UN Transcripts — https://transcripts.un.org/en/asset/k13/k13ytsk5xn
High-Level Panel on Ombudsman Institutions - General Assembly, High-level panel — General Assembly — 18 May 2026
Language: en
Automatically generated transcript — may contain errors. Not an official United Nations record.

---
GA · PGA [0:10]:

Good afternoon. I call to order the High Level Panel on the Importance of Complying with the Venice Principles for Ombudsman Institutions to strengthen the institution's independence and autonomy and create an enabling environment to perform their mandate nationally and internationally. I warmly welcome you all to this meeting. As mentioned in my letter dated April 13, 2026, this meeting has convened Persian to assembly resolution 79th rogue 177 of December 17, 2024. This meeting will comprise of an opening segment, immediately followed by the panel discussion. The High Level Panel will provide an opportunity to discuss and share best practices on how the Venice Principle can strengthen ombudsman institutions and help them respond to challenges affecting their independence and autonomy. I will now make a statement as the President of the General Assembly. Excellencies, Colleagues, When a public service fails, when a government decision is unfair, or when authorities abuse their power, people need somewhere to turn. They need an institution that can listen, investigate and help restore accountability before injustice becomes entrenched. For many citizens, ombudmen institutions play precisely that role. They provide accessible and impartial mechanism to challenge unfairness, abuse, maladministration and the misuse of public authority. Ideally, they act quickly, independently, and without the cost of complexity that often prevents people from seeking justice. That is why independent ombudsman institutions are critical to democracy, human rights and the rule of law. They also contribute directly to Sustainable Development Goal 16 by strengthening accountable institutions, advancing access to justice, and helping build peaceful, just and inclusive society. But ombudsman institutions can only fulfill this role credibly if their independence is protected in both law and practice. This requires freedom from political pressure, intimidation, financial coercion and arbitrary interference. It also requires transparent appointment procedures, security of tenure, financial autonomy, adequate resources, and safeguards against undue influence. The Venice Principles adopted by the Venice Commission in 2019 and subsequently acknowledged by the General assembly in Resolution 75 stroke 186 were developed to give practical meaning to these protections. They provide the first dedicated international framework for ombudsman and institutions established standards on mandates, appointments, operational independence, resources, and protection from interference. They also built on the Paris Principles endorsed by the General assembly in 1993, which established minimum standards for national human rights institutions. Together, these frameworks affirm a simple but vital principle. Institutions entrusted with protecting rights and ensuring oversight also need protection themselves. This is especially important because many ombudsman institutions are also mandated to function as national human rights institutions, giving them a wider role in defending rights, addressing grievances and strengthening public trust. Yet today, ombuds institutions are operating in ever more constrained environments. They face political interference, legal harassment, budgetary pressure and administrative obstacles, all of which weaken their mandates and limit their operational independence. These pressures also affect the people who lead and staff these institutions. Many face intimidation, smear campaign, online abuse and physical threats because of the work. Meanwhile, public authority is becoming more complex. Decisions that affect people's rights and access to services are increasingly shaped by digital systems, automated processes and emergency responses to overlapping crises. Artificial intelligence, automated decision making and digital governance are creating new risk for public administration and individual rights. Climate related crises, displacement, inequality and shrinking civic space are placing further pressure on institutions and communities, increasing the risk that grievances go unheard, rights violations go unaddressed, and public trust continues to erode. In this context, ombudsman institutions are more necessary than ever and too in the need to uphold the Venice Principles in practice. Therefore, let us move from information to implementation by protecting independence, defending mandates and supporting those who carry out this work, and by ensuring that ombudsman institutions can serve the public with integrity, impartiality and courage. For ultimately upholding the independence of ombudsman's institutions is a commitment to the people we serve. People whose grievances deserve to be heard, whose rights deserve to be protected, and those trust in public institutions must be earned. I thank you by this. I now give the floor to Ms. Ilse Bruns Karris, Assistant Secretary General for Human Rights, for her opening remarks. Please, you have the floor.


