UPSC Prelims 1999 · General Studies
Question 34: Polity and Governance
Consider the following statements regarding the National Human Rights Commission of India: I. Its Chairman must be a retired Chief Justice of India. II. It has formations in each state as State Human Rights Commission. III. Its powers are only recommendatory in nature. IV. It is mandatory to appoint a woman as a member of the Commission. Which of the above statements are correct?
AnswerThe answer is (c).
Statement III is right: the NHRC can only recommend, and its findings are not binding. I was right under the original 1993 Act, which required the chairperson to be a former Chief Justice of India. II is wrong: the Act lets states set up their own State Human Rights Commissions, which are separate bodies, and not every state had one. IV is wrong: the original Act did not require a woman member. Remember: the NHRC recommends; it cannot enforce.
- I. Under the original Act the chairperson had to be a former Chief Justice of India.
- II. State Human Rights Commissions are separate bodies that states may set up; not every state had one.
- III. Its powers are recommendatory.
- IV. The original Act did not make a woman member mandatory.
Why each option is right or wrong
- (a) Wrong. II and IV are false.
- (b) Wrong. This is II and IV, both false.
- (c) Right. I and III were correct under the 1993 Act.
- (d) Wrong. II is false: State Commissions are separate bodies, not formations of the NHRC.
Worth knowing: The 2019 amendment lets any former Supreme Court judge chair the NHRC (so I is no longer strictly true) and requires at least one woman member (so IV is now true).
Explanation: written by UPSC Grade, not by UPSC.
Source: UPSC, Civil Services (Preliminary) Examination 1999, General Studies. UPSC's own paper isn't online; the words are from a published compilation. The paper on upsc.gov.in.