ITANAGAR, 4 Feb: The Itanagar permanent bench of the Gauhati High Court has reprimanded the Arunachal Pradesh government for not taking steps to make the Arunachal Pradesh State Human Rights Commission (APSHRC) properly functional, despite issuance of an order by the court on a public interest litigation in the matter in 2022.
The court reprimanded the government following a submission from the counsel of the petitioner that, despite issuance of the order, the APSHRC is not properly functioning as there is only one member at present in the commission.
The court, while adjourning the matter following a prayer from the government advocate stating that the additional advocate general was unwell, however, questioned why the state government has not constituted the APSHRC as per the prescription of Section 21 of the Protection of Human Rights Act, 1993.
It sought to know whether, “at any point of time since the establishment of the Arunachal Pradesh State Human Rights Commission, it functioned properly with its full strength.”
The order further asked whether the state has cleared the dues of the past chairman and the superannuated staff of the APSHRC.
It asked also “whether the current salary and other office expenses are being duly paid and/or made available to the Arunachal Pradesh State Human Rights Commission.”
The court further asked whether, in the absence of proper functioning of the APSHRC, the provision of Section 28 of the Protection of Human Rights Act, 1993 has been complied with.
“Has any special public prosecutor been appointed for the Arunachal Pradesh State Human Rights Commission in accordance with Section 31 of said Act?” it questioned.
It also asked the state government whether it has constituted a special investigation team in accordance with the provision of Section 37 of the Protection of Human Rights Act, 1993.
The court directed the chief secretary to ensure that “an affidavit, responding to the queries raised in this order, shall be filed by a concerned officer, not below the rank of a joint secretary, at least two days prior to the next date of listing.”
The matter has been listed for hearing on 24 February.
