R2P and National Human Rights Institutions

global responsibility to protect 9 (2017) 318-341 brill.com/gr2p

R2P and National Human Rights Institutions Veronika Haász

European Inter-University Centre for Human Rights and Democratisation, Italy [email protected]

Abstract National Human Rights Institutions (nhris) have rapidly proliferated worldwide in the last twenty years. They play an important role in the implementation of international human rights standards at the domestic level. Examples, especially from the African and Asian regions show that the Responsibility to Protect (R2P) relates to the work of nhris. Some institutions were established as one of the outcomes of peace processes in order to advance reconciliation and prevent future abuses. Where nhris already exist, the institutions may promote and protect human rights in each phase of the R2P. This paper discusses what role nhris can take up in assisting governments, the international community, and people before, during and after crisis situations. Through concrete country examples, it also highlights the challenges that the institutions must face, and summarises the limits of their influence.

Keywords National Human Rights Institutions – nhris – Responsibility to Protect – R2P – violent conflict

Introduction The topic of National Human Rights Institutions (nhris) appeared in the academic research in the nineties and the number of publications has increased especially in the last ten years. The literature discusses a number of key issues relating to nhris, such as their governing rules, namely the status and interpretation of the so-called Paris Principles1 that set standards for the 1 a/res/48/134, 20 December 1993, Annex. Hereinafter referred to as the Paris Principles.

© koninklijke brill nv, leiden, 2017 | doi 10.1163/1875984X-00903006

R2P and National Human Rights Institutions

319

establishment, mandate and functions of these institutions. Research has been made regarding the effectiveness and efficiency of the institutions, and how to measure their impact on the promotion and protection of human rights. Furthermore, the different angles of their competences, their complaint-handling function, and the independence of the institutions are often subjects of nhrirelated research. Their cooperation with the United Nations (un) in general and with Treaty Bodies in particular, and their distinctive status in comparison to other national actors with special regard to non-governmental institutions (ngos) have also been widely researched.2 Relatively few pieces discuss the topic of nhris in relation to the Responsibility to Protect (R2P).3 The reason behind this lack of considering nhris might be that neither the Paris Principles, nor the Report of the International Commission on Intervention and State Sovereignty (iciss)4 mentions nhris in the light of R2P. In the latest, there is only one note on the institutions that refers to the un Secretary General’s (sg) 1998 report:5 ‘[p]eace building may involve the creation or strengthening of national institutions, […].’6 Since that report, the institutions have proliferated worldwide and have showed that they can take up several tasks in the peace building process. Meanwhile, the un has started to recognise these national entities. The un Secretary-General acknowledges nhris in its 2009 report on the implementation of the R2P7 and points out the need for capacity building of national institutions in order to 2 The Danish Institute for Human Rights, ‘Review of literature on National Human Rights Institutions,’ 2016, http://www.humanrights.dk/sites/humanrights.dk/files/media/dokumenter/ udgivelser/hrs/nhri_bibliography_dihr_mena_2016_en.pdf, accessed 29 October 2016. 3 Andrea Durbach, ‘Human rights commissions in times of trouble and transition: the case of the National Human Rights Commission of Nepal,’ unsw Law Research Paper No. 2010– 18, ‘Human Rights in the Asia Pacific,’ Conference, University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia, December 2009; Michelle Parlevliet, ‘National Human Rights Institutions and Peace Agreements: Establishing National Human Rights Institutions in Divided Societies,’ International Council on Human Rights Policy, Review Meeting, Role of Human Rights in Peace Agreements, Belfast, 7–8 March 2005; Thomas Pegram, ‘National Human Rights Institutions and their potential role in prevention and response to mass atrocities in Latin America,’ in Claudio Fuentes and Monica Serrano (eds.), Responsibility to Protect in Latin America: A New Map (Routledge Press, 2015); Webster Zambara, ‘Africa’s National Human Rights Institutions and the Responsibility to Protect,’ Global Responsibility to Protect, 2: 458–478 (2010). 4 International Commission on Intervention and State Sovereignty (iciss), The Responsibility to Protect (Ottawa: idrc, 2001). 5 Ibid. para. 5.5. 6 A/52/871–S/1998/318, 13 April 1998, para. 63. 7 A/63/677, 12 January 2009, para. 22.

global responsibility to protect 9 (2017) 318-341

320

Haász

be able to analyse emerging issues as part of development planning.8 The 2013 report of the un Secretary-General on state responsibility and prevention9 mentions nhris on multiple occasions. nhris are related to the rule of law, and as such, they ‘can contribute to strengthening the capacity of a society to overcome the risks associated with atrocity crimes.’10 Still, there is very limited awareness that nhris can have a role in the programmatic components of the implementation of the R2P, namely regarding early warning and assessment, capacity building, as well as collaboration with regional and sub-regional organisations.11 This article attempts to give a broad overview of the aspects that may arise when nhris can be mentioned in the context of the R2P. The general remarks describe the avenues that make a synergy between nhris and R2P. These are further analysed through concrete case studies in the next three headings that are divided according to the phases of conflict.

General Remarks

National Human Rights Institutions are state-founded, independent and pluralistic national bodies established by law and mandated to promote and protect human rights at the national level. The concept of nhris originates from the un, as the idea that ‘national human rights commissions should be established to monitor state compliance with the norms contained in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights’ was conceived in the earliest years of the un,12 and developed strongly in the last twenty years. Establishment There are nhris that were established under post-conflict conditions as part of the peace agreements in order to anticipate and prevent future abuses, and

8 9 10 11

12

Ibid. para. 45. A/67/929–S/2013/399, 9 July 2013. Ibid. para. 47. Jennifer Welsh, ‘Implementing the “Responsibility to Protect,”’ Policy Brief No. 1/2009, Oxford Institute for Ethics, Law, and Armed Conflict, 2009, http://www.elac.ox.ac.uk/ downloads/R2P_policybrief_180209.pdf, accessed 30 October 2016, pp. 5–6. Richard Carver, ‘A New Answer to an Old Question: National Human Rights Institutions and the Domestication of International Law,’ Human Rights Law Review, 10/1: 1–32 (2010), p. 3.



