A/HRC/22/47 68. The national institution in India is composed of members who have occupied highlevel seats in the judiciary, which is reported to ensure their credibility and also serve as a protective mechanism. Similarly, the Executive Secretary of the Governing Council of the Nigerian Human Rights Commission is to be a retired judge or a lawyer with relevant experience, although other members of the Council can include representatives from human rights organizations, journalists, trade unions and the Bar Association. The Special Rapporteur believes that the composition of the governing body of a national institution should be as diverse as possible, including representatives from civil society and people with relevant human rights experience. 69. The Special Rapporteur has stated on various occasions that standard operating procedures to ensure interaction with civil society in the work of national institutions are important and can endorse the legitimacy of the work of defenders (Indonesia, 2007). In this connection, she has recommended the establishment of a focal point on human rights defenders and systematic consultation with civil society (Armenia, 2010). 70. In the responses to her questionnaire, it has been reported that some national institutions have a dedicated focal point or desk for human rights defenders (India, Philippines and Uganda). Others report having a service dealing specifically with external stakeholders, including human rights defenders (New Zealand). Some institutions are mandated to establish relations with civil society working in relevant areas (Afghanistan and Mexico) and do so by establishing agreements and memoranda of understanding with NGOs for promotion, protection and capacity-building activities. 71. Some national institutions have reported that they have regular contact and meetings with defenders and civil society networks and organize different types of events and activities in coordination with them (Jordan, Sri Lanka). In certain countries, national institutions establish advisory groups which include defenders in their composition (Norway), in some cases with thematic focus (Serbia, Ukraine). Other institutions report that they encourage civil society to establish advocacy committees to increase synergies with the institution (Afghanistan). 72. The Special Rapporteur is of the view that regulatory frameworks for national institutions should mandate the establishment of a permanent, dedicated focal point for human rights defenders. Ideally, they should also encourage the collection of disaggregated data on violations against them and the establishment of a protection programme taking into account their specific profile and risks. In addition, she considers that the existence of regional or local offices of the institution established in the regions, either permanent (South Africa, Uganda) or itinerant (New Zealand), certainly makes the institution more accessible to local, grass-roots organizations and defenders working in remote areas. The Special Rapporteur emphasizes the importance of such local offices being responsive to complaints received. 5. Adequate powers of investigation 73. The Paris Principles contain additional guidance for national institutions with a mandate to hear and consider individual complaints and petitions. 74. From the responses to the questionnaire, the Special Rapporteur is pleased to note that most national institutions are entrusted by law to receive individual complaints on alleged violations of human rights. Most commonly, national institutions can receive individual complaints and are able to conduct an enquiry and then refer the matter to the specialized body or to the courts to obtain a binding decision (El Salvador, India). 75. Some of them have quasi-judicial powers to investigate any individual complaint and provide effective protection and remedies to victims. Some institutions have the power to issue interim protective measures for human rights defenders (Mexico). 13