Leaders of the Opposition in Rajya Sabha and Lok Sabha Mallikarjun Kharge and Rahul Gandhi have submitted a dissent note over the selection of the National Human Rights Commission (NHRC) chairperson and members, saying the process was fundamentally flawed. They called the exercise pre-determined, underlining it ignored the established tradition of mutual consultation and consensus, which is essential in such matters.
“This departure undermines the principles of fairness and impartiality, which are critical to the credibility of the Selection Committee,” Kharge and Gandhi said in the note. The two added Prime Minister Narendra Modi-led committee relied on its numerical majority to finalise the names, disregarding the legitimate concerns and perspectives raised during the meeting instead of fostering deliberation and ensuring a collective decision.
They noted 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.”
Kharge and Gandhi proposed the names of Justices (retd) Rohinton Fali Nariman, who was in the news this month for warning of an erosion of India’s secular foundation, and Kuttiyil Mathew Joseph for the position of NHRC chief, citing both merit and the need for inclusivity. “…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…Joseph, a former Supreme Court judge, 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.”
Kharge and Gandhi recommended the names of Justices (retd) S Muralidhar and Akil Kureshi as NHRC members. They added both have exemplary track records in upholding human rights. “…Muralidhar is widely respected for his landmark judgments advancing social justice, including his work on custodial violence and the protection of civil liberties.”
The two said Kureshi, 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.”
Kureshi retired as the Rajasthan high court chief justice in 2022, saying he left with his “pride intact” and considered the government’s “negative perception” about him as a certificate of independence.
Former chief justice of India Ranjan Gogoi said in his book that Kureshi could not be appointed to the Madhya Pradesh high court due to a “negative perception” about his judicial orders in the government.
In 2018, the government disagreed with the Supreme Court Collegium’s recommendation to appoint Justice Kureshi as the Madhya Pradesh chief justice from the Bombay high court, to which he was transferred from the Gujarat high court, where he was the most senior judge.
The collegium settled for his appointment as chief justice of the Tripura high court, a smaller court having four judges. Just six months before retirement, Kureshi was appointed the chief justice of the Rajasthan high court. Kureshi, as a judge in the Gujarat high court, heard cases related to fake encounters in the state, among others.
In their dissent note, Kharge and Gandhi said merit is undeniably the primary criterion, but maintaining a balance that reflects the regional, caste, community, and religious diversity of the nation is equally important. “This balance ensures that the NHRC operates with an inclusive perspective, sensitive to the lived experiences of all sections of society. By neglecting this critical principle, the [selection] Committee risks eroding public trust in this esteemed institution.”
The two said the dismissive approach by the majority of the selection committee towards these considerations is deeply regrettable. “The NHRC’s credibility and effectiveness depend on its ability to embody the diversity and inclusiveness that define India’s constitutional ethos. The names we proposed reflect this spirit and align with the foundational principles of the Commission. Their exclusion raises significant concerns about the impartiality and fairness of the selection process.”
Kharge and Gandhi underlined they respectfully record their dissent without prejudice to the names of the chairperson and members approved.
President Droupadi Murmu on Monday appointed former Supreme Court judge Justice (retd) V Ramasubramanian as the NHRC chairperson and Priyank Kanoongo and Justice (retd) Bidyut Ranjan Sarangi as members of the rights panel. Ramasubramanian also served as chief justice of the Himachal Pradesh high court in 2019. He enrolled as a member of the Bar on February 16, 1983, and practised for 23 years in the Madras high court. In 2019, he was appointed to the Supreme Court. He was involved in cases including the one related to the 2016 demonetisation policy and the validity of circumstantial evidence in bribery cases.
The NHRC chairperson’s post was vacant since Justice (retd) Arun Kumar Mishra completed his tenure on June 1. Mishra served as the eighth chairperson of the panel and was appointed in June 2021. Until Monday, former advocate of the Telangana high court Vijaya Bharathi Sayani was the acting NHRC chairperson.