321

to advance reconciliation. Such as in El Salvador (1992),13 Rwanda (1993),14 Bosnia-Hercegovina (1995),15 Northern Ireland (1998),16 East Timor (1999),17 Kosovo (1999),18 Sierra Leone (1999),19 Afghanistan (2001),20 Sudan (2004),21 Some states allocated roles to their existing institutions, such as Guatemala (1985 – establishment, 1997 – peace agreement22). Parlevliet argues that there are three main reasons why peace agreements tend to refer more often to nhris. There is a tendency to refer to human rights and international human rights standards as a normative framework, the number of nhris has increased rapidly since the 1990s, and there is a growing emphasis on strengthening national capacities and structures for conflict management and human rights protection.23 As the un Secretary-General pointed out in 2004: [t]he establishment of independent national human rights commissions is one complementary strategy that has shown promise for helping to restore the rule of law, peaceful dispute resolution and protection of vulnerable groups where the justice system is not yet fully functioning. Many have been established in conflict and post-conflict societies with mandates including quasi-judicial functions, conflict-resolution and protection programmes. Recent examples include the national human rights institutions of Afghanistan, Rwanda, Colombia, Indonesia, Nepal, Sri Lanka and Uganda, each of which is now playing an important role in this regard.24 Some institutions were established not directly in the peace agreement but as a result of the peace process. The South African Human Rights Commission 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24

A/46/846–S/23501, 30 January 1992, Chapter iii. 2. Peace Agreement between the Government of the Republic of Rwanda and the Rwandese Patriotic Front (Arusha Peace Accords for Rwanda), 4 August 1993, Article 15. A/50/419–S/1995/780, 8 September 1995, Annex i. Northern Ireland Peace Agreement (The Good Friday Agreement), 10 April 1998, Strand One 5(b). s/res/1272, 25 October 1999, para. 8. PC.DEC/305, 1 July 1999. S/1999/777, 12 July 1999. S/2001/1154, 5 December 2001, iii(C)(6). Permanent Ceasefire between the Government of the Republic of the Sudan (GoS) and the Sudan People’s Liberation Movement/Army (splm/a), 31 December 2004. A/51/796–S/1997/114, 7 February 1997, para. 73. Parlevliet, ‘National Human Rights Institutions and Peace Agreements,’ pp. 7–8. S/2004/616, 23 August 2004, para 31.


322

Haász

was established in 1995, one year after the end of apartheid. The Ugandan Human Rights Commission was set up in 1995 following the recommendation of the Commission of Inquiry into Violations and Human Rights.25 These nhris are not mandated to monitor the implementation of the peace agreement itself but rather to advise the government on its international human rights obligations, recommend human rights compliant legislation, and report on the human rights situation in the country.26 Mandate and Competences nhris are usually commissioned to promote the ratification and monitor the implementation of international human rights instruments, assist the government in the implementation of its human rights obligations and advise it on drafting state reports to the un human rights bodies, as well as ensure the harmonisation of national legislation and practices with international human rights standards, disseminate human rights information, remedy human rights violations, and cooperate with regional and international human rights bodies, above all with the un.27 However, the Paris Principles do not mention conflict prevention and management as part of the mandate of nhris, and usually national legislations do not contain such provisions either. nhris, especially in the East African Community and the Asia Pacific Region have realised that these fall within the ambit of human rights, and the above general competences can be exploited for these purposes.28 Cooperation with Other Actors Beyond their competences, the institutions’ special status within the state is also in favour of their constructive role in implementing the R2P. nhris are unique in the sense that they form a bridge and constitute a practical connection between the national and international level. 25

26 27 28

Commission of Inquiry into Violations and Human Rights, ‘Report, Findings, conclusions and recommendations,’ 1994, http://www.hpcrresearch.org/mrf-database/pdf/Report _CIVHR(1)_Chapters_1_to_4.pdf, accessed 29 October 2016. Zambara, ‘Africa’s National Human Rights Institutions and the Responsibility to Protect,’ p. 469. Paris Principles, A(1). Network of African National Human Rights Institutions, ‘The Role of National Human Rights Institutions in Conflict Management, Resolution and Peace Building. A Baseline Survey of the East African Situation,’ 2014, http://nanhri.org/wp-content/ uploads/2016/03/NANHRI-Baseline-Study-on-NHRIs-in-Conflict-Management-Peace -building.pdf, accessed 29 October 2016, p. 12.



323

The Paris Principles require nhris to cooperate with the un and its organisations, as well as with regional institutions and the nhris of other countries.29 The institutions are natural entry points for the international system for accessing independent knowledge and information on the domestic human rights situation.30 They are well situated, indeed, to provide objective and welldocumented information on the human rights situation, best practices and particular challenges faced by states. Thus, it is obvious that the un Special Rapporteur on the promotion of truth, justice, reparation and guarantees of non-recurrence is also tasked to ‘develop a regular dialogue and cooperate with, inter alia, […] national human rights institutions […]’31 and consider their views when drafting its report.32 One example of this in practice is Guatemala, where the Defensoría del Pueblo delivered systematic information on social cleansing to un experts.33 National Human Rights Institutions are in the best position to interact with those intergovernmental stakeholders who are present in the country, such as field operation offices of the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner (ohchr). At times, this requires negotiation. In Nepal in 2009 the ohchr and the nhri signed a memorandum of understanding in order to promote cooperation and avoid competition that arose from similarities in their functions and stakeholders at both the national and international level; this way they could ultimately share the same human rights work.34 Similarly, the Kenya National Commission on Human Rights also collaborates with the ohchr in the implementation of the internally displaced persons (idps) monitoring project, which encompasses protection monitoring, coordination, advocacy and capacity building.35 We can also find examples of regional cooperation of nhris. In 2010, the Provedoria for Human Rights and Justice for Timor-Leste signed an agreement 29 30

31 32 33 34

35

Paris Principles, C(e). The Danish Institute for Human Rights, Universal Periodic Review – First cycle. Reporting methodologies from the position of the state, civil society and national human rights institutions (Copenhagen: Danish Institute for Human Rights, 2011), p. 49. a/hrc/res/18/7, 13 October 2011, para. 1(d). Ibid. para. 1(f). a/hrc/4/20/Add.2, 19 February 2007. Guidelines for cooperation between the National Human Rights Commission (nhrc) and the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights in Nepal (ohchr-Nepal), 20 February 2009, http://nepal.ohchr.org/en/resources/Documents/English/other/2009/ 2009_02_20_NHRC_Guidelines_E.pdf, accessed 1 November 2016. Network of African National Human Rights Institutions, ‘The Role of National Human Rights Institutions in Conflict Management, Resolution and Peace Building,’ p. 20.


