NATIONAL HUMAN RIGHTS INSTITUTIONS AS A HUMAN RIGHTS PROTECTION MECHANISM: THE CASES OF THE OMBUDSMAN AND HUMAN RIGHTS AND EQUALITY INSTITUTION OF TURKEY 5. The Institution does not perform any activity for monitoring the implementation of international human rights conventions. 6. It is observed that a conservative point of view is prominent in the Institution and it moves away from the principle of universality of human rights. 7. The Institution's activities against some international conventions such as the Istanbul Convention are explicitly contrary to the requirements of "promoting and ensuring the harmonization of national legislation, regulations and practices with the international human rights instruments to which the State is a party, and their effective implementation" as set forth in the Paris Principles and "carrying out the activities of an equality institution based on the relevant international or national legal framework, standards, and case law" as specified in ECRI GPT2. 8. The Institution does not contribute to the preparation of the reports that must be submitted by the state to the examination, monitoring and inspection mechanisms established as per international human rights conventions. 9. The Institution does not perform any activity intended for monitoring and evaluating problems concerning the enforcement of judicial verdicts on the violations of non-discrimination. 10. The strategic plan drawn up by the Institution in 2018 was not shared with the public as of July 31, 2020. Limited statements by the Institution regarding this plan show that the aims and objectives identified are expressed in very general terms and prove to be insufficient. B- Composition of TIHEK and Guarantees of Its Independence and Pluralism Legislation 1. All members of TIHEK Board are appointed by the President and based on a process that is not transparent. 2. Procedure of appointment for the members of TIHEK Board does not enshrine pluralism and diversity and CSOs are completely left outside the process of selection for the members. 3. The qualifications prescribed for being a member of TIHEK Board are not objective and no expertise is envisaged for membership. 4. Term of office for the members of TIHEK Board is indefinite. 5. Members of TIHEK Board do not have sufficient guarantee, criminal and legal immunity. 6. Carrying out an investigation for the Chairman and members of the Board is subject to the permission of the President or the minister to be assigned thereby. 7. As the Institution is prescribed to be associated with the minister to be assigned by the President, it is totally dependent on the executive body in a way to eliminate its independence. 8. Although it is regulated that TIHEK Board will act independently and no body, authority, organ or person will give orders or instructions to the Board or indoctrinate it, no sanction is prescribed for any action to the contrary. 53