The State Police Complaints Authority (SPCA) has been without a chairman since April 1 last year, while the last chairmen of the Goa Human Rights Commission (GHRC) retired on March 3, 2016. An acting chairman was appointed for a brief period, but the body has now been headless for two years. This is affecting the functioning of the bodies as final orders, in the case of the SPCA, are not being passed in the absence of the chairmen.

There is no justifiable explanation to the delay in finding replacements to the retired chairmen. The two bodies appear to be caught in administrative red tape that has kept on hold the appointment of chairmen to the SPCA and GHRC. According to a senior bureaucrat, the Home Department is aware that the two institutions are without chairpersons, and the excuse that this bureaucrat gives for the delay in appointing chairmen to the two bodies is the Chief Minister’s illness. He goes on to say that the two bodies are expected to write to the government ‘urging urgent’ filling up of the posts.

In cases like these, does the government have to wait for correspondence from the bodies bringing to their notice the fact that there is a vacancy and seeking that it be filled? This should have been a seamless administrative function, that as the term of the chairman ends, another is appointed in his or her place so as to not affect the functioning of the bodies. The two bodies are currently functioning just with the members who are conducting hearings. In the case of the GHRC, there is only one member of the commission, as the other member expired last year, who is even passing orders.

These are two constitutional bodies, headed by retired High court judges, that are mandated to deliver justice to the people. The absence of the chairmen leads to a breakdown of the process. New appointments take time, as retired judges have to be identified, approached with the offer of the position and their consent obtained before the appointment can be made. The process should therefore start months before the scheduled retirement of the chairman of the body, rather than waiting for the person holding the post to retire, and then starting the process. It is now unlikely that the two bodies will get chairmen anytime soon.

The constitution of the SPCA was mandated by the Supreme Court due to the large number of complaints against the police and the lack of accountability from the men in uniform. If the authority is unable to pass orders due to the non-appointment of a chairperson, then it effectively becomes a toothless tiger, existing merely to fulfill the directions of the Supreme Court, but not serving the purpose for which it has been constituted. Such a state of affairs cannot be allowed to continue merely because the government has failed to appoint a chairperson to replace the person who has retired.

When this delay in appointing chairpersons is juxtaposed with the fact that there are close to 200 cases pending with the Vigilance Department and Anti-Corruption Branch, it further underlines the government’s lackadaisical attitude towards fighting corruption and upholding human rights. If the government is serious about tackling corruption then chairpersons have to be appointed to the SPCA and the GHRC so that the aggrieved parties are given justice. This has to be done on a priority basis, as the code of conduct for the Lok Sabha polls will soon stall many such decisions that need to be taken.