324

Haász

with the nhri of Indonesia, to focus, among other issues, on the finding of possibly as many as 4,000 missing children reportedly abducted to Indonesia during the time it occupied Timor-Leste. This agreement was renewed in late 2011.36 The bridging status enables nhris to cooperate with other state and nonstate actors at the national level. The institutions identify ngos, armed groups, corporations, and religious groups as their main non-state partners during conflict and in post-conflict situations.37 National Human Rights Institutions experiencing crisis situations themselves emphasise that they must have an honest relationship with all parties to the conflict, in particular local communities.38 There are many examples of this successfully occurring: the office of the Public Defender of Georgia actively engages in confidence building measures, including human rights trainings for conflict-affected youth and activists, as well as peace building projects with human rights defenders and civil society activists in conflict areas;39 the Kenya National Commission on Human Rights has working relationships to the National Gender and Equality Commission, the Independent Election and Boundaries Commission, and is member of the National Steering Committee on National Peace and Building and Conflict Management;40 the Uganda Human Rights Commission has engaged strategically with national and regional civil society organisations to influence the 36

25th Annual Meeting of the International Coordinating Committee of National Institutions for the Promotion and Protection of Human Rights (icc), Session on nhri and Transitional Justice, Geneva, 22 March 2012, http://nhri.ohchr.org/EN/ICC/General Meeting/25/Statementspresentations/Transitional%20Justice%20-%20Northen%20 Ireland.pdf, accessed 30 October 2016. 37 Northern Ireland Human Rights Commission and the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights, ‘Round Table Proceedings Report,’ International Round Table on the Role of National Institutions in conflict and post-conflict situations, 20–22 June 2006, http://www.nihrc.org/documents/treaty-and-international-work/2006/ international-roundtable-role-national-institutions-in-conflict-post-conflict-situations -belfast-june-2006.pdf, accessed 30 October 2016; Cairo Declaration on the Role of nhris in Conflict and Post Conflict Situations, 3–4 December 2011, http://www.bris.ac.uk/media -library/sites/law/migrated/documents/cairodeclaration.pdf, accessed 30 October 2016. 38 Ibid. 39 Ucha Nanuashvili (Public Defender of Georgia), Statement, Session 2: The role of nhris in conflict and post conflict situations, 29th icc General Meeting, 21–23 March 2016, http://nhri.ohchr.org/EN/ICC/GeneralMeeting/29/Theme%202%20ICC%20accredita tion%20process/Session%202%20-%20Mr.%20Ucha%20NANUASHVILI,%20Public%20 Defender%20of%20Georgia.pdf, accessed 1 November 2016. 40 Network of African National Human Rights Institutions, ‘The Role of National Human Rights Institutions in Conflict Management, Resolution and Peace Building,’ p. 21.



325

content of the national Torture Act;41 and the Commission on Human Rights and Good Governance in Tanzania held security dialogues bringing together political parties, police, district directors in order to clarify their relations during the elections in 2009.42 ngos vs. nhris Van Steenberghe says that ‘[t]he first and most obvious type of non-state actors’ that are having a role in the implementation of the R2P are ngos active in the field of human rights protection.43 ngos are referred to both in the report of the iciss, and the un Secretary-General’s report on implementation of the Responsibility to Protect. It is beyond doubt that human rights ngos play an essential role in the promotion and protection of human rights at the national level, and ‘some of the space that nhris occupy today has traditionally been that of ngos.’44 Whilst they do often have similar missions, there are several distinct differences. The added value of nhris in comparison to ngos is that nhris are established by an act of the state. Therefore, national institutions have an official mandate and formal powers, and the law regulates their relationship to the state.45 Their official status also allow them to access information and documents that are not easily accessible for ngos. Being an independent body established by the state, nhris are able to create human rights dialogue between civil society and public authorities. For example, the governing body of the Afghanistan Independent Human Rights Commission ‘includes civil society organisations and has built bridges between the Government and civil society.’46 Considering the nature of their work: nhris provide more than a negatively critical voice; they are constructively critical actors, and ‘can contribute actively to solving the problems rather than merely pointing them out.’47 Instead of 41 42 43

44

45 46 47

Ibid. p. 17. Ibid. p. 24. Raphaël van Steenberghe, ‘Non-State actors’ in Gentian Zyberi (ed.), An institutional approach to the Responsibility to Protect (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2013), pp. 33–57. Kirsten Roberts, ‘National human rights institutions as diplomacy actors,’ in Michael O’Flaherty, Zdzisław Kędzia, Amrei Müller, and George Ulrich (eds.) Human Rights Diplomacy: Contemporary Perspectives (Leiden: Nijhoff, 2011), p. 228. Gauthier de Beco, Non-judicial mechanisms for the implementation of human rights in European states (Brussels: Bruylant, 2010), p. 134. A/67/929, 9 July 2013, para. 51. Lone Lindholt, ‘Universities and national human rights institutions: the independent human rights actors,’ in Klaus Slavensky (ed.), Implementing human rights: essays in honour of Morten Kjærum (Copenhagen: Danish Institute for Human Rights, 2007), p. 149.


326

Haász

mere monitoring, they can provide human rights impact assessments and proposals for government policies that are highly relevant in conflict situations.48 Local ngos often criticise the national institution in place. The main concern relates to the (lack of) independence of national institutions, as ngos often call nhris state bodies. It is very important that the government and the institutions set clear boundaries ensuring the independence of the national institution. Independence According to the Paris Principles, nhris must be independent in a functional, personal, and financial sense. In crisis situations, it is of elementary importance that nhris maintain ‘their independence, neutrality, and integrity’49 in every phase of the conflict. nhris must face the challenge that they might seem a part of the state apparatus by other actors and this can make it difficult to the institutions to engage in mitigating the conflict effectively: ‘nhris must be seen to advocate the universality of human rights and to protect the human rights of all people equally, without favour or bias.’50 Ensuring the independence of nhris encourages the parties of a conflict to recognise the institutions as reliable partners, who work to the benefit of all parties of a crisis situation. One such institution is the Public Defender of Georgia, which tries to show that it is transparent, open and unbiased by addressing the needs and rights of local population, and speaking ‘with clear human rights agenda.’51 Capacity Building Mass atrocities can create the most difficult circumstances within which nhris have to work. They encounter very specific and serious human right atrocities, such as traumatised child soldiers, sexually abused women, or families whose members were killed or disappeared during the conflict.52 Even with a broad mandate and acknowledged independence, it is not self-evident that nhris 48