OHCHR · ASG for Human Rights · Ilse Bruns Karris [6:07]:

Thank you. Madam President of the General Assembly, Excellencies, distinguished participants, colleagues, I thank you, the President of the General assembly, for convening this high level panel and for keeping the role of ombudsman and mediator institutions free, firmly on the Assembly's agenda. We meet at a time when human rights are under pressure on many fronts. In this environment, trust in public institutions is more important and more fragile than ever. Lack of trust undermines the social contract that enables effective, accessible and inclusive governance for the benefit of all. Good governance also depends on holding accountable those responsible for human rights violations and on independently addressing grievances and complaints before they corrode societies and undermine security and stability. Ombudsman and mediator institutions make governance more accountable and transparent. They identify systemic failings of public services. They help correct injustices called by maladministration. They protect human rights defenders as a critical link between the state and the people. They strengthen the social cohesion that our times serve urgently demand. Excellencies, today's panel confronts a critical question. How can we, as the international community, ensure that public oversight institutions can thrive in these challenging times. Decades of experience show that being established by law is essential, but not enough on its own. Ombudsman institutions may have too narrow a mandate or lack the resources to investigate effectively, and may face political pressure or reprisals. When findings point to failures in public administration, they may be unable to reach those who face the greatest barriers in accessing justice, including people in remote areas, persons with disabilities, and communities affected by conflict or displacement. International standards like the Venice and Paris Principles help test whether the necessary independence exists beyond the words in a law. These principles are complementary. The Venice Principles guide the specific design and protection of ombudsman institutions, while the Paris Principles set the minimum standards for ensuring they are credible and effective institutions. The Venice Principles are clear about what an enabling environment requires beyond a constitutional or legislative basis that guarantees their independence. Ombudsman institutions mandates must be broad enough to cover all areas of public administration, appointment procedures must be transparent and based on merit, the holder of the office must have security of tenure and functional immunity, findings and recommendations must be made public, and authorities must be required to respond to them within a set time frame. And to be effective, the institution must be adequately resourced. Critically, the principles call for protection against reprisals for those who lead these institutions, for their staff, and for those who bring complaints or cooperate with investigations. Excellencies ombudsman and mediator institutions make a direct contribution to the 2030 Agenda and specifically to Sustainable Development Goal 16 when an Ombudsman investigates complaints of maladministration, it advances access to justice under Target 16.3, when it monitors the transparency and fairness of public decision making, it strengthens accountable institutions. Under Target 16.6, when it receives and acts on complaints from the public, it gives effect to responsive, inclusive and participatory governance under Target 16.7. And when it protects the those who report wrongdoing, it defends the fundamental freedoms at the heart of target 16.10. Strengthening these institutions, ensuring their ability to conduct their daily work effectively, is therefore a concrete investment in the entire architecture of peaceful, just and inclusive societies. Excellencies UN Human Rights works with member states around the world to translate these standards into practice. In Central America, we support joint monitoring by the Ombudsman institutions of Panama, Costa Rica, and Colombia to document protection gaps affecting migrants and refugees in Bosnia and Herzegovina, we engage with the Human Rights Ombudsman Institution and the Statistical Agency to strengthen the collection, disaggregation, and analysis of data so that patterns of exclusion and unequal treatment are made visible in Timor Leste, we have supported the Ombudsman Institution in training police officers on a human rights based approach to policing. This kind of operational partnership shows how ombudsman institutions can translate their mandate into concrete changes in state practice in Madagascar. Our office has worked closely with the ombudsman's office since the appointment of a new ombudsman in December 2025, providing technical advice, facilitating networking with regional counterparts and supporting a joint investigation into human rights violations. Excellencies these institutions are a vital part of the infrastructure that connects people's experiences at the national level with international mechanisms promoting human rights accountability and capacities. That connection is becoming even more important as public institutions face new and emerging challenges. Digital technologies and AI are changing the allocation and delivery of public services. Ombudsman institutions have a critical role to play in monitoring these technologies, assessing their impact on rights and the rule of law, and proposing safeguards as conflict, crisis, climate related displacement and shrinking civic space render their independent oversight role increasingly difficult. It is essential to recall that the Venice and Paris Principles are not only meant for stable times. These standards are essential also for our troubled times. They help identify the safeguards that will allow independent ombudsman institutions to continue acting even when under pressure. At this time of growing fragmentation and polarization, partnering for justice and human rights has taken on a new sense of urgency. Allow me therefore to conclude by inviting all ombudsman and mediator institutions to join the Global alliance for Human Rights, which will be launched by the High Commissioner for Human Rights next month to act together to make human rights central to leadership, public debate and people's lives inclusively, creatively and with determination. I wish you a rich exchange today on how we can jointly ensure that these institutions have the independence, the resources and the trust they need to serve the people for whom they exist. Thank you.


