A/HRC/11/3 page 8 F. Caseload and the use of inter-State complaints 21. Regional commissions may be able to receive both specific individual cases and complaints of a general nature. Dealing with repetitive cases of a similar nature increases the caseload of the commission without improving efficacy of human rights implementation by States and is beginning to be dealt with in the European system by pilot judgements. The power to provide member States with legal advice on legislation and policy is also extremely important to address issues of concern and prevent them from resulting in human rights violations. It was also observed that regional mechanisms which have a preventative advisory role can draw on their experience addressing human rights complaints brought against a member State to alert other member States to the issue and advise of the appropriate steps to be taken in order to prevent human rights violations from occurring in similar circumstances. 22. The Inter-American Commission can receive inter-State complaints but to date only two have been filed. One of these was declared inadmissible, as it was filed by the member State against itself (Costa Rica). The other, Nicaragua v. Costa Rica, was filed only in 2007 and was also declared inadmissible for failure to exhaust domestic remedies. The Inter-American Commission has obtained additional funding to enable it to reduce waiting times for individual complaints from five or six years to two years in the near future. 23. Generally, caseloads in regional mechanisms are increasing, underlining the need for effective NHRIs to ensure that as many cases as possible are resolved at the national level. Other domestic measures can be taken to promote efficiency within the regional mechanism: for example, the promulgation of laws providing that all regional Commission and Court decisions are incorporated into national jurisprudence would facilitate legal reform and address issues on a preventative basis. 24. It was observed that the complaints submitted to the Inter-American Commission reflect an increasing concern with due process of law issues, characteristic of the expansion of democracy amongst the member States of the OAS. G. Compliance by member States with decisions of the Commission and universality of human rights standards 25. During the workshop, it was noted that compliance by member States is fundamental to the success of regional human rights mechanisms. Compliance is heavily dependent on the degree of political will of the various member States and to overcome this obstacle, the member States should have domestic mechanisms in place, such as NHRIs, with constitutional or legislative powers to ensure that the State upholds the decision of the regional human rights body. 26. The Council of Europe Human Rights Commissioner enjoys a positive interaction with member States. When representatives of the Commissioner travel, they are often met by the President or Prime Minister of the member State. It was reported that member States often establish committees to follow up on the Commissioner’s recommendations or develop comprehensive national human rights action plans in response to recommendations. However, it was also noted that regional mechanisms should follow up with member States regarding implementation of the recommendations as in some cases member States have established action