an investigation (often called “reprisal”) should be prohibited by law. National human rights institutions should also have the power to impose or seek sanctions when they are obstructed or interfered with in any way. In some cases, statutes will have a general clause granting NHRIs the power to engage in all (unspecified) activities that, in their opinion, are necessary for conducting a proper investigation. Such an umbrella clause will permit flexibility, but NHRIs should be aware of their own obligations to respect the human rights of all persons at every stage of the investigation. Some institutions have authority to order interim injunctions or interim relief during the course of an investigation. This can be extremely valuable. Such interim measures are generally intended to ensure that the position of individuals affected by the matter under investigation is not made worse during the investigation, or that this process is not obstructed by subsequent events. Again, such powers must be given explicitly in the legislation. The authority to initiate an investigation The Paris Principles provide that an institution can consider any question within its competence brought to its attention, including “on the proposal of its members”. This essentially suggests that an institution should have the authority to initiate an investigation (or conduct a suo moto investigation, as it is sometimes called). This authority should be spelled out in the founding legislation so that there is no ambiguity. The power to initiate investigations can be extremely important and far-reaching, especially for disadvantaged and vulnerable groups that are unlikely to have access to NHRIs or the resources to inform the NHRI of their situation. The power to initiate investigations also allows an NHRI to ensure that vulnerable groups are given a public voice and that human rights violations, wherever they occur, become a matter of general knowledge and concern. Through initiated investigations, hidden issues can become part of the public discourse, a requisite step towards dealing with them. Selecting the issue for investigation Issues requiring attention may be identified through a trends analysis of incoming complaints (for those institutions mandated to receive complaints), a systematic media scanning, following a strategic planning exercise, or through monitoring. Community and non-governmental organizations may bring urgent local issues to the attention of the institution. Media reports may provide an indication that there is a potential problem and lead an institution to initiate an investigation. 4. Systemic investigations and inquiries Systemic investigations examine how systems—laws, policies, practices, patterns of behaviour and ingrained attitudes—can operate in a discriminatory manner or in violation of human rights laws more generally. Such patterns, policies or practices may be structural, in the sense that they start with the premise that violations are interwoven in the fabric of society and, therefore, pervasive and widespread. Not long ago, for example, it was still considered normal and acceptable to deny employment to women of childbearing age or to fire a woman from employment if she became pregnant, on the basis that she was treated the same way as other employees who leave work for long periods. Systemic investigations not only expose generalized problems, they may also be more effective than investigations into several individual complaints. Institutions may use a variety of methods. 79