1. National Mechanisms for Reporting and Follow-up
OHCHR Treaty Body Capacity Building Programme

2. Rational for institutionalizing State engagement with HRMs
Type
Mandate
Main Functions
UPR
Intergovernmental
Human Rights Council
- Reporting
SPs
Independent experts
- Visits
- Individual complaints
TBs
Human Rights treaties
- Visits (by 1 TB- SPT)
ALL THREE MECHANISMS ISSUE RECOMMENDATIONS
Explain all HRMs and their functions and that during this workshop focus will be given to engagement with HRM regarding reporting. Mention that the reporting cycle is going to be explained in the next session as well as the perioridicity of reporting.

3. National Challenges
Ongoing growth in human rights mechanisms (int’l and regional), reporting requirements, and number of human rights recommendations addressed to States
Timely and quality reporting demand sustainable technical expertise
Quality reporting requires effective follow-up and implementation of recommendations by many Ministries and at the local level
Ad-hoc arrangements are not viable anymore
- International and regional reporting requires political commitment, technical knowledge and dedicated resources and capacity.
- The number of recommendations from human rights mechanisms which States are to implement is enormous- give example of country of capacity building effort, e.g. in your country alone … recommendations issued by UPR, …. By TBs… and … by SPs- totalling to …. recommendations.
- States that use ad hoc mechanisms to prepare their reports typically face the same capacity constraints every time they constitute a new drafting committee and face challenges caused by a lack of coordination and a weak institutional memory.
- Treaty Bodies often face a delay between reception of a report and its consideration, increasing the risk that Government drafters are no longer available for the interactive dialogue, thereby weakening institutional memory.
Consequently, ad-hoc arrangements are not viable anymore.

4. Standing ./. Ad hoc
Increased coordination, institutional memory (also because of delay between submission of report and its review)
Better use of resources
Better horizontal linkages
Better monitoring of follow-up
National coherence
Easier to support with technical assistance
Ad hoc versus standing mechanisms
Reporting requires political commitment, technical knowledge and dedicated resources and capacity.
States that use ad hoc mechanisms to prepare their reports typically face the same capacity constraints every time they constitute a new drafting committee and face challenges caused by a lack of coordination and weak institutional memory.
Standing mechanisms are more effective in sustaining links with parliament, the judiciary, NHRIs and civil society in relation to international human rights reporting and follow-up. They provide a predictable and reliable vehicle for civil society groups to channel their information into the reporting process and national dialogue, and prevent overstretched individual ministerial staff from becoming overwhelmed by multiple individual and fragmented approaches and communications (or requests for meetings) from civil society groups.   
NMRF is should therefore be standing in nature (permanent) and establishes links across different ministries

5. A comprehensive national approach
A rapidly increasing number of States have therefore adopted a comprehensive, efficient approach to reporting and follow-up by institutionalizing existing arrangements into a National Mechanism for Reporting and Follow-up (NMRF)
We are aware of Governmental structures for engagement with international human rights mechanisms in some ? countries in your sub-region (list them).

6. Calls at the international level for NMRFs
The HC’s 2012 report to the GA on Strengthening the United Nations Human Rights Treaty Body System
UN GA resolution 68/268 on Strengthening and enhancing the effective functioning of the human rights treaty body system
Recommendations by States during the UPR and TB reviews
Practical Guide and Study on NMRFs (released in June 2016)

7. What is a National Mechanism for Reporting and Follow-up (NMRF)?
An institutionalization of current inter-ministerial coordination structures or processes around human rights reporting, moving away from ad hoc to sustainable arrangements which facilitate implementation of recommendations addressed to States.
Coordinate and prepare reports to and engage with the international and regional human rights mechanisms (including Treaty Bodies, the Universal Periodic Review and Special Procedures)
Coordinate and track national follow-up and implementation of the treaty obligations and recommendations/ decisions emanating from these mechanisms.

