justice of Orissa High Court.
The dissent note of Rahul and Kharge says: “Without prejudice to the names of the Chairperson and members approved by the Selection Committee, we respectfully record our dissent on the following grounds:
“Firstly, the selection process adopted by the Committee was fundamentally flawed. It was a pre-determined exercise that ignored the established tradition of mutual consultation and consensus.... This departure undermines the principles of fairness and impartiality, which are critical to the credibility of the Selection Committee.
“Instead of fostering deliberation and ensuring a collective decision, the Committee relied on its numerical majority to finalise the names, disregarding the legitimate concerns and perspectives raised during the meeting.
“Secondly, the NHRC is a vital statutory body tasked with safeguarding the fundamental human rights of all citizens, particularly those from oppressed and marginalised sections of society. Its ability to fulfil this mandate depends significantly on the inclusiveness and representativeness of its composition. A diverse leadership ensures that the NHRC remains sensitive to the unique challenges faced by various communities, especially those most vulnerable to human rights violations.
“We proposed the names of Justice Rohinton Fali Nariman and Justice Kuttiyil Mathew Joseph for the position of Chairperson, keeping in mind both merit and the need for inclusivity. Justice Rohinton Fali Nariman, a distinguished jurist from the minority Parsi community, is renowned for his intellectual depth and unwavering commitment to constitutional values. His inclusion would send a strong message about the NHRC’s dedication to representing India’s pluralistic society.
“Similarly, Justice Kuttiyil Mathew Joseph... belonging to the minority Christian community, has consistently delivered judgments that emphasise individual freedoms and the protection of marginalised groups; making him an ideal candidate for this critical position.
“Furthermore, for the position of Members, we recommended the names of Justice S. Muralidhar and Justice Akil Abdulhamid Qureshi, both of whom have exemplary track records in upholding human rights. Justice S. Muralidhar is widely respected for his landmark judgments advancing social justice, including his work on custodial violence and the protection of civil liberties.
Justice Akil Abdulhamid Qureshi, belonging to the Muslim minority community, has consistently defended constitutional principles and demonstrated a strong commitment to accountability in governance. Their inclusion would contribute to the NHRC’s effectiveness and its commitment to diversity.”
The two Congress leaders also cited the need for “a balance that reflects the regional, caste, community and religious diversity of the nation”. They alleged that the majority of the selection committee had adopted a “dismissive approach... towards these considerations” and called it “deeply regrettable”.