GA · PGA [13:31]:

I thank the Assistant Secretary General for Human Rights for your remarks. I now would like to welcome the moderator and panelists to the panel discussion taking place immediately after this segment. I look forward as well, like the Assistant Secretary General for Human Rights to a fruitful exchange and wish you all the best. The opening segment is now concluded. Thank you.


OHCHR · Chief · Anne Sioute [16:25]:

Good afternoon, everyone. Excellencies, distinguished delegates, thank you once again to the President of the General assembly and the Assistant Secretary General for Human Rights for opening our meeting today. My name is Anne Sioute. I'm the Chief of the Intergovernmental Affairs, Communications and Outreach Section in Ohchr, New York. We now resume our meeting with a panel discussion on the topic the Importance of Complying with the Venice Principles for ombudsman's institutions to strengthen the institution's independence and autonomy and create an enabling environment to perform their mandate nationally and internationally. We have three distinguished panelists with us today. Ms. Nadine Mayu, President of the International Ombudsman Institute, ombudsman de Montreal, Ms. Angie Quickshank Lambert Defensora de los Habitantes de la Republica de Costa Rica, and Mr. Rafael Bustos Gisbert, Member of the Venice Commission of the Council of Europe. They will discuss and share best practices on how the Venice Principles can strengthen ombudsman and mediator institutions. They will highlight some of the main recurring challenges faced by these institutions and how the Venice Principles can help to prevent or mitigate such challenges. Our discussion today will also explore how these Principles can support the creation of an enabling environment for ombudsman institutions to effectively carry out their mandate, including their role as national human rights institutions in promoting and protecting human rights and fundamental freedoms, as well as good governance and the rule of law. Without further ado, I turn to the first panelist, Ms. Nadine Mayu, President of the International Ombudsman Institute, ombudsman of Montreal. Ms. Mailloux is a lawyer and accredited mediator and has served as Ombudsman across major public institutions, later becoming Ombudsman of Laval in 2013 and Ombudsman of Montreal in 2020. She is president of the Forum of Canadian Ombudsman and of the International Ombudsman Institute, where she also sits on its UN Relations Committee. Ms. Mayu is kindly invited to address several questions in her intervention. One, what are the barriers that may hinder the implementation of the provisions of the Venice Principles that seek to ensure the independence of these institutions? And two, what are the potential impacts of emerging challenges, such as AI and global crises, on the independence and autonomy of ombudsman and mediator institutions? And how can the Venice Principles be used to mitigate these negative impacts? Ms. Ma, you have your four.


IOI · President · Nadine Mailloux [18:58]:

