Part I NHRIs and the Paris Principles Chapter 4: Models of NHRIs KEY QUESTIONS • What do the Paris Principles say about models of NHRI? • What are the four principal models of NHRI? • What other kinds of human rights institutions are there? 4.1. THE PARIS PRINCIPLES PRESCRIBE NO SINGLE MODEL The Paris Principles set out in general terms how NHRIs should be established and operate. They do not prescribe any single model or set of models for how NHRIs should be structured or what their basic nature should be. States are entitled “to choose the framework which is best suited to its particular needs at the national level”.105 NHRIs take many forms with many natures. The number of members of the governing body currently ranges from one to 70 or more. The number of members of the governing body who are full-time currently ranges from none to all members. Their mandates can be comprehensive or restricted to advisory or research functions. However, in the case of those with only research functions, it is less likely that they will be found to comply fully with the Paris Principles. Classifying NHRIs into models is difficult as no classification of models works for every NHRI. No matter what classifications are used, there will be as many NHRIs that are exceptions to the classifications as those that fit them easily. Many NHRIs will operate primarily according to one model but will also have some features of another model. And no single model is perfect; each has its strengths and weaknesses. Nonetheless, using a classification system assists in understanding the range of choices available in establishing NHRIs and of the ways in which they operate when established. It assists in identifying the particular strengths that can be built upon and the weaknesses that will need to be addressed. The classification system that is most helpful, and so is most commonly used, identifies the models as: • the commission model • the ombudsman model • the consultative council model • the research institute model.106 These models are found across the world but only two of them are found in the Asia Pacific region.107 105 Vienna Declaration and Programme of Action, A/CONF.157/23, Part I, para. 36. 106 For a substantial discussion of definitional and classification issues, see L. Reif “Boundaries of NHRI definition” in R. Goodman and T. Pegram (eds), Human Rights, State Compliance and Social Change: Assessing National Human Rights Institutions, 2012, particularly pp. 64-71. For discussion of slightly different classifications, see M. Kjaerum, National Human Rights Institutions Implementing Human Rights, 2003, p. 8; and International Council on Human Rights Policy, Performance and Legitimacy: National Human Rights Institutions, 2000, pp. 3-4. 107 Because only two models are found in the Asia Pacific region, all examples of the models in the following section are drawn from outside the Asia Pacific region. Also in section 7.2.6, dealing with the appointment of NHRI members by interest groups, the examples come from outside the Asia Pacific region as there are no examples of that appointment process within the region. All other examples in this manual are from within the Asia Pacific region. Chapter 4: Models of NHRIs | 29