16 i EXPERIENCE OF THE WORKING OF THE PROTECTION OF HUMAN RIGHTS ACT, 1993 district as a Human Rights Court have not had the desired effect, section 30 in its present form lacking clarity. The Commission had therefore proposed that this provision be amplified and clarified and had recommended a specific amendment to achieve this end. In the absence of any reaction to this proposal, too, the purposes of the Act are not being fulfiled, the infirmity being built into the present text. • The provisions of the present Act also need to be reviewed in order to reinforce the financial and administrative autonomy of the Commission — a cardinal feature of the 'Paris Principles' that should he reflected in the wording of the statutes of National Institutions for the Promotion and Protection of Human Rights. Specific proposals have been made by the Commission in respect of sections 32 and 33 of the Act which also need to be acted upon without delay in order to ensure that the National Human Rights Commission and State Human Rights Commissions are assured of adequate means and autonomy to function properly. Regrettably, the experience of more than one State Human Rights Commission has already shown how easy it is to subvert the purposes of the Act by withholding the means and denying the autonomy required for the proper functioning of such institutions. • Experience has also shown that there is need to radically amend the present wording of section 36 of the Act, dealing with 'matters not subject to the jurisdiction of the Commission,' as it has lent itself to efforts to thwart the purposes of the Act. On occasion, this has been done by bringing a matter before a State Human Rights Commission or some other Commission in similar, or slightly modified manner, in order to seek to block the jurisdiction of the National Human Rights Commission. On other occasions, this has been done by setting-up a Commission under the Commission of Inquiries Act after the National Human Rights Commission has already taken cognisance of a matter and then questioning the jurisdiction of the National Commission, in a court of law, to proceed with its efforts or monitor a situation. The Commission has made specific proposals to amend section 36(1) of the Act in order to provide the National Humam Rights Commission with an over-arching ability to oversee issues of human rights violations and their remedies. The Commission has, additionally, observed that other Commissions have taken disparate positions on fundamental issues of human rights, including serious social issues such as bonded labour, the rights of women and children, and that this has resulted in a lack of clarity in respect of the jurisprudence of human rights. It therefore NATIONAL HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION