Selection of SHRC chairperson mires into controversy, HP’s leader of opposition questions move

Leader of opposition Mukesh Agnihotri shot off a letter to governor Bandaru Dattatreya, opposing the process adopted by the government to select chairperson and members

Selection of State Human Rights Commission chairperson in Himachal Pradesh has mired into controversy, with opposition Congress questioning the government’s move to reconstitute the commission that had been lying defunct for the last 15 years.

HT File

Leader of opposition Mukesh Agnihotri shot off a letter to governor Bandaru Dattatreya, opposing the process adopted by the government to select chairperson and members. In the letter, he said that the presence of the opposition leader was mandatory. Agnihotri in the letter cited that he had ascribed the reason for not attending the meeting due to his prefixed engagement on June 9.

“I’m writing to inform you that proceeding with the selection of the chairperson and members of the State Human Rights Commission on basis of the decision made on June 9 would constitute an affront on the statutory norm and the democratic values. Section 22 of the Protection of Human Rights Act, 1993 mandates the inclusion of leader of opposition in the appointment committee,” the letter read.

“I intimated the government about my unavailability on that specific day due to unavoidable circumstances. As per the precedent if a member cannot attend the meeting on a specific day, it has to be rescheduled,” he said. Mukesh also cited examples of previous Virbhadra Singh-led government where leader of opposition Prem Kumar Dhumal could not make it to the meetings on three occasions and the government reorganised them each time.

“Importantly according to the statute, the government could carry on with the selection only in case there was a vacancy in the office of the leader of opposition, which is clearly not the case here. It is also pertinent to mention that no agenda was served,” he added.

He said that it was appalling that the government chose to proceed without abiding by the precedent and the statute in the very first meeting. It is a cause of grave concern as the independence of the commission would be threatened by such appointments. It would also erode the public confidence in the pious commission.” Agnihotri aid urging the government to reschedule the meeting so that democratic values and rule of law are upheld in the state.