49 50

51 52

C. Raj Kumar, (2006), ‘National Human Rights Institutions and Economic, Social, and Cultural Rights: Toward the Institutionalization and Developmentalization of Human Rights,’ Human Rights Quarterly, 28/3: 755–779 (2006), p. 760. Northern Ireland Human Rights Commission and the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights, ‘Round Table Proceedings Report,’ para. 2.2. Asia Pacific Forum of National Human Rights Institutions, ‘A Manual on National Human Rights Institutions,’ May 2015, http://www.asiapacificforum.net/media/resource_file/A _Manual_on_NHRIs.pdf, 30 October 2016, p. 242. Ucha Nanuashvili (Public Defender of Georgia), Statement. Shiva Datta Bhandari, ‘The Role of National Human Rights Institutions in Ending Impunity for Human Rights Abuses During Conflict: the Case of Nepal,’ Master’s Thesis,



327

are sufficiently prepared to operate in such severe situations. Handling such situations requires specific knowledge and skills. In those regions which are often affected by atrocities that can be the basis of evoking the R2P doctrine, nhris are more attentive to their responsibility to provide appropriate training to their staff. The Commission for Human Rights and Good Governance in Tanzania, for example, uses training courses to develop conflict management and mediation skills in its staff.53 Similarly, before deploying human rights volunteers at the local level as focal points, the National Commission on Human Rights in Rwanda first trained them to monitor human rights situations on the ground and advise individuals on their rights.54 The regional networks of nhris may also assist their members. The Asia Pacific Forum helps its members by publishing different guides, for example, on effective investigations55 or how to conduct inquiries into systematic patterns of human rights violations.56 Similarly, the Northern Ireland Human Rights Commission as chair of the Commonwealth Forum of nhris produced a guide assisting National Human Rights Institutions working in post-conflict societies on how to use the un Disarmament, Demobilisation and Reintegration, as well as Transitional Justice frameworks.57 Summing up, nhris are well situated to contribute to the implementation of the R2P if they have a broad mandate and independence as required by the Paris Principles, and a skilled staff and capacities to cooperate with national and international actors. The next three sections provide an overview of which concrete competences can nhris have before, during, and after the conflict.

53 54 55

56

57

University of Southern Denmark and the Danish Institute for Human Rights European Master’s Degree in Human Rights and Democratisation 2014–2015, p. 40. Zambara, ‘Africa’s National Human Rights Institutions and the Responsibility to Protect,’ p. 471. Network of African National Human Rights Institutions, ‘The Role of National Human Rights Institutions in Conflict Management, Resolution and Peace Building,’ p. 27. Asia Pacific Forum of National Human Rights Institutions, ‘Undertaking Effective Investigations: A Guide for National Human Rights Institutions,’ 10 August 2015, http://www .asiapacificforum.net/media/resource_file/Undertaking_Effective_Investigations_A _Guide_for_NHRIs.pdf, accessed 30 October 2016. Asia Pacific Forum of National Human Rights Institutions, ‘Manual on Conducting a National Inquiry into Systemic Patterns of Human Rights Violation,’ 10 August 2015, http://www.asiapacificforum.net/media/resource_file/Conducting_National_Inquiries _Manual.pdf, accessed 30 October 2016. Northern Ireland Commission for Human Rights, ‘Disarmament, Demobilisation, and Reintegration. A Guide for National Human Rights Institutions,’ March 2016, http://cfnhri .org/uploads/general/Disarmament_Demobilisation_Reintegration_A_Guide_for _National_Human_Rights_Institutions.pdf, accessed 1 November 2016.


328

Haász

Before the Conflict

The primary responsibility to protect lies with states and their institutions.58 Volk and Stedjan argue that governments are not always strong enough to prevent or stop mass atrocities alone. Therefore, the international community, namely the un should stand by national states in these efforts.59 At the same time, since the un is not always successful in conflict prevention and management, Secretary-General Kofi Annan has called states to build their own structures to address R2P from prevention to rebuild.60 States are also responsible for the prevention of human rights violations through their national protection systems.61 National Human Rights Institutions are cornerstones of strong domestic human rights protection systems,62 thus, they can play a role in preventing violations and mitigating its effects.63 The un Secretary-General acknowledges the role that nhris can play concerning the responsibility of states to protect, when he says that independent national institutions help states to oversee the implementation of relevant international human rights and humanitarian standards.64 This also includes their cooperation with the un Treaty Bodies, and the human rights mechanisms including the upr of the Human Rights Council, as well as with regional and international mechanisms.65 In peaceful times, nhris can deploy their advisory, monitoring, and early warning, as well as awareness raising competences, in order to work towards avoiding mass atrocities. Advocacy In the course of their advisory capacity, the institutions submit to the government, parliament, and administrative authorities or courts either at request or 58

Joe Volk and Scott Stedjan, ‘Building Structures for Peace. A Quaker Lobby Offers Strategies for Peacemakers’ in Richard H. Cooper and Juliette Voïnov Kohler (eds.), Responsibility to Protect. The Global Moral Compact for the 21st Century (us: Palgrave Macmillan, 2009), p. 208. 59 Ibid. 60 A/55/985–S/2001/574, 7 June 2001. 61 Bertrand G. Ramcharan, ‘The National Responsibility to Protect Human Rights,’ Hong Kong Law Journal, 361/39: 361–399 (2009). 62 Veronika Haász, ‘Die Nationalen Menschenrechtsinstitutionen als Grundsteine starker innerstaatlicher Rechtsschutzsysteme,’ Zeitschrift für Menschenrechte, 5/2: 128–142 (2011). 63 Network of African National Human Rights Institutions, ‘The Role of National Human Rights Institutions in Conflict Management, Resolution and Peace Building,’ p. ii. 64 A/63/677, 12 January 2009, para. 22. 65 A/67/929, 9 July 2013, para. 50.



