Internal discord within the National Human Rights Commission (NHRC) is an open secret. The differences among commissioners have been public on several occasions in the past.

It repeated on Thursday. Seven months after the constitutional human rights watchdog submitted a draft bill of its new Act, the commission, together with the Prime Minister’s Office (PMO), held an interaction on the day to collect feedback to make the bill more comprehensive.

However, a member, Mihir Thakur, revealed his reservation over the bill, which Chairperson Top Bahadur Magar had to clarify. On September 3, 2024, the commission decided to forward the draft bill to the PMO. Thakur said while sending the bill, he had registered a seven-point reservation to it.

“I am not aware of whether the secretary [of the commission] had dispatched it along with the bill. Therefore, I take this opportunity to share them,” said Thakur at the programme. He said instead of a new Act, he is for amending the existing law to incorporate necessary provisions.

Against the commission’s recommendation for a separate service of its staff, Thakur said those appointed under the civil service should be deputed to the constitutional body. A number of participants in the interaction, including the commission staff, had said that since the constitutional body bears the responsibility for holding the government to account, the staff should not be recruited under the civil service.

Following Thakur’s remarks, Magar clarified why they had to draft a bill for a new Act. “A new Act is necessary if more than 60 percent of the existing Act needs revision,” said Magar. “Also, while defending our “A” status, we, as recommended by the Global Alliance of National Human Rights Institutions, agreed on a new law.”

The bill, which aims to further empower the commission through economic autonomy and other measures, hasn't got due government priority. The PMO forwarded the draft bill for the finance ministry's consent after sitting on it for half a year.

Through Thursday's interaction, the commission wanted to build pressure on the government to expedite the bill. However, making the differences public doesn't serve the cause, say NHRC officials. There is a deep feeling within the commission and a large section of the civil society that the government doesn't want to empower the human rights watchdog. Lack of unanimity in the constitutional body leadership gives the executive room to meddle in rights affairs.

Following criticism directed at the government during the interaction, Rajendra Chhetri, joint-secretary at the PMO, had said, "The division within the commission over the draft bill is not hidden from us."

The discord within the commission has spilled in the public even in the past.

Four of the five commissioners, including the chief commissioner Magar on October 30, 2024, asked the government to promote Kharel as secretary.

Three days later, on November 3, Thakur wrote a separate letter to then-prime minister Pushpa Kamal Dahal asking him to refrain from appointing Kharel as secretary, accusing the latter of misusing resources and engaging in irregularities at the commission. Furthermore, he took to Facebook saying Kharel must be sacked because he had protected an official accused of sexual harassment.

The decision to promote Kharel was even challenged in the top court but it refused to act against the promotion.

Some senior officials at the commission even questioned the timing of the interaction. Neither the commission nor the PMO felt the need for interaction when the bill was not forwarded to the finance ministry for consent.

"The bill needs to go through a redrafting process to incorporate the suggestions from the interaction. This should have been done when the bill was still at the PMO," said a senior official at the commission.

In practice, draft bills are sent for the finance ministry’s consent only after their finalisation, to see if their implementation increases the burden on the state coffers. It then is sent to the law ministry to check the legal aspects.