Over the past 20 years, there has been growing awareness of the need to strengthen, at the national level, concerted action aimed at implementing and ensuring compliance with human rights norms and standards. One of the means used to do this has been the establishment of NHRIs. While the term covers a range of bodies whose name (national human rights commission, ombudsman, public defender, etc.), legal status, composition, structure, functions and mandates vary, all such bodies are set up by governments or parliaments to operate independently – like the judiciary – with a view to promoting and protecting human rights.
NHRIs must comply with the internationally agreed Paris Principles (see Box 41) that identify their human rights objectives and set core minimum standards with respect to independence, a broad human rights mandate, adequacy of funding, and inclusivity and transparency of selection and appointment processes. In 1993, they established the International Coordinating Committee of NHRIs in order to coordinate the activities of the NHRI network. The Committee resolved to create an accreditation process and to this effect set up a Subcommittee on Accreditation. The Subcommittee on Accreditation reviews and analyses accreditation applications and makes recommendations to the Committee as to applicant compliance with the Paris Principles. The Committee grants “A” status to NHRIs found to be in compliance with
the Paris Principles, “B” status to NHRIs partially in compliance with them and “C”
status to those not in compliance.
NHRIs should have the capacity and authority to:
• submit recommendations, proposals and reports to the government or parliament on any matter relating to human rights;
• promote the conformity of national laws and practices with international standards;
• receive and act upon individual or group complaints of human rights violations;
• encourage the ratification and implementation of international human rights instruments and contribute to reporting procedures under international human rights treaties;
• promote awareness of human rights through information and education, and carry out research in the area of human rights;
• cooperate with the United Nations, regional institutions, national institutions in other countries and NGOs.
Relations between NHRIs and parliaments have great potential for human rights protection and promotion at the national level. The March 2004 and February 2012 international workshops held in Abuja, Nigeria1 and Belgrade, Serbia2 focused on that relationship. The outcome of the first workshop was the Abuja Guidelines for strengthening cooperation between NHRIs and parliaments. The second concluded with the adoption of the Belgrade Principles on the relationship between NHRIs and Parliaments (see Box 43).3
Box 41 The Paris Principles
In 1993, the United Nations General Assembly adopted a set of principles applicable to the establishment of national human rights institutions. Known as the “Paris Principles”, these have become the internationally accepted benchmark setting out core minimum standards for the role and functioning of such
institutions. According to these principles, national human rights institutions must:
• be independent, and their independence must be guaranteed by either statutory law or constitutional provisions;
• be pluralistic in their roles and memberships;
• have as broad a mandate as possible;
• have adequate powers of investigation;
1 The workshop was organized by the National Human Rights Commission of Nigeria, the Committee on Human Rights of the Nigerian House of Representatives, the Legal Resources Consortium of Nigeria and the British Council, and was supported by the United Kingdom’s Foreign and Commonwealth Office.
2 The Belgrade seminar was organized by the OHCHR, the International Coordinating Committee of NHRIs, the National Assembly and the Protector of Citizens of the Republic of Serbia, with the support of the UN country team in the Republic of Serbia.
3 More information on NHRIs and their relationship with parliament can be found at http://www.ohchr.org/
EN/Countries/NHRI/Pages/NHRIMain.aspx.
• be characterized by regular and effective functioning;
• be adequately funded;
• be accessible to the general public.
Box 42 Countries with A status NHRIs (in compliance with the Paris Principles) (as of August 2016)
Asia and the Pacific: Afghanistan, Australia, India, Indonesia, Jordan, Malaysia, Mongolia, Nepal, New Zealand, Philippines, Qatar, Republic of Korea, Samoa, State of Palestine, Timor-Leste
Africa: Burundi, Cameroon, Egypt, Ghana, Kenya, Malawi, Mauritania, Mauritius, Morocco, Namibia, Nigeria, Rwanda, Sierra Leone, South Africa, Tanzania (United Republic of), Togo, Uganda, Zambia, Zimbabwe
Americas: Argentina, Bolivia (Plurinational State of), Canada, Chile, Colombia, Costa Rica, Ecuador, El Salvador, Guatemala, Haiti, Mexico, Nicaragua, Panama, Peru, Uruguay, Venezuela (Bolivarian Republic of)
Europe: Albania, Armenia, Azerbaijan, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Croatia, Denmark, Finland, France, Georgia, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Ireland, Latvia, Luxembourg, Netherlands, Poland, Portugal, Russian Federation, Serbia, Spain, Ukraine, United Kingdom (Great Britain, Northern Ireland, Scotland)
32 NHRIs are accredited with B status (not fully in compliance with the Paris Principles) and 10 with C status (non-compliance with the Paris Principles).
