EXPERIENCE OF THE WORKING OF THE PROTECTION OF HUMAN RIGHTS ACT. 1993 j 15 • A repetitive problem has arisen because the present wording of section 20 of the Act has permitted delays to occur in the tabling of annual reports of the Commission before Parliament, together with the Memorandum of Action Taken. The report for 1997-98 was transmitted to the Central Government on 8 March 1999. It was tabledinParliament inMarch 2000, a year later. The report for 1998-99 was transmitted to the Central Government on 9 November 1999. It was tabled in Parliament in December 2000, over a year later. The report for 19992000 was transmitted to the Central Government on 29 March 2001. It was tabled in Parliament in April 2002, again over a year later. While the Memorandum of Action Taken of April 2002 states that delays have occurred because printed copies of annual reports were received late by the Central Government, the regrettable fact remains that successive annual reports of the Commission have not been made available to Parliament or the public in a timely manner. This has not furthered the 'better protection' of human rights, or greater accountability or transparency. Nor do such delays indicate that greater effectiveness and efficiency are being brought to bear in dealing with the human rights situation. The delays, in fact, have also amounted to a denial of the Right to Information of the people of this coimtry. The annual reports of the Commission are widely read by human rights activists, scholars and others, both at home and abroad, as also by international human rights bodies, including treaty bodies. It was for this reason that, consistent with the purposes of the Act, the Commission had recommended that section 20(2) of the Act be amended to read: 'The Central Government and the State Government as the case may be, shall within a period of three months from the date of receipt of such report cause the annual and special reports of the Commission to be laid before each House of Parliament or the State Legislature respectively, as the case may be, along with a Memorandum of Action Taken or proposed to be taken on the recommendations of the Commission and the reasons for non-acceptance of the recommendations, if any. Provided that where such report is not laid before the Houses of Parliament or the State Legislature, as the case may be, within that period, it shall be open to the Commission to publish such reports' • The Commission has observed that, nine years after the Act was passed, the provisions of section 30 providing for the 'speedy trial of offences arising out of violation of human rights' through the notification of a Court of Session in each ANNUAL REPORT 2001 -2002