Madame La Moderatrice, madam Moderator, Excellencies, distinguished panelists, ladies and gentlemen. A woman receives a letter. A decision may be an algorithmic decision, maybe a human decision. She'll never know it has been made, and this decision dismantles her life, housing, her benefits, the custody of her children. The process is opaque and any recourse is a long way away. But in the institution that is supposed to protect at this moment only exists on paper. This is the ordinary condition of millions of people in states that have ratified all the relevant instruments and which Pronounce the words human rights with a fluidity verging on the musical. This is the paradox of the resolution adopted by consensus by this assembly and it, and we need to look at it directly. The architecture for human rights has never been as elaborate as it is now. And the gulf between this architecture and the people that depend on it has never been as immense. The Venice Principles exist to reduce this gulf. It's not as a text, an aspirational text, or an operational threshold. The enabling environment of this panel is considering is not a diplomatic formula. It is a precise institutional architecture. It's composed of 25 principles. Together they ensure seven pillars. They are the constitutional foundation, security of tenure, financial autonomy, ex officio powers, untrammeled access, functional immunity, and finally the obligation to follow up. Every one of these pillars responds to a specific vulnerability, a vulnerability identified by the cumulated experience of a half century of practice of ombudsman all over the world. An enabling environment is not an atmosphere, it's an architecture. And every principle is a stone that forms it. The experience of the IOI, however, which has 200 institutions in over 100 countries, shows that this architecture is being undermined according to a recognizable scheme which moves beyond regions and political regimes. There are three recurrent challenges that we've collectively observed. Number one, asphyxiating the ombudsman with a budget in silence, without deleting the institution, they take away all its functions. A major inquiry that can never be completed, a remote community that can't be visited, a systemic report that can't be published. And this is a form of suffocating without leaving any visible trace. And Principle 21 of the Venice Principles exist to make it impossible. And the second challenge is the discrete politicization of nominations, leaders that are chosen not for their ability to dissent, but for their deference. And principles six to nine respond to that, setting down the need for transparent process, qualified parliamentary majority and strictly regulated criteria for revocation. And the third challenge, which is more recent and more insidious, is the erosion of the narrative. A practice considering to publicly discredit the institution. And Principle 24 formally banned states from taking any action to undermine the effective functioning of the ombudsman. Allow me to be candid. An ombudsman that does not investigate the government is not an ombudsman. That's a communication strategy equipped with a mandate. But why is this bringing institutions into conformity so slow? And what are the genuine obstacles to the implementation of the principles of Venice? I'm being frank because the question deserves frankness. Obstacles to conformity are never only technical. They are almost always political. A state that genuinely wants to be in conformity with Venice principles can do this within the space of the legislature. What is the the obstacle is not complexity. It's the perception that strengthening the independence of the ombudsman will weaken the government. And yet the opposite is true. A government that is monitored by an independent institution is a legitimate government by virtue of this very institution. I'm speaking of this reality not as a abstraction, but as but from the experience of an institution that has made it its framework for action on a daily basis. The city of Montserrat is a metropolitan area in a North American federation, and it has governance carried out by officers of the city council that take the Venice principle seriously in both the letter and the spirit. Not because it's a binding international obligation, but because democratic maturity of a local government is measured specifically by its capacity to establish checks and balances which it does not control. The conformity of the Venice Principles is not merely within the purview of the great capitals or centralized states. It's accessible everywhere with this political will to make it effective. And it is precisely this political will that is needed. Four concrete commitments constitute the framework of the Venice Principles. And none of them require particular resources. Everyone requires decision, political decision. First, anchoring the ombudsman in the constitution rather than in an ordinary law that can be changed by a simple majority. Second, protect budgets from discretionary changes by submitting them directly to the Parliament. Third, guaranteeing security of tenure for strict requirements for removing personnel. Fourth, recognizing ex official powers without which these institutions will be blind to violations committed by those who don't even know that there is a remedy for them. These four commitments are the essence of an enabling environment. The resolution this assembly adopted by consensus 18 months ago Sketches out the right path. And right now we need to move from encouragement to commitment. This architecture is already being undermined, and today it faces several emerging challenges that the drafters of the Venice principles in 2019 couldn't have anticipated. The first problem is algorithmic governance. AI does not produce simply new administrative decisions. It's also producing a new category of prejudice. Prejudice that comes from a system rather than a identifiable decision, in which becomes almost impossible to contest on an individual basis. And the person that receives the letter that I was speaking of at the beginning might never know if she has been refused by a civil servant or by a predictive model. And it is precisely this ignorance that makes it impossible to have a traditional remedy. The finished principles have an important tool here, principle number 13, which enshrines ex officio powers. The modern ombudsman cannot be content with examining individual decisions. The ombudsman needs to investigate systems, their programming, logic, their biases and their very opacity. The second emerging challenge are global crises, climate, migratory or security challenges. And they have one thing in common. They have led to a proliferation of areas where the state is acting with urgency, where procedural guarantees are the first to be sacrificed. The Venice Principles provide a constitutional argument to sustain in times of crises a situation where the protection of human rights is not up for adjustment. The Paris Principles have a mechanism for accreditation given to Gonry and no one will contest that. They've transformed into. They've Transformed over the 30 years the national landscape of national human rights institutions. Venice Principles remain important. The OIO, with its 200 institutions in more than 100 countries, is the vast depository of institutional knowledge on what makes an office of Ombudsman hold fast and what makes it collapse. And we need to bear this responsibility to accompany institutions. And this is the ambition that we have. And let me be frank, the international community needs a peer review mechanism for the institution for institutions in the OIO is able to offer that the woman that received such a letter, such a woman exists in Montreal, Nairobi, Warsaw and Bogota. And she's waiting while we are talking. What we build will not be measured in the elegance of our resolutions. It will be measured by what happens or doesn't happen at the time that this woman stretches out her hand. If this hand encounters a free, independent and protected institution, then everything we do will take on its full meaning. If not, we have produced with very


