Conducting a National Inquiry into Systemic Patterns of Human Rights Violation protection of human rights, in accordance with the Paris Principles”.3 It has passed a resolution every year since.4 There have been similar resolutions in the General Assembly every second year.5 From 1995, the High Commissioner for Human Rights has responded to the Vienna Declaration and Programme of Action and to UN resolutions by supporting the establishment and strengthening of these institutions. From 1995 to 2003, a Special Adviser on National Institutions worked with the High Commissioner. 1.2. THE PARIS PRINCIPLES NHRIs should be established in conformity with the Principles Relating to the Status of National Institutions (the Paris Principles).6 The Vienna Declaration and Programme of Action encouraged “the establishment and strengthening of national institutions, having regard to the ‘Principles relating to the status of national institutions’…”.7 In 1991, the UN Centre for Human Rights convened a workshop of NHRIs for the first time. There were fewer than 20 NHRIs then and almost all attended. They met in Paris from 7 to 9 October 1991, along with representatives of Governments, UN agencies, non-governmental organisations (NGOs) and regional human rights mechanisms. They drafted and adopted Principles that were subsequently endorsed by the UN Commission on Human Rights and the General Assembly.8 The adoption of the Paris Principles was unusual in that the UN system usually does not endorse standards that are not drafted through its own processes. The fact that they were drafted by NHRIs themselves, however, makes them relevant to and credible among the institutions. The Paris Principles have provided a benchmark, a set of minimum requirements, for NHRIs. They continue to be the standard by which the structure, form and legal basis of an institution are assessed in determining whether the institution is to receive international recognition. They do not ensure the effectiveness of an NHRI, only that it conforms in law, structure, mandate and scope of operations with what is the minimum acceptable internationally. They are an instrument for structural evaluation, not for performance-based or impact-based evaluation.9 The Paris Principles require that NHRIs have guarantees of independence. • The independence of NHRIs must be legal, that is, provided by the law under which the institution is established. The law must provide that the Government cannot instruct the NHRI to adopt a certain policy or undertake a certain course of action. • Independence must be operational. The NHRI must be free to decide what projects or activities it will undertake or not undertake. • The NHRI must be independent in policy, able to determine itself what its views are on particular human rights issues and what recommendations to make to improve the country’s human rights performance. • The NHRI must have financial independence to be able to determine its own priorities for funding, including the allocation of the budget provided to it by the State, among its various programmes and activities. 4 3 Human Rights Council Resolution 17/9; operative para. 1. 4 The most recent is Human Rights Council resolution 39/17, adopted on 28 September 2018. See UN document A/HRC/39/L.19/ Rev.1 at https://documents-dds-ny.un.org/doc/UNDOC/LTD/G18/288/47/PDF/G1828847.pdf?OpenElement. 5 The most recent is General Assembly Resolution 72/181, adopted on 19 December 2017. See UN document number A/ RES/72/181 at www.un.org/en/ga/search/view_doc.asp?symbol=A/RES/72/181. 6 “National Inquiries” in National Human Rights Institutions in the Asia Pacific Region; Brian Burdekin, with Jason Naum; 2007. 7 Vienna Declaration and Programme of Action; part 1, para. 36. 8 Commission on Human Rights Resolution 1992/54 in 1992 and General Assembly Resolution 48/134 in 1993. 9 Performance and legitimacy: national human rights institutions; Richard Carver, International Council for Human Rights Policy; 2004 (2nd edition).