■■ A copy of the legislation or other instrument by which it is established and empowered in its official or published format; ■■ An outline of its organizational structure, including staff complement and annual budget; ■■ A copy of its most recent annual report or equivalent document in its official or published format; ■■ A detailed statement showing how it complies with the Paris Principles as well as any respects in which it does not so comply and any proposals to ensure compliance. On the basis of this documentation, the Sub-Committee drafts a report, which the Bureau then considers to decide, under the auspices of and in cooperation with OHCHR, on the application. The Bureau and the Sub-Committee adopt processes that facilitate dialogue and the exchange of information between them and the applicant NHRI to come to a fair decision. In practice, the National Institutions and Regional Mechanisms Section of OHCHR reviews the documentation and prepares a critical summary, highlighting any problematic areas. This summary tests both the applicant institution’s compliance on paper with the Paris Principles as well as the degree to which it has demonstrated its independence and effectiveness substantively. The applicant institution receives a copy and may provide additional information, documentation or written commentary on the problems noted in it. The accreditation process has become more rigorous and, as suggested above, includes not only a “paper review” but also seeks input from United Nations field presences, NGOs and other stakeholders on the merit of an application. Any such input is also shared with the applicant institution, which may comment on it. Finally, the applicant institution is contacted by telephone if the Sub-Committee believes that it needs to clarify any matter relevant to the application. Where necessary, it will be asked to provide further written submissions. The resulting recommendation is based on these inputs, as well as on the Sub-Committee’s own general observations, which have been developed over time. The recommendation is specific and in some cases time-bound, focusing on remedial action so as to ensure compliance with the Paris Principles. It is sent to the applicant institution, which has 28 days to challenge it. Thereafter, it is sent to the Bureau, whose decision is final. The recommendation will be forwarded to the Bureau for decision, together with any challenge and any material received in connection with either the application or the challenge. Any member of the Bureau who disagrees with the recommendation should, within 20 days of its receipt, notify the Chair of the Sub-Committee and the Secretariat. The Secretariat will promptly notify the Bureau of the objection raised and provide all necessary information to clarify that objection. If, within 20 days of receipt of this information, at least four members of the Bureau representing different regional groups notify the Secretariat that they also object, the recommendation is referred to the next meeting of the Bureau for decision. If at least four members from different regional groups do not object to the recommendation within 20 days of its receipt, the recommendation shall be deemed to be approved by the Bureau. The decision is final. 5. When are decisions on accreditation taken? Initial accreditation. This decision is taken when an NHRI first applies for membership of the International Coordinating Committee. Based on the documentation it is required to provide (see above), it must also demonstrate that it is functioning effectively. 47