OSCE/ODIHR Opinion on the Law of the Republic of Lithuania on the Seimas Ombudsmen 31. Aside from the definitions laid down in Article 2 of the Law, it is noted that throughout the Law, only masculine pronouns are used. In order to accurately reflect that women and men have the same chances of becoming Ombudsmen, it is recommended to use male and female pronouns throughout the Law, thereby ensuring its gender neutrality. 4. Term of Office 32. Chapter II on the Seimas Ombudsman deals mainly with eligibility for the office of Ombudsman, and the appointment and dismissal from office of Ombudsmen, as well as activities that are considered incompatible with the duties of Ombudsman. 33. According to Article 6, citizens of Lithuania are eligible for the position of Ombudsman if they are persons of high moral character, have a BA or MA in law/are university graduates of law, and have a record of at least ten years of practice or teaching of law. While this may be understandable and even appropriate for an institution with a strong focus on maladministration, such requirements would appear quite restrictive and unnecessary with regard to an independent human rights body. As they are, they do not permit persons with non-legal backgrounds to become Ombudsmen, even if they have substantive experience working in the field of human rights. In line with previous recommendations on enhancing the human rights profile of the Ombudsmen (see pars 23-24 supra), it is thus recommended to expand the eligibility requirements under Article 6 so that also persons with other, non-legal educational and professional backgrounds would be eligible to apply for the position of Ombudsman, provided that they have high moral standards, an adequately strong educational and professional background and recognized human rights experience. 34. Article 7 states that the Seimas shall appoint two Ombudsmen for a term of five years following their nomination by the Seimas Speaker. It would thus appear that the entire recruitment and appointment process is very much Seimas-driven and implemented, and not particularly transparent, inclusive or pluralistic. It does not appear to involve any actors outside the Seimas, such as civil society, academia or other relevant actors. For this reason, as mentioned above (see par 25 supra), the independence of the Ombudsmen may be brought into question. 35. Further to the above, according to the Paris Principles, the appointment of members of an NHRI shall be established in accordance with a procedure which affords all necessary guarantees to ensure the “pluralist representation of the social forces (of civilian society) involved in the promotion and protection of human rights, particularly by powers which will enable effective cooperation to be established with, or through the presence of, representatives of human rights NGOs, trade unions, concerned social and professional organizations”, e.g. lawyers, doctors’, journalists’ and “eminent scientists’” associations, trends in philosophical or religious thought, universities and qualified experts, parliament, and government departments (in an advisory capacity).18 It would also be important to include representatives from vulnerable groups of society, such as ethnic, national, linguistic, sexual or other minorities, as well as organizations protecting the rights of women, children and the elderly. 18 See the Paris Principles, Composition and guarantees of independence and pluralism, par 1, op cit. note 2. 12