NATIONAL HUMAN RIGHTS INSTITUTIONS AS A HUMAN RIGHTS PROTECTION MECHANISM: THE CASES OF THE OMBUDSMAN AND HUMAN RIGHTS AND EQUALITY INSTITUTION OF TURKEY d) Submitting opinions to judicial bodies, public institutions and organizations and relevant persons, upon request, with regard to non-discrimination; e) Deciding on the membership of the Institution before the international organizations working in the field of discrimination and the establishment of cooperation with such institutions where necessary; f) Deciding on the examinations, investigations, reports and similar activities performed by the Institution in the fight against discrimination; g) Deciding on the strategic plan of the Institution and identifying its purposes, objectives, service quality standards and performance indicators; ğ) Discussing and deciding on the budget proposal prepared in line with the Institution's strategic plan, purposes and objectives. Considering Articles 9 and 11 of TIHEK Law, it is observed that the Institution has a broad mandate, such powers and duties are regulated in a broad and clear way within the law, the powers and responsibilities set forth in international standards are stipulated and the Institution is granted significant powers in tackling with discrimination. Although the powers and responsibilities of the Institution largely match with those stipulated in the Paris Principles, TIHEK Law seems to remain silent on "ensuring that states become party to international human rights conventions and the implementation thereof" and "submitting to UN bodies or regional intergovernmental organizations pursuant to the states' obligations arising out of human rights treaties and, where necessary, expressing an opinion on the subject, with due respect for its independence". On the other hand, there are incompatibilities in terms of ECRI GPT2. TIHEK Law does not have any provision on "fight against hate speech" and "the promotion of diversity and of good relations between persons belonging to all the different groups in society". Besides, it is observed that Article 3(2) of TIHEK Law does not adopt an open-ended approach in terms of discrimination grounds and does not mention the grounds of gender, sexual orientation and sexual identity. In addition, the Law's wording does not comply with the perspective of gender. The aforementioned powers and duties are solely related to discrimination, and the Institution also has duties intended for the protection and development of human rights and the fight against torture and ill-treatment and the Institution's mandate seems to be too broad for the Institution to carry out an effective activity. As a matter of fact, it is seen that the aforementioned duties were not fulfilled to a certain extent considering the Institution's activities performed during the first four years. Although it is not the only reason for this situation, one of the important reasons is that the mandate of the Institution has been kept broad. TIHEK's work shows that no significant activity is conducted in the context of Articles 9(1)(a), 9(1)(b), 9(1)(c), 9(1)(ç), 9(1)(d), 9(1)(e) and 9(1)(o). The data published on the work carried out under Article 9(1)(ğ) of TIHEK Law (guiding those applying to the Institution on the ground that they are victimized by the violations of non-discrimination about potential administrative and legal remedies for the redressal of their victimization and helping them to follow their applications) shows that the Institution informed 481 persons on this issue during 2019.21 This figure is quite low compared to the population of Turkey. 21 TIHEK, 2019 Activity Report, p. 53, https://www.tihek.gov.tr/upload/file_editor/2020/02/1582925332.pdf (accessed: July 31, 2020). 19