329

ex officio, advisory opinions and recommendations on any matters concerning the promotion and protection of human rights and prepare reports on their findings.66 Encouraging the ratification of international human rights instruments, ensuring the effective implementation of the already ratified treaties,67 and contributing to the reporting activity of the state under its international human rights obligations68 is part of the advisory function. The aim of this advisory function is to ensure that internationally recognised rights find a home within national regulation and practice.69 Therefore, nhris should cooperate with governments for improving legislation, adopting new acts or amending the old ones, taking into consideration international human rights law and humanitarian law. In relation to R2P, this competence can be employed as part of ‘prevention advocacy strategies’ in which the institutions remind governments of their obligations under international law costs, as well as the consequences of R2P.70 The Bill of Rights consultation process in Northern Ireland is a complex example of advising the government, educating the public on human rights, and consulting with international organisations.71 Monitoring and Early Warning Owing to their status in the state, nhris are able to keep ‘their fingers on the pulse of the country,’72 assess the situation on the ground and transmit this information. Through monitoring, nhris examine whether national legislative and policy initiatives are being successfully implemented,73 and whether the domestic legislation, administrative provisions in force, and the administrative

66 67 68 69 70 71

72 73

Paris Principles, A(3)(a). Ibid. A(3)(c). Ibid. A(3)(d). ccpr/C/21/Rev.1/Add.13, 26 May 2004, para. 13. Pegram, ‘National Human Rights Institutions and their potential role in prevention and response to mass atrocities in Latin America.’ Northern Ireland Human Rights Commission, ‘Summary. A Bill of Rights for Northern Ireland Advice to the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland,’ July 2009, http://www.nihrc .org/uploads/publications/bill-of-rights-for-northern-ireland-advice-to-secretary-statesummary-2009.pdf, accessed 2 November 2016. Northern Ireland Human Rights Commission and the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights, ‘Round Table Proceedings Report,’ para. 2.2. United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights, United Nations Development Programme, and Democratic Governance Group Bureau for Development Policy, undpohchr toolkit: for collaboration with national human rights institutions (New York: undp, 2010), p. 38.


330

Haász

praxis comply with international human rights standards.74 This function is of high relevance in times of crisis situations, especially if it is enacted on a systematic and regular basis, so that early warning signs can be detected. nhris recently committed themselves to make their function as early warning mechanisms more effective by ‘further professionalizing [their] internal and external knowledge and information sharing, by intensifying [their] monitoring function domestically and by facilitating a culture of human rights dialogue at the national, regional and local levels.’75 Some nhris established separate units for this purpose. The Uganda Human Rights Commission monitors human rights violations in conflict areas through its Directorates of Monitoring and Inspections. The findings fuel the Commission’s annual reports submitted to the Parliament.76 The Kenya National Commission on Human Rights has developed indicators for tracking early warning signs.77 The Peruvian Defensoría operates the Unit of Social Conflict, while the Colombian Ombudsman office has the Early Warning System.78 Pegram makes a very important observation regarding what makes the monitoring activity of high relevance from an R2P perspective. Namely, ‘the systematic early warning activities may also provide powerful and concrete evidence that a state was aware of the risk of atrocities and yet manifestly failed to protect its population.’79 Awareness Raising, Human Rights Education and Training According to the un Secretary-General, ‘[m]ost civilian deaths, suffering and displacement that we witness in armed conflict would be avoidable if parties to conflict respected the fundamental norms of international humanitarian and human rights law.’80 Therefore, awareness raising about international human rights is of crucial importance. It appears also rewarding to incorporate human rights into general awareness raising programmes in schools and through

74 75

76 77 78 79 80

Paris Principles, A(3)(a)(i). Global Alliance of National Human Rights Institutions, Closing Statement, 2016 annual conference, ‘Current Challenges to Human Rights Protection,’ Geneva, 23 March 2016, http://nhri.ohchr.org/EN/ICC/GeneralMeeting/29/Meeting%20Documents/ICC29%20 closing%20Statement%20FINAL.pdf, accessed 1 November 2016. Network of African National Human Rights Institutions, ‘The Role of National Human Rights Institutions in Conflict Management, Resolution and Peace Building,’ p. 16. Ibid. p. 20. Pegram, ‘National Human Rights Institutions and their potential role in prevention and response to mass atrocities in Latin America.’ Ibid. p. 11. S/2016/447, 13 May 2016, para. 7.



331

the media.81 The Afghanistan Independent Human Rights Commission has a Transitional Justice Unit that holds regular awareness raising meetings and gatherings. The unit educates civil society members, civil servants and community elders. Topics include Afghanistan’s Truth Seeking Commission, Transitional Justice History, the International Criminal Court and Conflict Mapping.82 Similarly to awareness raising, tailor made education and training are of high importance in the prevention of conflicts. While awareness raising makes the wider public and victims aware of their human rights, education and training address mainly practitioners, inter alia, civilian police, armed forces, members of the judicial and legal professions, who have protection roles in crisis situations and get in touch with victims or vulnerable groups who can easily become victims of human rights violations. National Human Rights Institutions may provide training to all participants involved in the conflict, in particular the security forces, the police, and the public sector. In Uganda, the Human Rights Commission targeted local leaders, ex-combatants, religious leaders and civil society organisations with its peace education programmes. The Commission trained participants in mediation, negotiation, and reconciliation skills, and provided human rights education to members of the security agencies and the police. As youth are very often influenced by the violence and the non-peaceful means to resolving conflicts experienced in their surroundings, the educational activity of the Commission also reaches secondary schools in the form of organising Human Rights and Peace Clubs.83 The Kenya National Commission on Human Rights held capacity building forums for state and non-state actors on idps,84 as well as on Alternative Dispute Resolution.85 In Tanzania, the Commission for Human Rights and Good Governance conducts thematic education programmes, for example, on land rights and responsibilities, and for targeted audiences, including law enforcement officers, the judiciary or the police.86 The Commission also developed an SMS platform enabling citizens to lodge complaints of human rights violations via their mobile phones. The Commission conducts training on the usage of the 81 82

83 84 85 86

Northern Ireland Human Rights Commission and the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights, ‘Round Table Proceedings Report,’ para. 3.5. Afghanistan Independent Human Rights Commission, Annual Report (1 January to 31 December 2008), http://reliefweb.int/sites/reliefweb.int/files/resources/ABD0B7CF5B 422C01492575BB000ED1B7-Full_Report.pdf, accessed 2 November 2016, pp. 37–38. Network of African National Human Rights Institutions, ‘The Role of National Human Rights Institutions in Conflict Management, Resolution and Peace Building,’ pp. 15–16. Ibid. p. 20. Ibid. p. 21. Ibid. p. 24.