8. What are the main types of NMRFs?
Ad-hoc
Based within a ministry
Inter-ministerial
Separate institution

9. Ad hoc NMRFs
Created purely for the purpose of completing a specific report and is disbanded when it delivers that report
Established by an individual ministry or by an inter-ministerial committee
Does not retain any institutional capacity, practices, network or knowledge, as it is disbanded after completing the task
Usually has no objective or mandate for the follow-up to recommendations from international and regional human rights mechanisms
May make use of standardized reporting and coordination practices

10. Organigramme - ad hoc NMRF
Lead Ministry
(depending on Treaty)
Ad hoc drafting committee

11. Ministerial NMRF
Standing mechanism based within a single government ministry drawing on other Ministries expertise and information depending on the subject matter (for example Mexico)
Is maintained by the relevant ministry beyond the completion of a report
Retains its institutional capacity, practices, network or knowledge for reporting and follow-up; however, it does so within one ministry

12. Organigramme Ministerial NMRF
Example: Ministry of Foreign Affairs
Ministry Department
Unit
Drafting committee
(calling upon other Ministries depending on task )
Example – Mexico
The Directorate for Human Rights and Democracy (DHRD) in the Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MFA) in Mexico is responsible for coordinating international human rights reporting to the UN system and to the Inter-American Human Rights system. The DHRD coordinates communication and liaison with international human rights bodies. The DHRD is mandated to fulfil this role based on article 28 (I) of the Law of Federal Public Administration and article 29 of the Internal Regulations of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs. The budget for the DHRD and the activities of the specialised units are funded out of the MFA budget.
The DHRD has 41 staff members and includes two Deputy Directorates, each divided into specialised units that take responsibility for the production of relevant reports. The Deputy Directorate for International Human Rights Policy is divided into specialised units focusing on civil and political rights; economic, social and cultural rights, vulnerable groups, women’s rights and gender equality. The unit for civil and political rights coordinates the production of reports on the implementation of the ICCPR, the unit on economic social and cultural rights coordinates reports to CESCR, and the unit for women’s rights is responsible for coordinating reporting on CEDAW. The Deputy Directorate for Cases, Democracy and Human Rights is divided into specialised units for cases before the Inter-American human rights system, cooperation, and issues relating to migration and refugees.
The units convene ad hoc drafting committees, with representatives drawn from a variety of other government agencies sitting on these drafting committees. It is through them that the DHRD undertakes governmental coordination, coordination with Parliament, and the judiciary and consultations with the NHRI, and to a lesser extent civil society.
Joint governmental coordination is formalized for specific human rights treaties with specialized state entities:
CEDAW Reports are jointly coordinated with the National Institute for Women (INMUJERES).
CERD Reports are jointly coordinated with the National Council to Prevent Discrimination (CONAPRED) and the National Commission for the Development of Indigenous Peoples (CDI).
CRC Reports are jointly coordinated with the National System for the Comprehensive Development of the Family (SNDIF).
Additionally, the rights-specific specialised units in the DHRD have established networks of focal points to help coordinate information collection from 35 different federal level institutions.

13. Inter-Ministerial NMRF
A standing mechanism convened across two or more ministries through a joint structure
Often serviced by an executive secretariat located in one Ministry, such as the Ministry of Foreign Affairs (Portugal) or the Ministry of Justice (Senegal)/ the Attorney General’s Office (Bahamas), or the Office of the Prime Minister (Mauritius, Tunisia), that coordinates information collection, services the meetings of the national mechanism and compiles a first draft of reports
Mostly established through a formal legislative mandate
Regularly convenes its network of members as well as ministerial human rights focal points
Retains its institutional capacity, practices, network and knowledge for reporting and follow-up
Mainstreams human rights and builds key reporting and coordination capacities across multiple ministries

