“The SCA notes that the members of the Advisory Council are selected and appointed according to Articles 102(B)(6) of the Constitution and 18 of the Law. However, the Law is silent on the criteria used to determine the suitability of the candidates. The SCA is of the view that it is critically important to ensure the formalization of a clear, transparent, and participatory selection and appointment process for an NHRI’s decision-making body in relevant legislation, regulations, or binding administrative guidelines, as appropriate. A process that promotes merit-based selection and ensures pluralism is necessary to ensure the independence of, and public confidence in, the senior leadership of an NHRI.

The SCA reiterates its concerns and encourages the CNDH to continue to advocate for the formalization and application of a process that includes requirements to:

  1. Publicize vacancies broadly;
  2. Maximize the number of potential candidates from a wide range of societal groups and educational qualifications;
  3. Promote broad consultation and / or participation in the application, screening, selection and appointment process;
  4. Assess applicants on the basis of pre-determined, objective and publicly-available criteria; and
  5. Select members to serve in their individual capacity rather than on behalf of the organization they represent. The SCA encourages the CNDH to advocate for the amendment of its enabling law to include predetermined and objective criteria for the selection and appointment of the members of the Advisory Council. “