‘Credible rights commission need of the hour’
ICJ says govt delaying formation of commission.
LAHORE:
On the eve of the 64th annual world Human Rights Day, the International Commission of Jurists (ICJ) has urged the government to constitute a national human rights commission compliant with the UN principles relating to the Status of National Institutions (Paris Principles).
“Independent and credible national human rights institutions can be helpful for protecting and promoting human rights,” said Sam Zarifi, the ICJ’s director for Asia and the Pacific in a press release issued on Tuesday. “The government has been delaying the matter despite repeated promises,” he said.
“India, Sri Lanka, Nepal and Bangladesh have already established National Human Rights Institutions (NHRIs), making Pakistan a regional exception,” he said.
“A properly constituted national human rights commission can be an important part of the solution,” said Zarifi. “Pakistan can and should learn from the lessons of failed NHRIs in the region and constitute an institution that can address the real needs of all people in Pakistan,” he said.
Pakistan passed the National Commission for Human Rights Act in 2012. The law provides for an independent commission with broad powers to promote human rights and to investigate human right violations.
“However, the law significantly limits the commission’s mandate where the armed forces are accused of committing human rights violations. In such cases, the commission is only authorised to seek a report from the government, and make recommendations if it sees fit. The law further emphasises that the functions of the commission do not include inquiring into the act or practices of the intelligence agencies,” he said.
“The proposed commission’s restricted mandate over the armed forces, and especially the intelligence agencies, is of grave concern,” said Zarifi.
“A human rights commission that does not have jurisdiction over all these actors risks being toothless and ineffective—and worst, a cover for continuing government inaction in response to these violations,” he said.
“Section 3 (a) (ii) of the Paris Principles, which provide the minimum standards required by national human rights institutions to be considered credible and effective, states that an NHRI should have the power to hear a matter without higher referral over any situation of violation of human rights which it decides to take up,” he said.
“Because of the proposed commission’s limited mandate, it is questionable whether the proposed national human rights commission is compliant with the Paris Principles,” he said.
Published in The Express Tribune, December 10th, 2014.
On the eve of the 64th annual world Human Rights Day, the International Commission of Jurists (ICJ) has urged the government to constitute a national human rights commission compliant with the UN principles relating to the Status of National Institutions (Paris Principles).
“Independent and credible national human rights institutions can be helpful for protecting and promoting human rights,” said Sam Zarifi, the ICJ’s director for Asia and the Pacific in a press release issued on Tuesday. “The government has been delaying the matter despite repeated promises,” he said.
“India, Sri Lanka, Nepal and Bangladesh have already established National Human Rights Institutions (NHRIs), making Pakistan a regional exception,” he said.
“A properly constituted national human rights commission can be an important part of the solution,” said Zarifi. “Pakistan can and should learn from the lessons of failed NHRIs in the region and constitute an institution that can address the real needs of all people in Pakistan,” he said.
Pakistan passed the National Commission for Human Rights Act in 2012. The law provides for an independent commission with broad powers to promote human rights and to investigate human right violations.
“However, the law significantly limits the commission’s mandate where the armed forces are accused of committing human rights violations. In such cases, the commission is only authorised to seek a report from the government, and make recommendations if it sees fit. The law further emphasises that the functions of the commission do not include inquiring into the act or practices of the intelligence agencies,” he said.
“The proposed commission’s restricted mandate over the armed forces, and especially the intelligence agencies, is of grave concern,” said Zarifi.
“A human rights commission that does not have jurisdiction over all these actors risks being toothless and ineffective—and worst, a cover for continuing government inaction in response to these violations,” he said.
“Section 3 (a) (ii) of the Paris Principles, which provide the minimum standards required by national human rights institutions to be considered credible and effective, states that an NHRI should have the power to hear a matter without higher referral over any situation of violation of human rights which it decides to take up,” he said.
“Because of the proposed commission’s limited mandate, it is questionable whether the proposed national human rights commission is compliant with the Paris Principles,” he said.
Published in The Express Tribune, December 10th, 2014.