Part I NHRIs and the Paris Principles (f) To perform any other function which the Government may wish to assign to them in connection with the duties of that State under those international agreements in the field of human rights to which it is party. In regard to the structure of such institutions, the guidelines recommended that they should: (a) Be so designed as to reflect in their composition, wide cross-sections of the nation, thereby bringing all parts of that population into the decision-making process in regard to human rights; (b) Function regularly, and that immediate access to them should be available to any member of the public or any public authority; (c) In appropriate cases, have local or regional advisory organs to assist them in discharging their functions. The guidelines were subsequently endorsed by the Commission on Human Rights and by the General Assembly. The Commission invited all Member States to take appropriate steps for the establishment, where they did not already exist, of national institutions for the protection and promotion of human rights, and requested the Secretary-General to submit a detailed report on existing national institutions.17 With this international encouragement, States began to establish NHRIs. However, in spite of the international encouragement, progress was slow. In 1990, there were fewer than 20 NHRIs.18 Two events in the early 1990s led to the rapid increase in NHRIs over the following 20 years. 1.4. THE PARIS WORKSHOP AND THE PARIS PRINCIPLES The first significant event was a workshop of NHRIs, convened by the UN Commission on Human Rights in Paris, France, from 7 to 9 October 1991. The workshop was attended by representatives of NHRIs and of States, the UN and its agencies, intergovernmental organisations and NGOs. The key participants for the first time were the NHRIs themselves. The workshop was to review and update information on existing NHRIs, review patterns of cooperation of NHRIs with international institutions and explore ways of increasing the effectiveness of NHRIs.19 The workshop did what it was told to do but, in addition, and far more importantly, it drafted the Principles relating to the Status of National Institutions for the Promotion and Protection of Human Rights (the Paris Principles).20 The Paris Principles were endorsed by the UN Commission on Human Rights in 1992 and by the General Assembly in 1993.21 They are the standard against which NHRIs are assessed for recognition and participation in the international human rights system and are “the test of an institution’s legitimacy and credibility”.22 17 United Nations Centre for Human Rights, National Institutions for the Promotion and Protection of Human Rights: Fact Sheet 19, April 1993. 18 The official report of the Paris workshop in 1991 lists the following national institutions as being present at the time: Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission, Australia; Beninese Commission on Human Rights, Benin; Council for the Protection of Human Rights, Brazil; Canadian Human Rights Commission, Canada; Chilean Commission on Human Rights, Chile; Commission on Civil Rights, United States of America; National Consultative Commission on Human Rights, France; Commission on Human Rights, Italy; Advisory Council on Human Rights, Morocco; National Commission on Human Rights, Mexico; Human Rights Commission, New Zealand; Advisory Commission on Human Rights, Norway; Commission of Inquiry into Violations of Human Rights, Uganda; Human Rights and Foreign Policy Advisory Commission, Netherlands; National Council on Human Rights, Peru; Commission on Human Rights, Philippines; Commission for Racial Equality, United Kingdom; Commission on Human Rights, Senegal; National Commission on Human Rights, Togo; Higher Committee on Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, Tunisia; Human Rights Commission, Turkey; Political Commission for International Cooperation and Humanitarian and Human Rights Problems, Union of Soviet Socialist Republics; Attorney-General of the Republic, Venezuela; and Committee for the Protection of Liberties and Human Rights, Yugoslavia (E/CN.4/1992/43, 16 December 1991). Not all of these NHRIs could be considered independent, however. Those accepted into the ICC, when formed in 1993, were the NHRIs of Australia, Cameroon, Canada, Denmark, France, Mexico, Morocco, New Zealand, the Philippines, Senegal, Togo and Tunisia. 19 Commission on Human Rights resolution 1990/73. 20 See Appendix 1 of this manual. 21 Commission on Human Rights resolution 1992/54; General Assembly resolution 48/134. 22 OHCHR, National Human Rights Institutions: History, Principles, Roles and Responsibilities, Professional Training Series No. 4 (Rev. 1), 2010, p. 7. Chapter 1: The origins and development of NHRIs | 7