332

Haász

service.87 The National Commission on Human Rights in Rwanda holds weekly thematic radio programmes, entitled ‘The rights at our home’ and organises annual international peace day.88

During the Conflict

As mentioned before, the Paris Principles do not provide any guidance on the role of National Human Rights Institutions in conflict and post conflict situations. In 2000, the Global Alliance of nhris (called International Coordinating Committee of nhris at that time) established the Sub-Committee on Accreditation (sca) for making recommendations for accreditation status of national institutions submitting their application.89 Since October 2006, the sca has issued General Observations as annex to its accreditation recommendations, containing guidelines to the implementation of the Paris Principles.90 Two General Observations are directed towards specific conflict situations; the first deals with a situation of a coup d’état or state of emergency, and the second with national security contexts generally. ‘National Institutions are expected to promote and ensure respect for human rights, democratic principles and the strengthening of the rule of law in all circumstances and without exception.’91 The sca calls the institutions to monitor, document, issue public statements and release regular and detailed reports through the media in a timely manner to address urgent human rights violations.92 The sca adds that the above obligations are of even greater practical importance in times of particular hardship. Accredited nhris have been recognised by the un as human rights defenders (hrds).93 Working in conflict situations can bring harm, including serious assault, kidnapping, torture, murder or threats of these towards those who are involved in nhris’ work. Local functionaries of the Colombian Defensorías 87

Promoting Human Rights and Democracy Through ict. Kenya, Uganda, Tanzania. http:// ict4democracy.org/about/partnerproject-briefs/tchrgg, accessed 31 October 2016. 88 Network of African National Human Rights Institutions, ‘The Role of National Human Rights Institutions in Conflict Management, Resolution and Peace Building,’ p. 26. 89 E/CN.4/1999/95, 3 February 1999, para. 49. 90 General Observations of the Sub-Committee on Accreditation, May 2013, http://nhri .ohchr.org/EN/AboutUs/ICCAccreditation/Documents/SCA%20GENERAL%20 OBSERVATIONS%20ENGLISH.pdf, accessed 1 November 2016. 91 General Observations of the Sub-Committee on Accreditation, G.O. 2.6. 92 Ibid. 93 a/hrc/22/47, 16 January 2013.



333

along the Colombian Atlantic Coast are ‘routinely subjected to death threats.’94 The Afghanistan Independent Human Rights Commission and the National Human Rights Commission of Nepal reported tragedies affecting their staff.95 Where the state cannot provide the protection required by the institution, nhris must be able to employ their own security guards. While being hrds themselves, the institutions have the specific role to promote the work of and protect other human rights defenders, including taking effective measures when they are in danger.96 During the conflict, nhris must continue their monitoring, document and archive their findings, and try to mediate between conflicting parties in order to facilitate the peace process. Documenting In 2011, nhris committed themselves to document and fact-find on human rights violations, make public their findings and follow up the implementation of their recommendations.97 Detailed monitoring and documenting of all human rights violations is of utmost relevance when combating impunity, restoring justice, re-establishing the rule of law, and reinforcing a human rights culture after the conflict.98 Georgia and Uganda provide examples of these processes in action. During the 2008 conflict, the Public Defender in Georgia documented cases of killings and hostage taking of civilians, property destructions, torture and inhumane treatment. The institution surveyed idps and monitored their conditions. This activity enabled the office to advise the Georgian government on idp legislation and policy.99 Similarly, the Ugandan Human Rights Commission proactively monitored and reported on situations in camps of idps during rebel activities resulted also in massive displacement in the country between 1986 and 2008.100 94

Pegram, ‘National Human Rights Institutions and their potential role in prevention and response to mass atrocities in Latin America.’ 95 Asia Pacific Forum of National Human Rights Institutions, ‘A Manual on National Human Rights Institutions,’ p. 240. 96 a/hrc/28/63, 29 December 2014. 97 Cairo Declaration on the Role of nhris in Conflict and Post Conflict Situations, 3–4 December 2011, http://www.bris.ac.uk/media-library/sites/law/migrated/documents/cai rodeclaration.pdf, accessed 30 October 2016. 98 Northern Ireland Human Rights Commission and the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights, ‘Round Table Proceedings Report,’ para. 2.2. 99 Ucha Nanuashvili (Public Defender of Georgia), Statement. 100 Network of African National Human Rights Institutions, ‘The Role of National Human Rights Institutions in Conflict Management, Resolution and Peace Building,’ p. 13.


334

Haász

Facilitating Mediation National human rights institutions may play a very important role in the conduct of national consultations. The experience of the consultations carried out by the Afghanistan Independent Human Rights Commission demonstrates how a well-respected independent institution with good outreach across a country can deliver valuable findings that clearly convey the attitudes and opinions of affected communities.101

nhris have realised their potential to promote dialogue between conflicting parties.102 The Paris Principles also mention conciliation.103 The Ugandan Commission also recognised the necessity of cooperation with other stakeholders. Thus, it could advocate for peace in collaboration with religious leaders and civil society organisations, which resulted in amnesty law. The Commission initiated negotiations between the government and the rebellion group, whereby it advised the government and observed the discussion.104

After the Conflict

As the Asia Pacific Forum formulated, ‘nhris need to see the end of armed conflict as no more than the beginning of a new period of challenging work for human rights.’105 Indeed, the institutions have to keep monitoring the situation, collect their findings, and beyond investigating concrete cases and providing redress to victims, they have to feed into law making, so as to ensure that human rights standards are incorporated in new laws and practices, as well as contribute to transitional justice. 101 The Office of the un High Commissioner for Human Rights, Rule-of-Law Tools for PostConflict States, National consultations on transitional justice, 2009, http://www.ohchr .org/Documents/Publications/NationalConsultationsTJ_EN.pdf, accessed 2 November 2016, p. 18. 102 Kyiv Declaration on the Role of National Human Rights Institutions in Conflict and Post-Conflict Situations and its follow-up, Geneva, 23 March 2016, http://nhri.ohchr. org/EN/ICC/GeneralMeeting/29/Theme%202%20ICC%20accreditation%20process/ Session%202%20-%20Ms.%20Valeriya%20Lutkovska,%20Ukraine%20Parliament%20 Commissioner%20for%20Human%20Rights.pdf, accessed 1 November 2016. 103 Paris Principles, D(a). 104 Network of African National Human Rights Institutions, ‘The Role of National Human Rights Institutions in Conflict Management, Resolution and Peace Building,’ p. 13. 105 Asia Pacific Forum of National Human Rights Institutions, ‘A Manual on National Human Rights Institutions,’ p. 246.



