A/HRC/41/30 challenges. She added that the implementation of the 2030 Agenda required the inclusion and partnership of key actors at global, regional, national and local levels. 33. The representative of the Commission on Human Rights of the Philippines focused on the call in the Mérida Declaration for cooperation among national human rights institutions, more specifically regarding Goal 16, and in particular on access to justice. He recommended that, given the global nature of most human rights issues, such as migration, statelessness and climate change, national human rights institutions should work together in investigating human rights violations to create more synergies and avoid possible gaps or overlaps. He acknowledged that this proposal entailed some challenges, such as establishing rules and protocols, identifying common issues and conducting joint inquiries. 34. The representative of OHCHR emphasized that national human rights institutions had been producing and using data to monitor, from a normative perspective, the voluntary commitments assumed by Member States under the 2030 Agenda. They required adequate resources and the right tools, especially human rights indicators and a human rights-based approach to data, to do this effectively. He added that while two thirds of the global Sustainable Development Goal indicators adopted by the General Assembly 10 were human rights indicators, less than half of those directly measured States’ commitment to international standards or their efforts to achieve them. Using complementary structural and process indicators developed by OHCHR could help address that imbalance. He stated that OHCHR was also keen to support the formation and strengthening of platforms of cooperation between national human rights institutions and national statistical offices. He added that those new partnerships were critical in implementing Sustainable Development Goal indicators 16.10.1, 16.a.1, 10.3.1/16.b.1 and 16.1.2 11 and other human rights/Sustainable Development Goal indicators, and operationalizing the human rightsbased approach to data. Thus, it would be important to accelerate the establishment of national human rights institutions compliant with the Paris Principles in view of indicator 16.a.1 data showing that only 54 per cent of countries would have A status institutions by 2030, at the current slow and uneven pace. 2. Summary of discussions 35. Due to time constraints, only the representatives of the national human rights institutions of Algeria and Mexico took the floor. 36. The representative of the institution of Algeria gave an example of its approach to the right to health. Her institution had categorized the indicators based on different population groups, particularly the most vulnerable, such as older persons and persons with disabilities. 37. The representative of the institution of Mexico asked how the 2030 Agenda could be promoted and achieved in countries experiencing various forms of violence, such as disappearances and violence against women, journalists and human rights defenders. IV. Conclusions and recommendations 38. The consultation provided an opportunity for national human rights institutions to share their experience and best practices in supporting the implementation of the 2030 Agenda. It also enabled them to assess the progress 10 11 8 General Assembly resolution 71/313. Number of verified cases of killing, kidnapping, enforced disappearance, arbitrary detention and torture of journalists, associated media personnel, trade unionists and human rights advocates in the previous 12 months (16.10.1); existence of independent national human rights institutions in compliance with the Paris Principles (16.a.1); proportion of population reporting having personally felt discriminated against or harassed in the previous 12 months on the basis of a ground of discrimination prohibited under international human rights law (10.3.1/16.b.1); and conflict-related deaths per 100,000 population, by sex, age and cause (16.1.2).