Part I NHRIs and the Paris Principles enforced do nothing for human rights. Parliaments enact the laws, often with the advice of NHRIs, and then NHRIs need to work on interpretation, implementation, investigation, education and monitoring. NHRIs do not replace governments. Their powers and functions are largely administrative in nature, rather than legislative or judicial, but they are not governmental decision makers. They can offer advice to government on government policies, programs and activities that will promote or protect human rights and they can investigate and expose governmental actions that violate human rights. However, NHRIs do not and cannot take the place of government in running the country. They should respect the role of government in making decisions and setting policy, while advising, investigating and, when necessary, criticising government. NHRIs do not compete with the courts. They complement the courts. Formally, they have similarities with the status of courts. Courts are set up under the State’s constitution and laws. They too are independent institutions. Courts and NHRIs are both subject to and limited by the provisions of the laws that establish them. Both courts and NHRIs must operate according to the rule of law and the principles of natural justice and due process. The members of courts and of NHRIs are appointed through executive or legislative processes or some mix of the two. The funding of courts and NHRIs is determined through the ordinary budgetary processes of the State and requires some form of parliamentary approval and allocation. Both courts and NHRIs have responsibilities for the promotion and protection of human rights. Courts and NHRIs may have some overlapping responsibilities. Most NHRIs, for example, have jurisdiction to receive and investigate individual complaints of human rights violations and some NHRIs have power to make binding, enforceable determinations on those complaints, much as courts do. For the most part, however, courts and NHRIs have different but complementary roles and functions. NHRIs do things that courts cannot do or cannot do well. Understanding the complementarity of NHRIs and courts is important because comparisons between the two types of institution are common. Some argue that, because courts have power to make binding, enforceable decisions and NHRIs generally do not, there is no need for NHRIs. However, courts cannot do everything and they encounter significant structural limitations in their capacity to promote and protect human rights. Some argue that NHRIs compete with courts and undermine their roles, but NHRIs have distinctive roles that do not replace the need for effective, independent courts within every State. Human rights need both good courts and good NHRIs, not one or the other. The Palestinian Independent Commission for Human Rights operates five regional offices across the West Bank and the Gaza Strip. Chapter 2: The nature and concept of NHRIs | 13