335

In post-conflict situations, nhris may participate in peace agreements, both as drafters as well as duty bearers. They can also assist to the work of truth commissions. The Human Rights Commission of Sierra Leone monitors the implementation of the recommendations of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission.106 The Kenya National Commission on Human Rights works with District Peace Committees and provides trainings on conflicts and human rights and rights based approach to them.107 The Commission conducted factfinding missions in the country in order to deal with the consequences of the conflict by investigating and documenting human rights violations. The Commission also assisted the government in developing a national peace policy.108 Investigating nhris must investigate allegations of violations ‘promptly, thoroughly, and effectively.’109 National human rights institutions can play an important role in ensuring the enjoyment of the right to the truth for victims, their relatives and the society. Through fact-finding investigations and public reports both on individual cases and more generally, human rights violations practices, national human rights institutions contribute to exposing the truth.110 In order to be able to deliver such an investigation, the Paris Principles specify certain powers, which nhris can and must be entrusted with. The main rule is that national institutions should freely consider any questions falling within their competences and must be authorised not only on the proposal of the government but also without referral to a higher authority.111 Such powers include hearing any person, accessing any official documents, entering any premises, or filing a legal action.112 Closing their inquiries, national institutions must be

106 Zambara, ‘Africa’s National Human Rights Institutions and the Responsibility to Protect,’ p. 469. 107 Network of African National Human Rights Institutions, ‘The Role of National Human Rights Institutions in Conflict Management, Resolution and Peace Building,’ p. 19. 108 Ibid. 109 General Observations of the Sub-Committee on Accreditation, G.O. 2.6. 110 E/CN.4/2006/91, 8 February 2006, para. 51. 111 Paris Principles, A(3)(a). 112 United Nations / Centre for Human Rights (1995), National human rights institutions: a handbook on the establishment and strengthening of national human rights institutions for the promotion and protection of human rights, Professional Training Series


336

Haász

able to publicise their findings and formulate opinions, reports, recommendations, or proposals.113 Whilst relatively few institutions have the power to issue enforceable orders, with some assistance from other national, regional and international players, they can have an impact. The recommendations of the National Human Rights Commission of Nepal were rejected by the Royal Nepal Army. After international and national human rights organisations and donor governments put pressure on the Nepalese government, the Royal Nepal Army conducted an internal inquiry into the killings and suspended the lead officer.114 Since conducting investigations during mass atrocities is difficult or impossible, nhris usually start their procedure after the conflict had ended. Nevertheless, conducting investigations while the conflict is still underway has many advantages. The evidence gathering is more effective if done as soon as possible after the events occur; witnesses are easier to find and they can provide more reliable evidence while the events are fresh in their minds. Releasing findings publicly may encourage combatants to respect human rights for fear of being exposed and punished.115 During the ceasefire, the National Human Rights Commission of Nepal established an investigation committee, chaired by a former Supreme Court Judge to investigate and report on complaints of killings, disappearances and torture across the country.116 In Guatemala, the Office of the Ombudsman created a special investigations section to search for disappeared persons. This assisted in establishing the truth regarding the whereabouts of hundreds of missing individuals.117 Protecting the Population In the work of nhris, special attention is devoted to those members of the society whose position renders them less able to enforce their own rights, such as women, children and other vulnerable groups. In post-conflict settings, people often lack basic needs, such as food, shelter, education, health care and social

113 114 115 116 117

No. 4 (New York, Geneva), available at: http://www.ohchr.org/Documents/Publications/ PTS-4Rev1-NHRI_en.pdf, accessed 4 July 2016, para. 259. Paris Principles, C(c) and A(3)(a). Durbach, ‘Human rights commissions in times of trouble and transition,’ p. 12. Asia Pacific Forum of National Human Rights Institutions, ‘A Manual on National Human Rights Institutions,’ p. 243. Durbach, ‘Human rights commissions in times of trouble and transition,’ p. 12. The Office of the un High Commissioner for Human Rights, ‘Guidance Note on National Human Rights Institutions and Transitional Justice,’ 27 September 2008, http://nhri .ohchr.org/EN/Themes/Portuguese/DocumentsPage/NHRIs_Guidance%20Note%20TJ _Oct%2008.pdf, accessed 2 July 2016, p. 14.



337

welfare. Realising the right to these through national courts, especially when the judicial system is down as well, is difficult, lengthy and expensive. Owing to their broad mandate, nhris can also address economic, social and cultural rights. Raising these issues through the national human rights commission or ombudsman may deliver redress.118 Complaint Handling The Paris Principles do not require nhris to have a complaint-handling function. This is merely an additional principle concerning the status of commissions with quasi-jurisdictional competence.119 Accordingly, there are several institutions that are not authorised to hear or consider complaints and petitions concerning individual situations but are still in compliance with the Paris Principles. Nevertheless, recent research has showed that institutions with the ability to receive and process complaints are more effective than nhris lacking in this competence.120 The complaint-handling function may contribute to the institutions’ advisory role, since complaints serve as indicator of emerging problems that should feed into policy processes.121 They have to address cases of torture, and other cruel treatment or punishment, forced disappearance, forcible displacement, protection of civilians, provision or facilitating of humanitarian assistance, and realising human rights and un Guiding Principles in idp centres.122 The actions of nhris as non-judicial mechanisms complement and supplement that of judicial mechanisms, especially in cases related to violations of the rights of vulnerable people who may not be able to afford costly, lengthy, inflexible and formal procedures.

118 The Office of the un High Commissioner for Human Rights, Rule-of-Law Tools for PostConflict States, Mapping the justice sector, 2006, http://www.ohchr.org/Documents/ Publications/RuleoflawMappingen.pdf, accessed 2 November 2016, p. 24. 119 Paris Principles, D. 120 Correspondence with Tom Pegram, July 2016. 121 Council of Europe, Commissioner for Human Rights, ‘National Human Rights Structures can help mitigate the effects of austerity measures,’ 31 May 2012, http://www.coe.int/en/ web/commissioner/-/national-human-rights-structures-can-help-mitigate-the-effects -of-austerity-measur-1, accessed 1 November 2016. 122 Sima Samar (Chairperson, Afghanistan Independent Human Rights Commission), Statement, Session 2: The role of nhris in the conflict and post-conflict situation, 29th icc General Meeting 23 March 2016, http://nhri.ohchr.org/EN/ICC/GeneralMeeting/29/ Theme%202%20ICC%20accreditation%20process/Session%202%20-%20Dr.%20%20 Sima%20SAMAR,%20Chairperson,%20Independent%20Human%20Rights%20Com mission%20of%20Afghanistan.pdf, accessed 1 November 2016.


