A/HRC/33/34 (g) The Subcommittee on Accreditation systematically issues tailored recommendations to the national human rights institution under review, even when it recommends “A” status; (h) Recommendations by the Subcommittee on Accreditation, once adopted by the Bureau, are made public in the report of the Subcommittee, which is posted on the Global Alliance’s website.2 11. In accordance with article 16.2 of the Statute, where it appears that the circumstances of any national human rights institution accredited with an “A” status may have changed in a way which affects its compliance with the Paris Principles, the Chair of the Global Alliance, or the Subcommittee on Accreditation, may initiate a special review of the accreditation of that institution. Further to the special review, the status of the institution can be either maintained or downgraded. 12. It is stipulated in article 18.2 of the Statute that where, in the opinion of the Chair of the Global Alliance, an exceptional circumstance exists necessitating urgent consideration of the immediate suspension of an accredited “A” status institution, the Bureau may decide to immediately suspend the accreditation classification of that institution and initiate a special review, pursuant to article 16.2 of the Statute. Article 18.3 describes the procedure to be followed for the immediate suspension of accreditation in exceptional circumstances. As stipulated in article 18.4: “for the purposes of article 18.2 and 18.3, an ‘exceptional circumstance’ refers to a sudden and drastic change in the internal political order of a State”, such as a break in the constitutional or democratic order, or a declared state of emergency, or gross violations of human rights; which is accompanied by any of the following: (a) a change in the national human rights institution – enabling legislation or other applicable law that is contrary to the Paris Principles; (b) a change in the composition of the national human rights institution that is not undertaken in accordance with the established selection and/or appointment process; or (c) the national human rights institution acts in a way that seriously compromises its compliance with the Paris Principles. 13. In conformity with the accreditation procedure set out in article 12 of the Statute, the recommendations of the Subcommittee on Accreditation are submitted to the Bureau for it to make the final decision on the accreditation status of the institutions reviewed, in accordance with the following process: (a) The recommendation made by the Subcommittee on Accreditation is forwarded to the applicant; (b) Within 28 days of receipt of the recommendation, the applicant may challenge it by submitting, through OHCHR, a written communication to the Chair of the Global Alliance; (c) The report of the Subcommittee, including the recommendation, is forwarded to the Bureau. Any challenges from the institution reviewed, together with the statements of compliance and the summaries prepared by OHCHR of all the documents submitted by the institution concerned, are sent to the Bureau members to enable them to assess the validity of the challenges; (d) If, within 20 days of receipt of the report and the challenges, at least four members of the Bureau, from no fewer than two regional groups, notify the secretariat that they support the objection to the recommendation of the Subcommittee on Accreditation, the recommendation is referred to the Bureau at its next meeting for a decision; 2 See nhri.ohchr.org. 5