A/HRC/39/21 33. The rules of procedure (art. 4.4) provide that the presence of all four members of the Subcommittee on Accreditation constitutes a quorum. However, in specific circumstances when no alternate member has been appointed by a regional network, the presence of three members is sufficient. 34. To avoid any deadlock in the deliberations of the Subcommittee, the rules of procedure (art. 4.5) now provide that the Chairperson will have a casting vote when a vote is tied and further deliberation is unlikely to result in a decision. 35. Another key amendment to the rules of procedure prevents a member of the Subcommittee on Accreditation whose institution is under notice of intention to downgrade its status from attending the session of the Subcommittee during which that institution will be reviewed and provides that the member be replaced by an alternate appointed by the relevant regional network (in accordance with new article 4.8 and article 3.1). 36. According to the amended procedures (art. 6.4), the Subcommittee determines whether an institution is a national human rights institution, and whether it is a new or continuing national human rights institution. C. Amendments to the general observations of the Subcommittee on Accreditation 37. The Subcommittee on Accreditation, in cooperation with its secretariat, has drafted general observations to interpret the Paris Principles in order to enhance their understanding and implementation by all national human rights institutions. The general observations have been adopted by the Bureau of the Global Alliance of National Human Rights Institutions. To date 20 general observations have been issued. Amendments to these general observations were proposed by the Subcommittee on Accreditation and endorsed by the Bureau of the Global Alliance in March 2017 and February 2018. 38. A new paragraph has been added to general observation 1.4 on interaction with the international human rights system to emphasize that national human rights institutions must maintain their independence and participate in sessions of United Nations human rights mechanisms in their own right or in a manner that clearly distinguishes them as independent national human rights institutions. 39. General observation 1.9 on political representatives in national human rights institutions has been amended to emphasize that representatives of Governments, government agencies and parliamentarians should not be members of, nor participate in, the decision-making organs of a national human rights institution. 40. To avoid any confusion, general observation 2.3 on functional immunity has been retitled “Protection from criminal and civil liability for official actions and decisions undertaken in good faith”. The general observation has furthermore been amended to take into account national contexts where functional immunity is not part of the legal tradition and to provide that such protection be made available to members of national human rights institutions’ decision-making bodies as well as staff. 41. Former general observation 2.5 on staffing by secondment has been merged with general observation 2.4 on recruitment and retention of national human rights institution staff, which now requires national human rights institutions to be empowered by law to determine the staffing structure and the skills required to fulfil their mandate. It also provides that their staff should be recruited according to an open, transparent and meritbased selection process and that a national human rights institution should be able, and be perceived to be able, to operate independently from government interference, and should not be required to accept staff assigned to it by a Government. 7