34 SURVEY RESULTS 31% of NHRIs surveyed have the power to appear before courts or quasijudicial/ administrative bodies. 14% of NHRIs have the power to issue some form of order. 55% of NHRIs have no compliance powers or standing before courts or administrative bodies. Example The Portuguese Ombudsman has the power to file appeals on the constitutionality of legislation, and has exercised this power in a number of gender equality cases before the Constitutional Court, addressing issues of “legitimate” children in the system of family allowance for the military (1979), functions that could only be performed by unmarried women or widows without children (1942), discrimination against unmarried couples (1991), and discrimination in terms of male and female survivors’ pension from the death of spouse (1993). HANDBOOK FOR NHRIs ON WOMEN’S RIGHTS AND GENDER EQUALITY 2.5 REMEDIAL POWERS The ability to recommend or provide remedies is an important aspect of the protection responsibilities of NHRIs. The ability to address not only individual complaints, but also to identify and remedy root causes of discrimination and address systemic discrimination where this exists, depends on remedies. Some NHRIs are legally able to receive complaints or communications, but are unable to issue orders or appear before administrative or judicial bodies to enforce them. Nonetheless, good offices’ interventions may, directly or indirectly, facilitate remedies. For example, some NHRIs can monitor proceedings of gender-based discrimination cases before the courts or administrative bodies, and can also investigate complaints concerning excessive length of such proceedings. Some NHRIs even have the power to file appeals on the constitutionality of legislation before the competent courts. Example The Polish Human Rights Defender uses a wide range of judicial enforcement and compliance techniques, including constitutional complaints, administrative proceedings, motions to the Constitutional Tribunal and petitions to the courts and to executive bodies. In one case, the Human Rights Defender brought a case to the Constitutional Tribunal arguing that differences in the common retirement age for women and men meant that women’s retirement pay was lower than average. Although the Constitutional Tribunal found that the different common retirement age for women and for men did not discriminate against women, it decided to refer the matter to the parliament to consider the advisability of legislative actions aimed at gradually making retirement age for women and men the same.