NATIONAL HUMAN RIGHTS INSTITUTIONS AS A HUMAN RIGHTS PROTECTION MECHANISM: THE CASES OF THE OMBUDSMAN AND HUMAN RIGHTS AND EQUALITY INSTITUTION OF TURKEY published by TIHEK does not contain any information as to the number of successfully-finalized applications or reviews referred to reconciliation during the first four years and which procedure of compensation or redress is agreed upon regarding successfully finalized reconciliation procedures, if any, it is not known whether the aforementioned regulations create an impact or not. 3. Evaluation of TIHEK Resolutions The number of resolutions published by TIHEK on the website of the Institution since 2018 is 43. Out of these resolutions, the number of those relating to non-discrimination is 12 and evaluation within the report is performed over the few resolutions published by the Institution. It is observed that one of the resolutions was a resolution of inadmissibility, three resolutions did not find any violation and eight resolutions found a violation. It is seen that nearly all of the resolutions published by TIHEK were resolutions where a merits review was performed for the application. It is not known why the other resolutions of the institution were not published. The abundant number of unpublished resolutions prevents a qualified evaluation of the Institution's performance. The resolutions show that TIHEK Board asks for the opinions of third parties although this is rare. Opinions of various public institutions were sought in some of these resolutions. In an application filed against two private legal entities (tourism companies), the Association of Turkish Travel Agencies (TURSAB) and the Ministry of Culture and Tourism were asked for opinions.105 Acting Provincial Director of Migration Management was heard in an ex officio review conducted concerning the hanging of placards on the display window of a shop "Customers from Iran, Syria and Afghanistan cannot enter into this shop and make shopping. Otherwise, they will get a beating" and "People from Syria, Afghanistan and Iran will get a beating if they enter into this workplace. Otherwise, we refuse any responsibility!".106 It is observed that the opinions of CSO representatives were sought in a review initiated by TIHEK in an ex officio fashion. Within an ex officio review, the Aegean Region Coordinator of the Association for Solidarity with Asylum Seekers and Migrants (SGDD/ASAM) and a Member of the Board of Anatolia Youth Association were heard. The resolution does not explain why the information of CSOs was sought this time in contrary to other applications or reviews and how the CSOs to be consulted were identified.107 Asking the opinions of CSOs regarding any application lodged therebefore or any ex officio review is important for TIHEK to make use of the expertise of civil society and be aware of the different dimensions of the relevant issue. Intervention of CSOs in the review of application alongside the victim or as a third party through the publication of applications as in the case of the European Court of Human Rights will improve the quality of resolutions by the Institution and contribute to the visibility of discrimination in the society. Article 66 of TIHEK Regulation provides that a resolution of non-evaluation will be issued concerning the applications lodged regarding the disputes that are pending before judicial authorities or finalized by judicial authorities. It is observed that TIHEK acted in contravention of this provision in one resolution and initiated an ex officio review 105 TIHEK, Resolution No. 2019/22, April 9, 2019, para. 24-25. 106 TIHEK, Resolution No. 2019/29, May 7, 2019, para. 4. 107 TIHEK, Resolution No. 2019/29, May 7, 2019, para. 4. 47