The INDH reports that the dismissal process for the Director and Councilors is initiated by the President of the Republic or the Chamber of Deputies, and that the final decision is made by the Supreme Court, based on national legislation and its own jurisprudence when interpreting what constitutes manifest and inexcusable negligence. The INDH further notes that the grounds alleged must refer to unforeseen circumstances that were not present at the time of the selection and appointment of Councilors, and decisions made by the Director and Councilors in the performance of their duties cannot be considered grounds for dismissal.

While acknowledging the information provided, the SCA highlights that the grounds for dismissal must be clearly defined in its enabling law and/or relevant administrative instrument.

The SCA encourages the NHRI to advocate for amendments to its enabling law with a view to clarifying the rules for the dismissal of its Director and Councilors, including the definition for determining of “manifest and inexcusable negligence”.

The SCA refers to Paris Principle B.3 and to its General Observation 2.1 on “Guarantee of tenure for members of the NHRI decision-making body”.