14. Organigramme - Inter-Ministerial NMRF
Chairmanship
(ex.: Ministry of Foreign Affairs)
Minister
Focal point
NMRF Secretariat
(ex. HR Division)
Example – Portugal
The Portuguese National Human Rights Committee (PNHRC) was created by a Council of Ministers’ Resolution (27/2010) in March The PNHRC is responsible for governmental coordination with the aim of promoting an integrated approach to human rights policies. The Committee aims to define Portugal’s position in international fora and to implement Portugal’s obligations under international human rights treaties. Given the broad scope of international instruments on human rights that Portugal is a party to, the PNHRC coordinates all governmental action on human rights. The PNHRC is not responsible for implementing human rights policies, this is the responsibility of line Ministries.
It is chaired by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MFA), since its inception by the Secretary of State for European Affairs. The Deputy Chair of the PNHRC has always been a senior diplomat in the MFA, the Deputy Political Director responsible for Multilateral Affairs. The Council of Ministers’ resolution listed a number of State Departments/Ministers who should be members of the PNHRC and allows for the PNHRC to itself invite other State Departments to join the Committee. Currently, all Ministers are represented in the PNHRC. The National Statistics Office is also a member. The latest addition to the PNHRC is the Ministry of Finance (in December of 2014). All Ministers are represented by two members, in some cases at State Secretary level. In addition to its members, the PNHRC is supported by a network of human rights focal points in Ministries. The Office for Comparative Law and Documentation in the Attorney General’s Office and the Portuguese Ombudsman, Portugal’s National Human Rights Institution with an A Status according to the Paris Principles, have a standing invitation to participate in all PNHRC meetings, both at plenary and working group level.
The Human Rights Division (HRD) within the MFA acts as a Permanent Secretariat for the PNHRC. The Council of Ministries resolution did not create a specific administrative structure for this purpose. The Secretariat works in a very flexible manner and can be assisted by other members of the Committee, including the Office for Comparative Law and Documentation in the Attorney General’s Office, for example when drafting a report for a specific Treaty Body. The Council of Ministers’ resolution that created the PNHRC specified that the PNHRC should adopt its own rules of procedure. These were approved in 2010 and were amended once, in 2012.
The PNHRC meets at least three times a year at Plenary level and, whenever needed, at Working Group level. The HRD drafts the reports of the Plenary meetings, which are submitted to the PNHRC members for approval and executive summaries of the Working Group meetings. Its main means of communication is . There is a PNHRC mailing list (of PNHRC members and Ministerial human rights focal points) which is regularly updated by the Secretariat. There is also a PNHRC NGO mailing list. Any civil society organization can request to be included in this mailing list, thereby receiving invitations to attend PNHRC meetings and minutes of these meetings.
The PNHRC is responsible for implementing Portugal’s reporting obligations. The reporting process starts with the PNHRC identifying upcoming reporting obligations and circulating a table matching articles and the previous recommendations with the responsible line Ministries. The PNHRC sets deadlines for line Ministries to answer to specific requests for information. During a PNHRC plenary session, the relevant Ministries are selected to form a Working Group according to the areas in a particular treaty. Each PNHRC member is responsible for gathering information within its own Ministry and sending it to the MFA HRD, who then prepares the first draft. The draft report is then sent to all PNHRC members for validation. Once the final draft is approved by all PNHRC members (usually by and through silent procedure), a PNHRC Working group meeting with civil society is organized in order to consult NGOs on the draft report before its finalization and submission to the relevant Treaty Body. This meeting is usually chaired by the MFA in partnership with the main line Ministries involved in the drafting process.
The PNHRC does not have its own budget and does not employ its own staff (separately from the MFA staff). The PNHRC adopts an Annual Work Plan that determines its annual activities (including regarding international and regional fora, reporting, ratifications, information sharing). The last chapter of the Annual Work Plan contains pledges for action of individual PNHRC members for the coming year (3 pledges per member). At the end of the year, PNHRC members are obliged to report back on what they have done to implement the pledges. This information is included in the PNHRC Annual Report. The Annual Work Plan and the Annual Report are public documents available on the PNHRC website ( and on the PNHRC Facebook page. These two documents are shared with local Embassies in Lisbon and with Portugueses Embassies and Permanent Missions abroad. The Annual Work Plan is also translated into English and shared with the OHCHR.
Portugal’s UPR preparation (report, interactive dialogue and mid-term report) is also coordinated within the PNHRC.
The preparation for the interactive dialogues with the Treaty Bodies or UPR is similar to the one for drafting reports. The HRD leads but the PNHRC members who contributed to drafting the report actively participate in the exercise. In order to guarantee that Line Ministries come to the interactive dialogue in Geneva, the PNHRC circulates at all plenary meetings a calendar of future interactive dialogues with Treaty Bodies (timeframe of up to 5 years). This allows Line Ministries to budget for such participation.
The PNHRC does not have a formal institutionalized link with Portugal’s Parliament but individual members of Parliament can be invited to attend PNHRC meetings with civil society.
According to the Council of Ministers’ resolution that created the PNHRC at least one of the annual plenary meetings must be open to civil society. More frequent meetings, however, are held with civil society groups at working group level often convened in response to requests from civil society groups (for example on the rights of elderly people) or to discuss draft national reports to Treaty Bodies.
Drafting Working Group

