Issues regarding inadequacy of finances, non-framing of rules, filling-up of vacant posts etc. were also discussed. The National Commission would also be taking up some of these issues with the respective State Governments. 15.13 15.14 Regarding the implementation of the recommendations of the Commissions, some of the Chairpersons and Members of the State Commissions commented on a general reluctance on the part of State Governments promptly to implement the recommendations of the State Commissions. Some of them urged the desirability of a suitable amendment to the law, so as to enable an effective machinery for execution. Some Members, however, expressed the view that as the powers and jurisdiction of the Commissions are inquisitorial in nature and exercisable even suo-motu, any additional change in the 'statute to make the Commission's recommendationsbinding and per-se enforceable may not concur with the spirit and philosophy on which the Commissions are based. That apart, any such provision, it was urged, might make the Commission another adjudicatory body carrying with it a litigative disposition to its deliberations attracting Court's interventions. 15.15 It was further pointed out that, unlike the provisions in the Commission of Inquiry Act, 1952, the Protection of Human Rights Act, t 993 has two distinct features whose significance has not come to be appreciated and whose potential is not properly utilised. The first is the provision in Section 18(5), which provides: "The Commission shall send a copy of its inquiry report together with its recommendations to the concerned Government or authority and the concerned Government or authority shall, within a period of one month, or such further time as the Commission may allow, forward its comments on fhe report, including the action taken or proposed to be taken thereon, to the Commission". 15.16 Unlike the case of Commissions of Inquiry, the recommendations of the National and State Human Rights Commissions have to be dealt with by the Governments, not as some recommendations amenable to their drscretion whether to accept or reject them. Rather, the State Governments, under the Protection of Human Rights Act, 1993, are bound, within the time frame prescribed by Section 18(5), to forward to the Commission their comments 'including the action taken or proposed to be taken thereon". This obligation has significant relationship to and requires to be read with Sub-section (2) of Section 18, under which the Commission has the right, and in appropriate cases the duty, to approach the Supreme Court or the High Courts. The provisions in Section 18(2) and (51, read together and properly construed, impose 'reporting obligations" on the Central and State Governments. 15.17 It would, indeed, be appropriate for National and State Commissions, wherever they consider that the responses of the State Governments do not accord with justice and fail to