338

Haász

The Human Rights Commission of Uganda opened civilian military operation centres in various regions receiving complaints on human rights violations. The centres are unique in the sense that they bring together civil and military parties. The aim is to discuss problems and resolve human rights issues in a cooperative way. If the regional centre is not capable of finding a solution, the case will be referred to the Commission, which then proceeds with its formal complaint handling methods.123 Conflict situations damage the whole democratic settlement, including judiciary. In such a situation, the complementary role of nhris is highly relevant and essential. nhri’s can inform complainants about their rights and the available means of redress, as well as promote access to such redress, referring complainants after hearing them to the competent authorities.124 The proactive complaint-handling practice of the Kenya National Commission on Human Rights offers a particularly useful model. Namely, the complaints submitted with the Commission often serve as a basis for strategic investigations into human rights violations.125 Promoting Transitional Justice The un Secretary-General pointed out that for carrying out community-wide transitional justice processes, the strengthening of national capacity is needed: ‘[n]ational human rights institutions may play an important role in advancing public participation in these processes, and, where appropriate, they may also directly participate in the implementation of transitional justice mechanisms, or in implementing recommendations of such mechanisms.’126 Owing to their special status between state and non-state actors, as well as by using their regional and international networks, nhris can: raise awareness about various transitional justice mechanisms and lessons learnt worldwide, engage civil society and institutional actors in the transitional justice discourse, facilitate national consultations on transitional justice while ensuring the participation of victims, women and 123 The Office of the un High Commissioner for Human Rights, ‘Guidance Note on National Human Rights Institutions and Transitional Justice,’ p. 16. 124 Ramcharan, ‘The National Responsibility to Protect Human Rights,’ p. 367. 125 Network of African National Human Rights Institutions, ‘The Role of National Human Rights Institutions in Conflict Management, Resolution and Peace Building,’ p. 20. 126 un Secretary-General, Guidance Note, United Nations Approach to Transitional Justice, March 2010, https://www.un.org/ruleoflaw/files/TJ_Guidance_Note_March_2010FINAL .pdf, accessed 2 November 2016, Guiding Principle 3.



339

vulnerable groups, assist in establishing and implementing transitional justice initiatives, and facilitate follow up on the recommendations of various transitional justice mechanisms.127 After a conflict situation, there is a need to address issues of reconciliation, reparations, reintegration, truth telling, and accountability for past human rights violations and other serious crimes committed during the conflict. Governments often establish commissions or working groups for these purposes. nhris can assist governments in these efforts (such as in Kenya),128 and work closely with these bodies, or be an appointed member of them (as seen in Uganda).129 nhris have also committed themselves to take an active role in the drafting of constitutions in emerging societies.130 The Provedoria in Timor Leste contributed to the drafting of follow up laws to the recommendations of the two truth commissions.131 Furthermore, nhris have become significant players in monitoring the implementation of peace agreements. By the Comprehensive Peace Accord (2006), the mandate of the National Human Rights Commission of Nepal was expanded in as much as the Commission was to monitor its implementation by the parties and report on it.132

Limits of Influence

National Human Rights Institutions will only be able to provide their assistance before, during, and after conflicts if states grant them a broad human rights mandate, the necessary independence and resources to operate. These are not only requirements in the Paris Principles133 but are elementary to meaningful 127 The Office of the un High Commissioner for Human Rights, ‘Guidance Note on National Human Rights Institutions and Transitional Justice,’ para. 4. 128 Network of African National Human Rights Institutions, ‘The Role of National Human Rights Institutions in Conflict Management, Resolution and Peace Building,’ p. 19. 129 Ibid. p. 16. 130 Cairo Declaration on the Role of nhris in Conflict and Post-Conflict Situations. 131 25th Annual Meeting of the International Coordinating Committee of National Institutions for the Promotion and Protection of Human Rights (icc), Session on nhri and Transitional Justice, Geneva, 22 March 2012, http://nhri.ohchr.org/EN/ICC/GeneralMeeting/ 25/Statementspresentations/Transitional%20Justice%20-%20Northen%20Ireland .pdf, accessed 30 October 2016. 132 Durbach, ‘Human rights commissions in times of trouble and transition,’ p. 4. 133 Paris Principles, B.


340

Haász

work. In the lack of these, the influence of the institutions is limited. The scope of the mandate of nhris may be restricted for national security reasons and they do not always have the authority to investigate the actions of officers and personal of the military, police, and special security forces. However, very often these forces are under suspicion for serious human rights violations. While this limitation is not inherently contrary to the Paris Principles, it should not be unreasonably or arbitrarily applied and should only be exercised under due process.134 Another hindering factor is that as long as a minimum level of democratic governance has not been reached by functioning institutions, such as p olice and judiciary, it is hard for nhris to function effectively.135 Furthermore, it is also important that the institutions enjoy public legitimicy and credibility among the population. Legitimacy is rooted in the legal status of the institutions, i.e. they have to be established by law, but also depends on the institutions’ internal rules and procedures, such as possessing an independent and fair selection and appointment procedure, diverse membership and staff, as well as collaborative working methods. Conclusion nhris have an important role in conflict prevention, resolution, management and peace building. As state-founded, yet independent institutions, they are well placed to act as a bridge between governments and non-state actors, as well as national and international human rights players. Their broad mandate for the promotion and protection of human rights gives them the prerogative of intervening in each phase of conflict and peace building situations. They advise governments on risks of human rights violations and remind them of their international human rights obligations, namely to implement international human rights instruments and draft legislation in keeping with international human rights standards. They conduct monitoring and can draw attention to early warning signs. nhris have responsibilities in inducing conflicting parties to realise the provisions of international human rights law and international humanitarian law by raising awareness about human rights and providing human rights education and training to professionals involved in crisis situations. nhris can be allies of the international community by monitoring and documenting human rights situations on the ground. nhris can 134 General Observations of the Sub-Committee on Accreditation, G.O. 2.7. 135 Parlevliet, ‘National Human Rights Institutions and Peace Agreements,’ p. 27.



341

contribute a holistic approach of the transitional justice that include truth seeking, prosecution of perpetrators, reparation to victims, vetting and institutional reform. nhris could contribute to the transitional justice processes through information gathering, documenting, and archiving of the human rights abuses, as well as conducting investigations and monitoring, cooperating with the specialised mechanisms and providing assistance to victims. To all this, they need to be granted a broad human rights mandate, full independence, and sufficient resources to function.