15. Institutionally separate NMRF
A separate institution established by the Government and responsible for coordination, report writing and consultation (Morocco)
Endowed with a separate budget, separate staff, and structured into internal directorates, programmes and subprogrammes
Institutionalized and maintained by the Government beyond the completion of individual reports
Retains its skills and knowledge, and is able to control its own budget and appoint staff independently

16. Organigramme Institutionally separate NMRF
Head of NMRF
Directorate
(Engagement/ drafting reports/ information management including monitoring implementation)
(Coordination within Government)
(Consultation with NHRI and CSOs)
Division of Administrative Affairs
Separate institution
Example – Morocco
The Interministerial Delegation for Human Rights (Délégation Interministérielle aux Droits de l’Homme or DIDH), was established in 2011 by formal Decree published in the official Government Gazette. Due to its cross-sectorial mission, it is led by an Interministerial Delegate appointed by the King of Morocco, answering directly to the Head of Government.
The DIDH is responsible for coordinating national policies in the field of human rights and for ensuring interaction with international human rights mechanisms. It proposes measures to ensure the implementation of international human rights treaties ratified by Morocco, prepares periodic national reports to Treaty Bodies and the UPR, and follows up the implementation of their recommendations, as well as those of Special Procedures. The DIDH also provides support to national NGOs working in the field of human rights and promotes dialogue with international NGOs.
The Decree establishing the DIDH contains a number of articles which set out the structure of the DIDH. The DIDH has a highly formalised internal division of labour that spans across 3 separate directorates, a General Secretariat and a Division of Administrative and Financial Affairs, which is responsible for providing the necessary administrative, logistical and financial support for the day to day running of the DIDH. Responsibility for its management falls to a Secretary-General who is directly accountable to the Interministerial Delegate, and who coordinates the development and implementation of the DIDH strategic and action plans with their various projects and activities.
The DIDH negotiates its budget directly with the Ministry of Finance on the basis of its strategic plan and yearly action plan. Its budget is allocated separately from individual Ministries. As a separate government entity, the DIDH can either recruit staff directly or second them from other government departments. In December 2015, DIDH had 62 staff members, but was in the process of recruiting and appointing a number of additional staff. It aimed to have a total of 70 – 80 full-time personnel by the end of DIDH is housed in a separate building, which has 3 separate meeting venues for purposes of facilitating consultative meetings (with the largest capable of seating up to 60 people). It is presently renovating the building to set up a documentation centre and establish new offices and meeting rooms. Its budget covers its coordination, core facilitation and national consultation functions and enables it to control the appointment and training of its own staff.
Its directorates are structured to assume the capacities for coordination, interaction with human rights bodies, core facilitation of report writing, and national consultation, amongst others. Each directorate is further sub-divided into divisions and sections.
The DIDH has introduced a standardised set of steps to be followed in the production of reports with a clear division of labour between relevant actors. The DIDH also produces an action plan and calendar of activities for the drafting of each report (a “frame of reference”), which it negotiates with relevant ministries. This “frame of reference” involves the creation of a taskforce out of a network of human rights focal points and identifies relevant stakeholders for contribution of information to the report and sets out a timeframe for the submission of information by each stakeholder.

