Part I NHRIs and the Paris Principles • Relations between national institutions and other partners –– the partners of national institutions –– relations with the various partners: a partnership based on identity of purpose and complementarity of function • Jurisdiction and competence of national institutions –– domestic and/or international scope –– participation in the drafting of legislation –– quasi-judicial powers and mode of referral –– protection and promotion of human rights –– advisory jurisdiction or binding jurisdiction –– conflicts of jurisdiction. The workshop’s results, however, went well beyond exchanging experiences and considering cooperation with UN agencies. The NHRI participants were anxious to agree on a statement of principles that would constitute international minimum standards for the establishment and operations of NHRIs. They drafted, negotiated and adopted the Paris Principles.42 The workshop recommended that the Paris Principles be conveyed to the Preparatory Committee for the World Conference on Human Rights, scheduled to be held in Vienna in 1993. The Paris Principles quickly received support within the UN human rights system. They were endorsed by the Commission on Human Rights in 1992.43 They became the basis on which the Vienna World Conference on Human Rights in June 1993 urged the establishment of new NHRIs.44 And they were endorsed by the General Assembly later in 1993.45 3.2. THE PARIS PRINCIPLES The Paris Principles are the international minimum standards for NHRIs. They are not aspirational – what NHRIs should be – but obligatory – what NHRIs must be, if they are to be legitimate, credible and effective in the promotion and protection of human rights. The Paris Principles run to just 1,200 words. They mix very broad and very specific provisions. They are also silent on some key issues, such as the structure of an NHRI. They are arranged in four sections: • competence and responsibilities • composition and guarantees of independence and pluralism • methods of operation • additional principles concerning the status of commissions with quasi-jurisdictional competence.46 The arrangement of the provisions is not always logical or consistent. It does not give appropriate emphasis or attention to some of the more important requirements; for example, the requirement for a constitutional or legislative basis for NHRIs. For that reason, this manual discusses the requirements of the Paris Principles thematically, rather than in the order in which they appear in the text, or with the degree of attention that they receive there. 42 Paris workshop report, E/CN.4/1992/43, pp. 45-49. The Paris Principles are included in full in Appendix 1 of this manual. 43 Commission on Human Rights resolution 1992/54. 44 A/CONF.157/23; Part I, para. 36. 45 General Assembly resolution 48/134. 46 The term “quasi-jurisdictional” is an error that arose from mistranslation of the original text, which was in French; see B. Burdekin with J. Naum, National Human Rights Institutions in the Asia Pacific, 2007, p. 24, footnote 37. The correct term is “quasi-judicial”. The error is in the original English text and has never been corrected. Chapter 3: The Paris Principles | 17