LOOKING BACK AND FORGING AHEAD During the course of the year under report, on 12 October 1998, the Commission 2.1 completed five years since its establishment. A brief review of the challenges it has faced, its responses to those challenges, and its concerns for the period immediately ahead, would be appropriate at this stage. The establishment of a National Human Rights Commission in 1993, based on an Act of Parliament, was a step without precedent in the building of institutions of governance in independent India. As with other National Institutions established in other countries, there was a degree of scepticism as to whether such a body would indeed function with independence and integrity. Questions were also raised as to whether the Protection of Human Rights Act, 1993, which contained the Statute of the Commission provided an adequate enough basis for bona fide efforts to promote and protect human rights in the country. 2.2 The Commission decided that the only way to deal with this dual challenge was to face 2.3 it frontally and unequivocally. The very first case on which it took suo motu action related to the tragic incident in Bijbehara, in Jammu & Kashmir, involving elements of the security forces. Further, despite the grave threat posed to the country by terrorism, a danger that persists, the Commission urged the non-renewal of the Terrorist and Disruptive Activities (Prevention) Act, 1987 because it came to the conclusion, after extensive hearings and analysis, that the Act lent itself to serious abuses in its implementation, damaging the civil and political rights of the people of India. As to the Statute itself, the Commission proceeded, after six months in existence, to make certain recommendations for amendments to the Protection of Human Rights Act, 1993. However, in the light of further experience, the Commission itself came to the conclusion that there was need for an independent and more comprehensive examination of the Act. It accordingly requested Justice A.M.Ahmadi, former Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of India, to chair a high-level Advisory Committee to make an in-depth study of the Act and suggest possible amendments. The report of the Ahmadi Committee is awaited. Upon it being received, it will be studied by the Commission and brought before the Central Government. In the meantime, the Commission has not waited upon events: it has constantly sought to use and interpret its powers and functions under the Act as expansively and responsibly as it could, keeping in mind its over-arching responsibility to promote and protect human rights in the country and to create a culture in which such rights would be nurtured and respected. Further, it has sought to act with utmost transparency. Its decisions are made public; its proceedings are often in open Court; and it has sought to ensure the easiest accessibility: no 2.4