17. Key features A Governmental structure
Comprehensive (covers all human rights mechanisms -UPR, TBs, Special Procedures- all human rights- all outcomes: recommendations, decisions, and views)
Standing/ permanent ./. Ad hoc
Comprehensive formal legislative or policy mandate ensuring political ownership (empower within Ministries)
Legislation (passed through Parliament)
Formal regulation (by the Executive, but not through Parliament)
Policy mandate (formed after the adoption of an Executive/Ministerial policy provision)
Budget (forward planning within each Ministries budgets)
Continuity and technical expertise of staff (train staff, institutional memory, gender sensitivity and gender parity)
And four key capacities
NMRF is part of a Government structure (thus not NHRI nor NPM)
Mandate:
Legislation (passed through parliament);
Formal regulation (by the executive, but not through parliament);
Policy mandate (formed after the adoption of an executive/ministerial policy provision).
With regard to policy mandates, a national human rights action plan can also be the source of a national mechanism’s mandate (as is the case, for example, in Mauritius), tasking it with developing indicators and benchmarks, and monitoring the performance of the State based on these benchmarks.
A second, even more important factor is a common intragovernmental understanding of its role. The national mechanism needs to have the political clout and standing to ensure that feedback can be sought from and provided by the different institutions and ministries. Ministerial-level membership or support, either through the mechanism’s central location within the executive or through the direct participation of ministers (for example, at plenary meetings or during draft report validation meetings), is an important factor in this regard and ensures crucial political ownership at the highest levels.
Only institutionally separate NMRFs control their own budgets and appoint their own staff. In most cases, the budget of the national mechanism for reporting and follow-up is covered by the budget of one or more ministries. OHCHR research has found that the effectiveness of national mechanisms for reporting and follow-up does not necessarily depend on their having their own budgets or direct control over the appointment of their staff. Impressive results can be achieved through extensive planning, if individual ministries make the necessary budget allocations to cover the work related to the national mechanism (e.g., attendance at treaty body or universal periodic review meetings, or the collection of necessary information) for the upcoming financial year. This obviates the need for a substantial and separate budget, and for separate staff, and ensures maximum efficiency in the use of available resources.
Another decisive factor for effectiveness is the continuity of staff who are responsible for collecting information on specific rights, developing in-depth expertise on those rights and coordinating the national mechanism’s work in relation to those rights. This continuity will build sustainable expertise, knowledge and professionalism at the country level. A stable secretariat, as well as a mechanism with a broad membership, supported further by a network of focal points in ministries can contribute to such sustainability. States should also ensure gender balance in the NMRF’s staff composition.

18. Four key capacities of a NMRF
An effective NMRF should have the following
four key capacities:
Engagement capacity
Coordination capacity
Consultation capacity
Information management capacity

19. Engagement capacity
The capacity to engage and liaise with international and regional human rights bodies and organize and centrally facilitate the preparation of reports and responses to international and regional human rights mechanisms
This may include
a dedicated capacity and knowledge (e.g. through the establishment of a permanent Executive Secretariat for such purposes with trained staff knowing about each international human rights mechanism)
Ministerial focal points
the establishment of standardized internal reporting guidelines and procedures or checklists to organize Special Procedures visits

20. Engagement capacity- CHECKLIST
Establish an executive secretariat to support the work of the NMRF
Build the capacity of the executive secretariat for engagement with international human rights mechanisms, but also for drafting and presentation
Establish a network of focal points in each ministry, appointed by each minister, for drafting and information-sharing purposes
Establish standardized reporting guidelines and procedures for the national mechanism’s members and focal points to follow
Make an inventory of upcoming universal periodic review and treaty body reporting obligations, as well as forthcoming special procedure mandate holder visits and visits of the Subcommittee on Prevention of Torture
Develop a work plan and calendar of activities together with timelines, assignment of responsibilities and estimated costs (of participation in dialogues, for example)
Establish specific drafting groups from among the network of focal points (e.g., under the coordination of the mechanism’s executive secretariat) organized for each of the human rights treaties ratified; or focusing on groups of rights; or for a specific upcoming report

21. Coordination capacity
The capacity and authority to disseminate information, and to organize and coordinate information gathering and data collection from government entities, but also other State actors such as the national office for statistics, SDG implementation focal point “agency/Ministry”, parliament and the judiciary, for reporting and follow-up to recommendations
This may include:
a solid mandate, terms of reference, and annual work plans engaging all relevant Ministries, the National Statistics Office and SDG focal point (lead agency/Ministry)
lists and regular coordination meetings
Use of templates for collecting information
Standing procedures for coordination with Parliament