OHCHR · Chief · Anne Sioute [28:24]:

much care beautiful documents for those insightful contributions. We've heard clearly how structural, political and resource related barriers continue to challenge the full implementation of the Venice Principles. Yet at the same time, how these principles can serve to safeguard the operating space of ombudsman and mediator institutions. I now turn to the next panelist, Ms. Angie Cruikshank Lambert Defensora de los Habitantes of Costa Rica. Ms. Cruikshank is a lawyer specializing in human rights and an international consultant and researcher who was elected by the Legislative assembly as the Ombudsman of Costa rica for a four year term in March 2023. Ms. Cruikshank is also currently serving as First Vice President of the Ibero American Federation of Ombudsman FIO. She was recognized in 2019 as one of the world's 100 most influential people of African descent. Under 40, Ms. Craigshank is kindly invited to address these questions in her intervention. How can the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights better support the establishment of independent ombudsman and mediator institutions in accordance with the Venice Principles and the Paris Principles? And two, can you share examples and good practices of how ombudsman and mediator institutions have contributed to the implementation of SDG 16? Ms. Cruikshack, you have the floor.


Costa Rica · Ombudsman · Angie Cruickshank Lambert [29:49]:

Thank you, Your Excellencies. By 2025, 21.8 million forcibly displaced and stateless people have been identified in Latin America, a crisis sustained primarily by violence, extreme poverty and social political instability. The regional homicide rate is 18 per 100,000 inhabitants, three times the world average. Moreover, 50% of homicides in the region are linked to organized crime. On the other hand, in 2024, 162 million people were living in income poverty and almost half of all workers were in precarious situations, without stability, without full Social Security and with limited capacity to claim labor rights. It is a slow burning bomb for social protection systems, with women and youth, from their intersectional perspectives, being the most affected populations. In this context, ombudsman institutions play a fundamental role in the protection and promotion of fundamental human rights in states. To this end, we enjoy functional and administrative independence as well as independence of criteria, which allows us to oversee public power without political, budgetary or technical subordination. However, reality confronts us with institutions that have had to be resilient given the profound processes of political capture and loss of autonomy, which have significantly eroded our institutions. Therefore, processes in recognition and strengthening of a global framework for the functioning, independence and effectiveness of these institutions is crucial. In Latin America, we face the constant threat of bias, processes, selection processes where positions are contested based on political quotas rather than merit, when the ultimate goal is the strengthening of our offices, good governance, respect for human rights, and in general, the well being of our population. We experience budgetary constraints, often justified by the rhetoric of austerity, which undermines economic autonomy and becomes a tactic that increases dependence on the government in power. These situations become barriers that severely limit our presence in vulnerable territories, sustain contact with civil society organizations, and consequently, the possibility of fully fulfilling our mandate. Latin America has become the most dangerous place for human rights defenders. Many ombudsmen and their staff operate on the threats to their lives and physical integrity. And yet our delegates are frequently the only representatives of the states in conflict zones. Latin American ombudsman institutions exercise their defense of rights through various avenues and mechanism based on the moral legitimacy granted by the people, their Primary tools is the power of the voices that publicly denounce the mismanagement and human rights violations, including those against human rights defenders and journalists who are silenced with threats and even murdered. In various countries of the region, we observe regulatory reforms that weaken guarantees of rights and the dismantling of institutions that for decades were pillars of the rule of law. Therefore, in the case of Costa Rica, we have promoted a reform to the Constitution to grant constitutional status to the Ombudsman's office, thereby providing it with the functional immunity inherent to the office and greater institutional independence. The Venice Principles and the Paris Principles are prime examples of tools that enable a solid path for the protection of our institutions. Therefore, understanding these international standards, it is urgent that our ombudsman institutions develop strategies that can delve into a long term vision that allows without ambiguity the strengthening of democracy, the rule of law and the protective administration of human rights. Regarding this role, we also have the authority to defend rights in the judicial arena, for which we possess broad legal standing to challenge the constitutionality of laws, regulations or general administrative acts. In the case of Costa Rica, this legal standing has allowed us to defend collective rights of various kinds, including those for indigenous peoples and even the national community as a whole. Likewise, to defend individual cases when there was an urgent need to guarantee the right to access, the right of access to justice and effective judicial protection. Today, the challenge is to guarantee protection mechanisms, particularly for human rights defenders. Now, to address the question of how the Office of the Human of the High Commissioner for Human Rights can best support the Ambassador man's institutions in accordance with the Venice and Paris Principles. I believe it is not only possible, but urgent for international and regional protection systems to strengthen their collaborations with ombudsman institutions and their networks, to reinforce their political recognition and visibility at all levels in order to truly impact States, to protect them against any threat or attempt at suppression, to guarantee their operational capacity and to strengthen their legal and constitutional mandates. This is the next step to bring the guiding principles to life. It is imperative that together with the UN system, we build our own specific mechanisms to support this agenda. This could be through dialogue and technical assistance to States for the creation of a new Ombudsman and a national human rights Institute. Institutions through mechanisms that promote greater regional and international dialogue. For example, by strengthening collaboration with Gonri and other bodies, and in particular through the profound and permanent review of the ecosystem of ombudsman institutions, their work, the challenges they present in the regions and generating proposals for today and for the future accreditations with Gonri has been a first great step, but we need to take another step by opening international spaces to strengthening our work through the exchange of good practices, the inclusion of diverse knowledge from different countries, and by strengthening our capacity to address emerging challenges such as artificial intelligence disinformation, climate and migration crises, systemic racism and reparations. I thank you


