NATIONAL HUMAN RIGHTS INSTITUTIONS AS A HUMAN RIGHTS PROTECTION MECHANISM: THE CASES OF THE OMBUDSMAN AND HUMAN RIGHTS AND EQUALITY INSTITUTION OF TURKEY not sign the resolutions of the Board in due time; they do not attend a total of five Board meetings within a calendar year without any excuse acceptable by the Board; their incapacity to work is certified due to severe illness or disability through a medical board report; the conviction issued on them due to the crimes committed thereby in association with their positions becomes final; the temporary state of incapacity to work lasts longer than three months and they are convicted of a crime preventing them from being a public servant and the execution of their sentence actually starts. The aforementioned regulation assures a certain level of protection regarding the dismissal of members. It is observed that the responsibilities of the members of the TIHEK Board are regulated in the legislation. Article 10(9) of TIHEK Law sets forth the activities that consort and do not consort with the status of Board members. Accordingly, members of the Board are banned from assuming an official or special post other than their duties in the Board, acting as directors and auditors in associations, foundations, cooperatives and similar organizations, engaging in trade, engaging in self-employment activities and acting as arbitrators and experts unless such assignment is based on a special law. Ties of the members with their former assignments are severed as long as they remain to be members. Article 10(3) of TIHEK Law provides that the investigation of the Chairman and members is subject to the permission of the President or the minister to be assigned thereby and, in this case, the provisions of the Law No. 4483 on the Trial of Civil Servants and Other Public Officials. It is possible to appeal before the Council of State against resolutions on granting or not granting permission for investigation. However, it seems more appropriate to offer a number of privileges and immunity to the board members so as to ensure independence and autonomy. This issue is crucial for the board to function independently and effectively. At this point, it is of importance to grant immunity against the arrest or detention of the board members or the seizure of their personal belongings, the seizure or examination of their papers and documents and the interception of their communications and correspondence during their term of office and in association with their posts as well as legal immunity against the legal actions taken against their statements, written statements or actions within the scope of their posts during and after their term of office. The current regulation authorizing the executive body to grant permission for trial poses a significant problem for the institution's independence to be covered in more detail in the following section. Article 15(2) of TIHEK Law provides that the Board members are paid the same amount of salary paid to senior public directors as per the provisions of the DL No. 375 of June 27, 1989 and, in this regard, it can be accepted that they are paid a reasonable salary. 3. TIHEK and Independence Independence of equality institutions is the most important issue that comes to the fore in terms of the criteria related to such institutions and must be considered to have fundamental importance for the effectiveness and success of the equality institution.51 Problems with the de facto independence of an institution emerge depending on factors that may vary from one country to another such as political culture and power relations beyond the legal framework. This study focuses mainly on de jure independence as it mostly focuses on regulations. 51 Roy Gregory, “Building an Ombudsman Scheme: Statutory Provisions and Operating Practises”, The International Ombudsman Anthology, Linda C. Reif (ed.), Kluwer Law International, The Netherlands, 1999, p. 132. 28