22. Coordination capacity - CHECKLIST
Hold regular (plenary) meetings of the national mechanism
Draw up a calendar of regular coordination meetings with all ministerial focal points and establish an e‑mail list to allow for regular information sharing
During the regular plenary and/or focal point meetings include debriefings by the head of delegation on the universal periodic review and interactive dialogues before treaty bodies and the recommendations received
For an upcoming report, (a) hold a preparatory meeting of the national mechanism to explain how the relevant human rights mechanism works and outline the structure and content of the upcoming report; and (b) send a template/table to the members of the national mechanism and the focal points listing previous recommendations with the responsible line ministries, with a request for information and/or draft input for the periodic report, including word limits and submission deadlines
Through the ministry of justice, transmit recommendations from human rights mechanisms to various levels of the judiciary and collect information on human rights-related cases from the courts
Establish a standing procedure to interact with parliament, for example informing parliament on the reporting/review process, submitting draft reports for comments, forwarding recommendations, and liaising between parliament and special procedure mandate holders

23. Consultation capacity
The capacity to foster and lead consultations with the country’s NHRI(s) and civil society
This may include:
a dedicated focal point for liaising with other stakeholders
Establishing a mailing list
regular consultations with different stakeholders
Participation of stakeholders in selected meetings (observer)

24. Consultation capacity- CHECKLIST
Draw up a calendar of consultations with all stakeholders keeping in mind reporting deadlines
If institutionally separate, the national mechanism can create a separate directorate for coordination with the NHRI and civil society
Otherwise, it can establish a “desk” for consulting with the NHRI and civil society during the drafting process
Systematically include NHRI representatives in the national mechanism’s structure and working groups, and in plenary meetings (without voting rights in order to preserve their independence in line with the Paris Principles)
Send draft reports to NHRIs for comments
Establish an NGO contact network and mailing list
Invite civil society to participate periodically in selected plenary or focal point meetings
Hold subject-specific meetings with civil society (including in response to requests from civil society groups)
Circulate the minutes of plenary meetings and/or meetings with civil society among the civil society network

25. Information management capacity
The capacity of a NMRF to
track the issuance of recommendations and decisions by the international and regional human rights mechanisms
systematically capture and thematically cluster (including against SDGs) these recommendations and decisions in a user-friendly spread sheet or database
identify responsible Government ministries and/or agencies for their implementation
develop HRM recommendations implementation plans, which can feed into any other national action plan or roadmap, including time-lines, with relevant ministries to facilitate such implementation and indicators
manage information regarding the implementation of treaty provisions and recommendations, including with a view to preparing the next periodic report

26. Information management capacity-CHECKLIST
Cluster recommendations by theme, analyse and prioritize them, and circulate clustered and prioritized recommendations among members and focal points
Keep those lists up to date
Develop, based on these clustered and prioritized lists, a HRM recommendations implementation plan (word-processing file, spreadsheet or database) or a national human rights action plan, feed into SDG implementation plan or other national action plans (as applicable) and track its implementation
If a database is used, keep it up to date, recording progress in the implementation of recommendations from human rights mechanisms, and make it public (e.g., Paraguay)
During the regular plenary meetings ask members to report back at the end of the year on how their respective ministries have implemented recommendations addressed to them in the implementation plan or national human rights action plan and what they have done to implement their pledges under the universal periodic review
Issue an annual report and make it public
Create a website and/or social media presence
If institutionally separate, include a separate directorate within the national mechanism responsible for tracking progress in the implementation of recommendations from human rights mechanisms

27. Conclusions An effectively functioning NMRF
Establishes a national coordination structure, thereby creating national ownership of reporting and follow-up and regular interaction within ministries and with ministries engaging seriously in reporting and follow-up
Makes communication between ministries easier and more direct, thereby creating efficiencies and maximizing resources
Systematizes and rationalizes the engagement with international and regional human rights mechanisms, including the preparation of reports, and coordinates follow-up, thereby ensuring national coherence
Empowers ministerial focal points to communicate and explain the human rights system and its recommendations within their ministries, thereby actively contributing to the development of policies and practices
Allows for structured and formalized contacts with parliament, the judiciary, NHRI and civil society, thereby mainstreaming human rights at the national level, strengthening public discourse on human rights, and improving transparency and accountability
Builds professional human rights expertise in every State

28. NMRF Engagement capacity Coordination Standing Comprehensive Types
Mandate
Budget
Consultation
Information
management capacity