Search Results

National Human Rights Institutions (NHRIs) were established after a long process of consideration at the United Nations. Since 1993, they have become widely accepted institutions that exist throughout the world. Furthermore, their voices on human rights are listened to both nationally and internationally. This chapter examines how NHRIs have arrived at this point by exploring the history and establishment of NHRIs at the United Nations, from the earliest considerations of their establishment in the mid-1940s up to the adoption of the United Nations Paris Principles in 1993. It then considers the progress made by NHRIs in establishing and developing their own networks and how their engagement with regional and international organizations have been finalized.

How are National Human Rights Institutions (NHRIs) expected to use their mandate in practice? This chapter is the first in Part III of this book and examines recommendations of the Sub-Committee on Accreditation (SCA) in relation to the activity of the NHRI on the ground as a human rights actor. This is a growing area of focus and concern for the SCA as is seen throughout Part III of this book. This chapter examines how the SCA deals with NHRIs who are failing to promote and protect human rights, or worse, actively undermining human rights. It also considers the requirements for NHRIs to engage both at the domestic level with other national human rights actors, primarily NGOs and civil society, and with the international and regional human rights systems.

This chapter places the book in its broader context. It considers the complex position of National Human Rights Institutions (NHRIs) at the national level, and the risks where they are ineffective. It examines some of the central discussions and approaches taken in the academic literature to NHRIs’ independence and effectiveness, notably the factors considered as underlying effectiveness. It also introduces the increased focus by international organisations—in particular, the United Nations—on NHRIs as domestic implementers of international human rights standards. Introducing the book as a whole, this chapter also explains the content, format, and approach taken by the authors in the book.

Independent leadership is critical to the independence and functioning of NHRIs. This chapter examines a range of crucial issues for National Human Rights Institutions (NHRIs), central to which is the question of who runs the NHRI. This chapter begins by examining how NHRIs should reflect the nature of the society in which they operate, including representation of women and diverse societal groups. It then moves on to the area that has received the most focus in Sub-Committee on Accreditation reviews: the selection and appointments process, including the formalization of the process in the enabling law, the composition of the selection panel, and the procedure for nominations and appointment. Finally, this chapter considers the related issues of security of tenure, functional immunity, and staffing. Together, the issues dealt with in this chapter go to the heart of the functional and structural requirements for the compliance of NHRIs with the Paris Principles.

The Sub-Committee on Accreditation (SCA) is a unique mechanism within the international human rights system that is entrusted to assess National Human Rights Institutions, with its judgments accepted by the international community. But how does the SCA accreditation process work, and how does the SCA make its decisions? This chapter provides a detailed insight into how the SCA functions in practice, and the methods by which it reaches its decisions. Drawing in particular on the eleven years of experience of David Langtry as a member of the SCA, this chapter provides unique insights into the process of accreditation as well as detailing the formalities of the accreditation process that will be of particular interest for those seeking to improve their understanding of it, as well as for those who will engage with this process.

This chapter examines the Sub-Committee on Accreditation’s (SCA) recommendations in relation to several important areas of the mandate of National Human Rights Institutions (NHRIs)—in particular, their human rights mandate, and their promotion and protection functions. There are several interrelated questions examined in this chapter. First, is the definition of human rights sufficiently broad in the NHRI’s enabling law? Second, are promotion and protection functions sufficiently provided for in the enabling law, and are they being used by the NHRI in practice? Third, does the NHRI have a mandate to encourage the ratification of international instruments? Finally, if the NHRI has a complaints-handling function, is this function compliant with the Paris Principles?

What does this book tell us about the Sub-committee on Accreditation (SCA) and National Human Rights Institutions (NHRIs)? And what will the coming period look like for them? How can Global Alliance of NHRIs’ (GANHRI), the SCA, and NHRIs support the credibility of these institutions around the world? This final chapter of the book reflects upon the approach taken by the SCA in its assessments reviewed in this book, as well as what these assessments can tell us about NHRI effectiveness and independence. It also offers final reflections by the authors on the role of the SCA, the potential and risks for it moving forward, and the future for NHRIs.

Whether a National Human Rights Institution’s (NHRI) has sufficient budgetary resources to undertake its operations is fundamental to the ability of the institution to fulfil its mandate as an independent human rights body. Funding is thus a significant point of concern for the Sub-Committee on Accreditation (SCA). Almost half of the SCA recommendations from 2006 to 2019 included mention of the need for adequate funding. NHRIs are expected to be adequately funded by the state, yet states may underfund their NHRI either because of a lack of commitment, the general economic situation, or as a way of undermining its effective functioning.

Some National Human Rights Institutions (NHRIs) have been given additional mandates under two of the most recent international human rights instruments: Specifically, as National Preventative Mechanisms (NPMs) under the Optional Protocol to the Convention Against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (OPCAT) and/or as National Monitoring Mechanisms (NMM) under the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD). The national mechanisms under OPCAT and CRPD are novel innovations in the modern human rights architecture, and one in which NHRIs have been closely involved. This chapter reviews the observations of the Sub-Committee on Accreditation (SCA) on NHRIs that have an additional role as treaty-mandated national mechanisms.

How does the Sub-Committee on Accreditation (SCA) approach its review of its institutions that are operating in conflict zones, authoritarian states, or in the midst of gross violations of human rights? This chapter examines specific cases in order to understand how the SCA has dealt with ‘challenging cases’. These are situations where the National Human Rights Institution is operating in a highly challenging national climate such as during a time of coup (Thailand, Honduras) or armed conflict (Afghanistan), where rule of law is under significant threat (Hungary and Poland), or where they or their members come under direct threat of harm (Togo).

The Paris Principles require National Human Rights Institutions (NHRIs) to be properly established as a state body in law. In establishing an NHRI, states therefore enact an enabling law and/or modify their constitution. This is the fundamental starting point for the creation and functioning of an NHRI. But what form should this enabling law take and how does the Sub-Committee on Accreditation (SCA) respond when the NHRI is established not by legislation but by an executive order? How should NHRIs seek improvements to their enabling law? This chapter considers the SCA’s findings in relation to these questions. It also examines the formal requirements for NHRI annual reports within the enabling law, and their placement before the national parliament. This chapter focuses on the status of the enabling law at the national level, as the content of the enabling law itself is the subject of multiple recommendations across other chapters in this part of the book.

In the period of work of the Sub-Committee on Accreditation (SCA) covered by this book, there have been a number of National Human Rights Institutions (NHRIs) who have lost their Paris Principles compliant A-status accreditation following a special review or during the re-accreditation process due to either their actions or their inaction. This chapter examines some of these instances in a case-study format looking at Azerbaijan, Mauritania, Nicaragua, and Paraguay, as well as situations where NHRIs have been downgraded but not because of a failure to engage with the human rights situation but because of serious structural deficiencies, such as a structural change to the institution or financial issues.