Box 43 Recommendations for parliamentarians from the Abuja Guidelines and the Belgrade Principles
• Founding law
– Parliaments, in consultation with relevant stakeholders, should produce an appropriate legislative framework for the establishment of NHRIs in accordance with the Paris Principles, securing its independence and direct accountability to parliament. Parliaments should have the exclusive competence to legislate for the establishment of an NHRI and for any amendments to the founding law.
– Parliamentarians should carefully scrutinize any government proposals that might adversely affect the work of NHRIs, and seek the views of NHRI members on such proposals.
• Financial independence
– Parliaments should ensure that adequate resources and facilities are provided to NHRIs to enable them to perform their functions effectively. Parliaments should also ensure that resources are made available to the NHRIs.
– NHRIs should submit to parliaments a strategic plan or annual
programme, which parliament should take into account when discussing budget proposals.
• Appointment and dismissal process
– Parliaments should clearly lay down in the founding law a transparent selection and appointment process, as well as procedures for the dismissal of NHRI members. These processes should include civil society where appropriate.
– Parliaments should secure the independence of NHRIs by incorporating a provision on immunity for actions taken in an official capacity within the founding law.
• Reporting
– NHRIs should report directly to parliament, which should develop a
principled framework for debating the activities of the NHRIs consistent with respect for their independence.
– NHRIs’ annual reports and other reports should be debated – and the government’s response presented – in regular and timely parliamentary discussions.
• Forms of cooperation between parliaments and NHRIs
– NHRIs and parliaments should agree on the basis for cooperation, including by establishing a formal framework to discuss human rights issues.
– Parliaments should identify or establish an appropriate parliamentary committee which will be the NHRI’s main point of contact with parliament;
that could be an all-party committee.
– Members of NHRIs should be invited to appear regularly before the
appropriate parliamentary committees to discuss the bodies’ annual reports and other reports, and parliamentarians should invite members of NHRIs to meet regularly with them to discuss matters of mutual interest.
– Parliamentarians should ensure that sufficient time is given to considering the work of NHRIs.
– Parliamentarians should ensure that NHRI recommendations for action are followed up and implemented.
• Cooperation between parliaments and NHRIs on legislation, international human rights mechanisms, education, awareness raising and monitoring of the executive’s response to judgments delivered by courts or administrative bodies – NHRIs should be consulted by parliaments on the content and applicability
of new law so as to ensure that human rights norms and principles are reflected therein.
– Parliaments should seek to be involved in the process of ratification of international human rights treaties, including by consulting NHRIs in the
process, and in monitoring the State’s compliance with its international human rights obligations.
– NHRIs and parliaments should work together to encourage the development of a culture of respect for human rights; parliaments should ensure that constituents are aware of recommendations issued by NHRIs.
– Parliaments and NHRIs (as appropriate) should cooperate in monitoring the executive’s response to judgments by courts (national, regional or international) and administrative tribunals regarding human rights related issues.
“Parliaments should play a critical role in securing the independence and functioning of NHRIs. The Paris Principles require effective cooperation between NHRIs and parliaments and, in this regard, the adoption of the Belgrade Principles on the relationship between NHRI and parliament is welcomed. States are encouraged to use the Belgrade Principles as guidelines to strengthen cooperation between NHRIs and parliaments for the promotion and protection of human rights at the national level.”
Report of the United Nations Secretary General to the General Assembly, A/HRC/20/9, 2012.