A/HRC/7/70 page 3 6. The table reflecting the accreditation status of NHRIs as of December 2007 is attached in annex I. The Sub-Committee also acknowledged the high degree of support and professionalism of the staff of the ICC secretariat (OHCHR, National Institutions Unit). II. IMPROVEMENT OF THE ICC ACCREDITATION PROCESS 7. At the seventeenth session of its annual meeting, held on 12 April 2006, ICC established a Working Group to examine the process used to accredit NHRIs and to develop a discussion paper for the ICC on the matter. The working group, whose members were also the members of the ICC Sub-Committee on Accreditation at the time, developed a discussion paper examining three areas: (a) the composition of the Sub-Committee and its role and responsibilities; (b) the accreditation process; and (c) the substance of criteria or minimum standards set for accreditation. The paper was presented at the eighteenth and nineteenth sessions of the annual meeting of the ICC. In addition, members were asked to provide further comments in writing with a view to developing a final paper for presentation and adoption at the 20th ICC meeting (scheduled for April 2008). 8. In addition, and in response to comments made at the nineteenth session, the working group examined the issues of: (a) including a mechanism to challenge adverse accreditation recommendations within the accreditation process; and (b) the status that should be accorded to NHRIs while their accreditation status is being reviewed or recommendations on that status are being challenged. 9. In accordance with the recommendations of the seventeenth session of ICC in April 2006, it was agreed to initiate a review process of NHRIs already accredited with “A status” every five years. The process began in October 2006. It was also agreed that there would be a continuous review of accreditation of NHRIs every five years from the date of initial accreditation. 10. At its October 2007 session, the Sub-Committee on Accreditation adopted measures to improve its accreditation procedure, including: − An appeal process to ensure that greater transparency and due process has been instituted by the Sub-Committee, especially for NHRIs that are deemed not to comply with the Paris Principles. Such NHRIs have 30 days to appeal the results of the Sub-Committee review with the full ICC membership then making a decision; − A more rigorous review of each application for accreditation, including of the full documentation and statement of compliance submitted in advance of the session by NHRIs, with a detailed summary prepared by the secretariat (NIU) in close coordination with relevant parts of OHCHR. OHCHR is actively involved in the reviews and the Sub-Committee could also address NHRIs themselves, if necessary, through conference calls; − More focused recommendations provided to each NHRI (no matter if it has A or B status) to ensure full compliance with the Paris Principles - even before the prescribed five-year time frame for review of accreditations;