NEWSLINKS US EDITION SOUTH ASIA COLUMNISTS DIARY SPECIALS INTERVIEWS CAPITAL BUZZ REDIFF POLL DEAR REDIFF THE STATES ELECTIONS ARCHIVES SEARCH REDIFF
To decide matters pertaining to the jurisdiction of the National Human Rights Commission, the Supreme Court on Monday transferred to itself two petitions in Gujarat and Tamil Nadu pertaining to recent communal riots and the manner of the arrest of Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam chief M Karunanidhi respectively.
As the Solicitor General Harish Salve agreed that there was a substantive question of law involved in it and the matters be transferred to the Supreme Court, a three-judge bench comprising Chief Justice B N Kirpal, Justice K G Balakrishnan and Justice Arijit Pasayat transferred the petitions pending in Gujarat and Madras high courts to itself.
The bench called for the records from the respective high courts and directed the registry to fix the matter for further hearing after the receipt of the records.
In the wake of the Godhra carnage and the resulting communal frenzy, the NHRC had on March 1 taken suo-motu cognizance of the events in Gujarat and sought replies from the chief secretary and the director general of police regarding steps taken to prevent further violence.
As the state government appointed a Commission of Inquiry headed by retired high court judge, Justice K G Shah, on March 6, a petition was filed by Karuna Trust, a charitable organisation questioning the jurisdiction of NHRC to inquire into the incidents of disturbances in the state.
The NHRC in its transfer petition said that it was empowered under Section 12 of the Protection of Human Rights Act, 1993 to inquire suo-motu or on a petition, into complaints of violation of human rights or abetment thereof, or negligence in the prevention of such violation.
Salve said that as NHRC was inquiring into incidents of alleged violation of human rights in various states the questions raised in the petitions before the Madras and Gujarat high courts were bound to arise and they should be settled by the Supreme Court.
NHRC said both the Tamil Nadu and Gujarat petitions raised an identical question of law and added as it had taken cognizance of the matters prior to appointment of the Commissions of Inquiry by the state governments, there would be no bar on the power of the NHRC to inquire into such incidents.
Tell us what you think of this report
