Establish a standing national mechanism (NMIRF)

National mechanisms for implementation, reporting and follow-up (NMIRFs) are national government structures mandated to coordinate the preparation of reports to, and engage with, international and regional human rights mechanisms and to facilitate national follow-up and implementation of human rights treaty law obligations and the recommendations emanating from those mechanisms.

This page provides guidance on key ingredients of national mechanisms' institutional set-ups and mandates as initial considerations for establishing NMIRFs.

A related page entitled "Strengthen a NMIRF" looks at how a national mechanisms' functioning and efficiency can be scaled up when the mechanism's capacity to engage with international and regional mechanisms is adequately addressed and when coordination processes among state entities are institutionally built.

This related page also shows that strengthened NMIRFs entail, in any given context, the capacity to meaningfully consult with a variety of independent stakeholders including the national human rights institutions (NHRIs) and civil society organizations, human rights defenders, marginalized groups.

Lastly, you can go to "Strengthen a NMIRF" page to read more on how experience has shown that given the wealth of information such national mechanisms deal with, they can only be efficient when they are supported by fit for purpose information management tools including digital tracking tools and databases.

Legal framework

Empirical evidence from States’ experience point to the importance of a strong legal basis for national mechanisms. While such a legal basis may form part of the legislative document defining the mandates of specific ministries that coordinate engagement with international human rights mechanisms, a separate enactment outlining the mandates and the interministerial composition of national mechanisms has been found to be a good practice by many States. This has helped some States rationalize reporting efforts and overcome the lack of coordination and weak institutional memory.

Without standing national mechanism, some States rely on ad hoc drafting task forces for each ratified treaty, which would be dismantled once the report is submitted.

The choice of an institutional set-up and mandate influences the political leverage of a national mechanism not only to coordinate information collection for the purpose of reporting but also to ensure follow-up and implementation.

Given the importance of a multidimensional and government-wide approach to advance human rights, many States agree that national mechanisms would gain from a higher level of political support, as is the case for the coordination bodies on the Sustainable Development Goals. The latter are often attached to the office of the head of State or to the cabinet, an arrangement which has proven particularly effective in promoting the mainstreaming of the Sustainable Development Goals in national development and sectoral policies.

For more, see latest report of the High Commissioner on National Mechanisms for Implementation, reporting and follow-up.

Chairmanship and membership

High political leverage entails having national mechanisms chaired at a relatively high level. In some countries, national mechanisms are chaired by the Prime Minister and the members of the Council sit at the ministerial level.

Membership: all relevant line ministries are usually represented in the national mechanism. Good practices include having two focal points from each ministry represented: one at a higher – political or senior official – level, and another at a more technical level: senior level membership helped ensure that requested information was provided in a timely manner and decisions were made promptly while technical-level focal points were knowledgeable on the substance in detail and were able to ensure regular follow-up on requests for inputs. For more on coordination with other State entities and consultation with independent actors, please click on Strengthen a National Mechanism for Implementation, Reporting and Follow-up

The importance of a secretariat of a national mechanism to ensure business continuity is worth mentioning, especially in a context of high turnover in ministries. The secretariat will oversee the development of:

- Terms of reference for the NMIRF

- Adoption of NMIRF workplan or specific roadmaps from planning to submission of State reports

- Adoption of standard operating procedures on core work of NMIRF such as drafting reports to specific treaty bodies, for the Universal Periodic review or responding to requests for information from Special mandate Holders. Standard operating procedures on how to host a visit of a Special Rapporteur or any other independent mechanism can also ensure retention of institutional memory

- Adoption of standard operating procedures and managing information management tools aimed at tracking the implementation of recommendations.

The secretariat is usually also in charge of ensuring that the State is up to date with its international human rights obligations and implements all tasks encompassed in the NMIRF’s mandate as per its legal basis, terms of reference and standing operating procedures.

Recommended resources:

Examples of legal frameworks by language (see relevant country page)

Guidance for Terms of Reference (below)

Examples of NMIRF organigrammes (see relevant country page- for instance Maldives, Malaysia)

Standard Operating Procedures of the NMIRF (see SOPs developed by the Maldives)

National mechanisms’ mandate may include:

- Reporting to UN and Regional Human Rights Mechanisms

- Hosting visits of Special procedure mandate holders and other independent monitoring bodies

- Following up on the implementation of recommendations

In addition, practices shared by States suggest that their functions have evolved from the traditional drafting of reports to human rights mechanisms or engaging in country visits and the tracking of national follow-up of recommendations.

While State practices are uneven, mandates of NMIRFs may also include:

- Following up with each line ministry to ensure mainstreaming of recommendations into sectoral policies

- Leading efforts to develop comprehensive national human rights action plans and thematic action plans

- Contributing to the implementation of recommendations under the direct purview of the lead ministry of the NMIRF (ratification of treaties when the NMIRF is led by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs for instance)

- Human Rights Education/training

- Advocacy

- Fundraising

- Extending its mandate to reporting and follow-up on the 2030 Agenda

For more, see latest report of the High Commissioner on National Mechanisms for Implementation, reporting and follow-up.

As a continuation of previous endeavors, the 10th Glion Human Rights Dialogue co-organized by the Kingdom of Morocco and the Universal Rights Group in Marrakech in October 2024 led to the adoption of the Marrakech Guidance Framework (MGF), a guidance document based on international good practices and a reference tool to assist States in establishing and reinforcing effective National Mechanisms for Implementation, Reporting and Follow-up.

External links:

Commonwealth and Universal Rights Group

Bridging the Human Rights Implementation Gap- A Commonwealth Survey (Commonwealth and Universal Rights Group)- 2023

Danish Institute for Human Rights

The Danish Institute for Human Rights has worked extensively on Governmental human rights focal points (GHRFPs), including National Mechanisms for Implementation, Reporting and Follow-up. This work is available here: Governmental human rights focal points | The Danish Institute for Human Rights

Its 2021 study looks at states’ administrative structures mandated to provide the human rights response of the executive power and ensure human rights implementation at the national level through expertise-building, mainstreaming and coordination: Defining governmental human rights focal points: practice, guidance and concept | The Danish Institute for Human Rights

A short e-learning module gives an introduction the full report: DIHR Learning hub mini module on defining GHRFPs

In addition, the Danish Institute for Human Rights published a 2022 report on the international seminar on NMIRFs: Report on the International Seminar on National Mechanisms for Implementation, Reporting and Follow-up in the field of human rights | The Danish Institute for Human Rights

Geneva Human Rights Platform of the Geneva Academy

The Geneva Human Rights Platform of the Geneva Academy has organized a number of events and published guidance including its Briefing Note no 18 on "National Human Rights Strategies: The Role of National Human Rights Systems in the Implementation of International Human Rights Standards.