­ elegated to a provincial or state human rights institution, no gap in jurisdiction d should exist between local and national bodies. C. Appointment procedures Appointment mechanisms are one of the most important ways to guarantee the independence, diversity and accessibility of NHRIs. Direct appointment by the executive branch of government is undesirable. Processes should be open and transparent. Appropriate models of appointment include: Nomination by civil society organisations – This ensures that diversity and an organic relationship with civil society are reflected in the membership. Such mechanisms only work in multi-member organisations. One potential shortcoming is that, when a variety of organisations nominate, none will have regard to the overall composition of membership (for example, to its gender or ethnic balance). Another hurdle is that the institution’s membership must be large to reflect properly the variety of civil society bodies. Some of these ­disadvantages may be overcome if both single- and multi-member institutions establish ­advisory boards or committees with broader social representation. Appointment by Parliament – In theory, this distances the appointment ­process from the government of the day. It may work well if Parliament vigorously ­exercises independent oversight, but not if parliamentary scrutiny is weak or ­biased. An advantage is that the legislature is likely to have regard for the overall composition and balance of a multi-member institution. The body responsible, such as a parliamentary committee, may receive nominations from civil society organisations, and nominees can be subject to a public interview process. Appointment by another autonomous institution – In some societies other ­appointment mechanisms may meet the requirement of independence from the government of the day, such as a judicial service commission which appoints judges in many countries. D. Criteria for membership of a national institution Criteria for membership will necessarily vary, especially in single-member ­institutions where the incumbent may have a quasi-judicial role. It will be ­important to include criteria that help to ensure independence. For example, civil servants or political party officials may be excluded, especially if they are financially dependent on the government of the day. Criteria may include a legal qualification (eligible to be a senior judge for example) or be aimed at ensuring diversity among NHRI members. The most important point, however, is that criteria should be clearly ­established, preferably by law, in advance of appointment. They must be objectively ­verifiable criteria against which the actual appointment can be assessed. A potential danger of membership criteria is that they may be chosen in order to exclude specific individuals or groups. This is a further reason to ensure that  Members may be formally appointed by the head of state after appointments have been determined by a separate body. 14 Assessing the Effectiveness of National Human Rights Institutions