The Paris Principles

In one line

The Principles require a national institution to have a broad mandate in law, a pluralist and transparent appointment procedure, adequate independent funding, security of tenure and free access to information, and compliance is assessed by a peer accreditation body that assigns A or B status.

Where they came from and what they are

Drafted at a workshop in Paris in 1991, endorsed by the Commission on Human Rights in 1992, and adopted by the General Assembly in resolution 48/134 of December 1993, the same year as the Vienna conference that pressed for such institutions and the same year as India's own Act.

They are not a treaty. They are a General Assembly resolution, which puts them in the category discussed in [The Universal Declaration: What Kind of Instrument], and their force comes from the accreditation system built on them rather than from binding obligation.

The six requirements

One: a broad mandate, founded in constitutional or legislative text

Competence to promote and protect human rights, set out in a constitutional or legislative provision that specifies its composition and its sphere of competence.

The requirement is that the mandate be as broad as possible and be given by law, so an institution created by executive order or with a narrowly drawn subject-matter fails at the first requirement.

Two: independence guaranteed by law

Including in the institution's establishment, its composition and its operation.

Three: pluralist composition through a pluralist and transparent appointment procedure

Representation of the social forces involved in the promotion and protection of human rights, including non-governmental organisations, trade unions, professional bodies, religious and philosophical currents, universities and qualified experts, and parliament.

Government representatives, where they participate, should do so in an advisory capacity only.

Four: adequate funding

Sufficient to allow the institution its own staff and premises, so that it is independent of the Government and not subject to financial control which might affect its independence.

This is the requirement most often failed, including by well-designed institutions, because staffing and budget are the ordinary levers of executive control.

Five: security of tenure

Appointment by an official act establishing the specific duration of the mandate, renewable provided that pluralism is preserved.

Six: adequate powers

To hear any person and obtain any information and documents necessary, to address public opinion directly or through the press, to meet regularly, to establish working groups, and to consult other bodies.

And the additional principles concerning quasi-jurisdictional competence, where an institution may hear complaints: seeking amicable settlement through conciliation, informing the complainant of their rights and available remedies, hearing complaints or transmitting them to the competent authority, and making recommendations including proposals for amendment of laws or administrative practice.