OSCE/ODIHR Opinion on the Draft Amendments to the Act on Establishment of the Slovak National Centre for Human Rights democratic society. The procedure must provide also a forum with respect to any disputes arising in this field. 4. 37. Funding Section 2 of the Draft Amendments, specifies how the Centre is funded, and the use of funds. Some amendments have been made to the existing law, specifically the removal of reference to ‘an international agreement’ in §2 (2), and clarification of the SNCHR’s legal status under Slovak law. However, this section still lacks sufficient detail and omits some critical aspects of NHRI funding that should be provided for in NHRI enabling legislation. 4.1. Appropriate Levels of Funding 38. Funding provision is vital to the independent functioning of NHRIs. The state is expected to provide the NHRI with an appropriate level of funding for all of its core operations and activities. The SCA considers that: ‘[t]o function effectively, an NHRI must be provided with an appropriate level of funding in order to guarantee its independence and its ability to freely determine its priorities and activities. It must also have the power to allocate funding according to its priorities. In particular, adequate funding should, to a reasonable degree, ensure the gradual and progressive realisation of the improvement of the NHRI’s operations and the fulfilment of its mandate.’44 39. Appropriate funding includes allocation of funding for accessible premises, salaries and benefits to staff, well-functioning communications systems and sufficient resources for mandated activities. 45 Appropriate funding should be provided to the NHRI even in times of financial constraint. In its justification to General Observation 1.10, the SCA emphasises that ‘[w]hile the provision of “adequate funding” is determined in part by the national financial climate, States have the duty to protect the most vulnerable members of society, who are often the victims of human rights violations, even in times of severe resource constraints.’ 46 The SCA has recommended the downgrading of several A-Status NHRIs due to insufficient state financial support.47 40. There has been previous criticism of Slovakia about the level of resources provided to the Centre. In its 2014 recommendations on the Centre, the SCA expressed concern about the Centre’s level of funding. It noted that concern in this regard had also been expressed by a number of UN Treaty Bodies. 48 These recommendations have been 44 Op. cit. fn 9, SCA General Observation 1.10. Ibid. 46 Ibid, SCA General Observation 1.10, justification. 47 For example, Senegal in 2011, Greece 2016-2017. 48 Op. cit. fn 7, p. 11 (2014 ICC Sub-Committee on Accreditation Report: “The SCA notes the concerns expressed by the Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination (CERD/C/ SVK/CO/9-10), the Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (E/C.12/SVK/CO/2) and the Human Rights Committee (CCPR/C/SVK/CO/3) regarding the adequacy of the SNCHR’s funding.”; e.g. The Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination in its 2013 Concluding Observations, stated that it ‘regrets the lack of adequate financial and human resources to empower the NCHR with necessary means in disseminating the Anti-Discrimination Act and assisting victims of racial discrimination (art. 2)… the Committee recommends that the State party strengthen the NCHR’s independence and mandate and provide it with financial and human resources in order to efficiently fight against discrimination.’ Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination, Concluding observations on the ninth to the tenth periodic reports of Slovakia, adopted by the 45 13