NATIONAL HUMAN RIGHTS INSTITUTIONS AS A HUMAN RIGHTS PROTECTION MECHANISM: THE CASES OF THE OMBUDSMAN AND HUMAN RIGHTS AND EQUALITY INSTITUTION OF TURKEY that they will take an oath in this direction when starting their duties. The term of office of the Chief Ombudsman and ombudsmen is four years and they can serve for a maximum of two terms. During these four years, the Chief Ombudsman and ombudsmen have certain guarantees in relation to dismissal. The termination of their duties, except in cases such as resignation or death, is possible only if it is subsequently determined that they do not have the qualifications specified in the Law or if they lose these qualifications after being selected, or are convicted or restricted because of an offense preventing being elected to such position. At the end of each calendar year, the institution prepares a report on its activities and recommendations, and submits the report to the Commission. The Commission discusses this report in two months, excluding any breaks and holidays, and sends the report to the Speaker’s Office to be submitted to the General Assembly, including a summary of its opinions. The report of the commission is immediately discussed in the General Assembly. The foremost issue emphasized in both the Paris Principles and the Venice Principles is to ensure the independence of these institutions, although they can be organized in different ways. Both Principles emphasize the importance of the Ombudsman having a legal basis, which should be constitutional preferably. It is stated in the Venice Principles that it is a better method to elect the ombudsman from the parliament with the qualified majority. KDK has constitutional basis, and since it is elected by the parliament, it meets these criteria. Both Paris Principles and Venice Principles emphasize that objective criteria should be developed for electing individuals that will work in these institutions and the election/appointment process should be transparent as much as possible, and that such individuals should have professional experience, and if possible be experienced in human rights. However, in Turkey, the number of ombudsmen experienced in civil society organizations that work in human rights, is very small. The majority of ombudsmen have political or bureaucratic experience. One of the most important problems regarding its formation concerns pluralism. As emphasized in Paris principles, appointment of its members “shall be established in accordance with a procedure which affords all necessary guarantees to ensure the pluralist representation of the social forces (of civilian society) involved in the protection and promotion of human rights, particularly by powers which will enable effective cooperation to be established with, or through the presence of, representatives of: (a) Non-governmental organizations responsible for human rights and efforts to combat racial discrimination, trade unions, concerned social and professional organizations, for example, associations of lawyers, doctors, journalists and eminent scientists; (b) Trends in philosophical or religious thought; (c) Universities and qualified experts; (d) Parliament; (e) Government departments (if these are included, their representatives should participate in the deliberations only in an advisory capacity).” The Chief Ombudsman/ombudsmen are elected by the TGNA General Assembly and Joint Commission, and they are not directly appointed by the President like it is the case in TIHEK, therefore, the election process seems to be more pluralistic, however, the fact that only one ombudsman is a woman, and the female ombudsman is assigned to cases involving women’s rights, children’s rights and human rights, is an indication that the institution does not have a pluralistic and egalitarian structure. This also applies to the Constitutional Court and TİHEK, and this structure should be changed in institutions 59