OSCE/ODIHR Final Opinion on the Draft Act Amending the Act on the Commissioner for Human Rights of Poland D. explicitly mention in Article 7d par 3 which entity is the competent authority to examine requests for permission to bring criminal charges against the Commissioner, while ensuring that its composition is fixed ab initio; [par 54] E. introduce a list of clear and precise criteria to be taken into consideration when determining whether immunity should be lifted or not in a given case; [pars 56-57] F. specify that the Sejm/competent authority should not analyse the merits of the criminal case when taking their decision on lifting immunity, and that they should duly respect the principle of the presumption of innocence, and therefore remove the requirement for the criminal case file to be made available to the Sejm/competent authority from Article 7d par 5; [pars 58-59] G. introduce in Article 7d par 8 a higher majority of deputies for the vote of the Sejm on lifting immunity; [par 60] H. specify what are the legal consequences in cases where immunity is lifted, or not lifted; [pars 62-64] and I. ensure that the Draft Act undergoes extensive and inclusive consultation processes, including with the general public and the Commissioner, before adoption. [par 68] Additional Recommendations, highlighted in bold, are also included in the text of the opinion. IV. ANALYSIS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 1. International Standards on NHRIs 11. National Human Rights Institutions (hereinafter “NHRIs”) are independent bodies with a constitutional and/or legislative mandate to protect and promote human rights. They are considered to constitute a “key component of effective national human rights protection systems and indispensable actors for the sustainable promotion and protection of human rights at the country level”.3 Thus, NHRIs link the responsibilities of the State stemming from international human rights obligations to the rights of individuals in the country. Although part of the state apparatus, NHRIs’ independence from the executive, legislative and judicial branches ensures that they are able to fulfil their mandate to protect individuals from human rights violations, particularly when such violations are committed by public authorities or bodies. 12. The main instrument relevant to NHRIs at the international level are the United Nations Principles relating to the status of national institutions for the promotion and protection of human rights (hereinafter “the Paris Principles”).4 While they do not prescribe any particular model for NHRIs, they outline minimum standards in this respect, including a broad human rights mandate, autonomy from government, guarantees of functional and institutional independence, pluralism, adequate resources and adequate powers of investigation. 3 4 See par 15 of the 2007 Annual Report of the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights, A/62/36, available at http://daccess-ddsny.un.org/doc/UNDOC/GEN/N07/461/09/PDF/N0746109.pdf?OpenElement. Defined at the first International Workshop on National Institutions for the Promotion and Protection of Human Rights in Paris (7-9 October 1991), and adopted by UN General Assembly Resolution 48/134 of 20 December 1993, available at http://www.ohchr.org/EN/ProfessionalInterest/Pages/StatusOfNationalInstitutions.aspx. 5