A/HRC/22/47 IV. The role of national human rights institutions in the protection of human rights defenders 84. National human rights institutions can potentially play a substantive role in protecting human rights defenders. The Special Rapporteur has recommended on numerous occasions that such institutions establish a focal point for human rights defenders with the responsibility of ensuring their protection.23 Protection constitutes a wide range of possible measures and interventions, including formal complaints mechanisms and protection programmes; advocacy in favour of a conducive work environment for defenders; public support when violations against defenders are perpetrated; visits to defenders in detention or prison and provision of legal aid in this context; mediation when conflicts occur between defenders and other parts of society; and strengthening of the capacity of defenders to ensure their own security. The Special Rapporteur has noted a number of commendable initiatives taken by national institutions which are detailed below. A. Formal complaints mechanisms and protection programmes 85. The most common measure by national institutions to ensure protection of human rights defenders appears to be complaints mechanisms. Most national institutions are mandated to receive complaints from individuals whose rights have been violated, with some also allowed to receive petitions from representatives of victims and associations. The majority of the institutions which responded to the Special Rapporteur’s questionnaire indicated that defenders could present complaints to them using the same channels as other individuals. 86. The Special Rapporteur has on previous occasions provided observations and guidelines on national protection mechanisms and other formal protection programmes (see A/HRC/13/22, paras. 70-83). Several national institutions reported that they are involved in such mechanisms. In Mexico, both the National Human Rights Commission and some institutions at state level are involved in protection programmes of this sort. At state level, the most developed appears to be the Human Rights Commission of the Federal District (Mexico City), which has had a unit dedicated to human rights defenders since 2007. 87. National human rights institutions usually have a mandate to provide recommendations to various parts of the Government on what actions should be taken in a given case without these recommendations carrying any legal obligation. The national institutions in Mexico and El Salvador both noted that they used such a mechanism to issue recommendations with precautionary measures to be taken by the Government in cases involving human rights defenders. In Mexico, such recommendations are made public, and the national commission has published a guide on how to implement precautionary measures awarded to human rights defenders. The National Human Rights Commission of India is using a similar mechanism to alert the relevant authorities about reported violations against defenders. The Indian commission has established a focal point for defenders which has a hotline and is accessible online. 88. In a similar vein, some national institutions have engaged actively with the authorities when reported violations against defenders occur. The Afghanistan Independent Human Rights Commission noted that it intervenes directly with the police and security officials once complaints are received of threats or intimidation of defenders by State or non-State actors. The Commission on Human Rights of the Philippines is mandated to 23 See A/HRC/13/22, para. 108; A/66/203, para. 86, inter alia. 15