OHCHR · Chief · Anne Sioute [36:37]:

thank you very much, Ms. Christian, for your thoughtful remarks, including to highlight how ombudsman and mediator institutions often operate in very challenging contexts to safeguard human rights and protection mechanisms, and how we need to foster more regional, international and national interconnection to foster stronger mechanisms in this regard. Our third and final panelist for today is Mr. Rafael Bustos Gisbert, Member of the Venice Commission of the Council of Europe. Let me introduce you very quickly. Mr. Bustos is the Spanish member of the Venice Commission and a Professor of Constitutional Law at the Complutense University of Madrid, where he also directs the Institute of Parliamentary Law. As a member of the Venice Commission, he has served as rapporteur for several opinions, including the 2024 report on bicameralism, and contributed to the working group that drafted the 2025 updated checklist on the rule of law. Mr. Bustos is kindly invited to address the following questions in his intervention at a time of rule of law and democratic regression what role do ombudsman institutions play in the overall system of checks and balances? And how can the Venice Principle support and reinforce that role? And two what steps should ombudsman institutions and networks, member states, civil society and international organizations take to further consolidate the Venice Principles as an instrument for the promotion of the rule of law? Mr. Bustos, you have the floor.


Venice Commission · Member · Rafael Bustos Gisbert [38:10]:

Thank you. I'd like to start by thanking on behalf of Venice Commission, the invitation to participate in this conference and outline the work that the Commission has been doing on these topics. Although really, after the two excellent interventions we just heard by my colleagues, here I am. I feel somewhat. I feel ashamed to actually have to take the floor. Also, I want to express my satisfaction to be the only man on this panel. It hasn't been that easy to achieve that after so many years. Now, having said that, and continuing on the topics already outlined by my colleagues, I wrote a text, but I think it's better to adapt my statement to further develop what my colleagues said and to explain how. What they have stated, how it connects with the work that the Venice Commission is doing. Generally speaking, and in particular with regard to the Venice Principles, which are the topic of this conference, two major topics have been broached. The Issues of the Ombuds Persons institutions, how they can act as to provide some checks and balances against movements that question the rule of law and democracy on the one hand, and then the issues that are derived from the use of new technologies and artificial intelligence in today's world. Both these issues at the very heart of the last major document approved by the Venice Commission in December of 2025, which is the updated Checklist on the Rule of Law. The Checklist on the Rule of Law is a very major document, one of the basic documents of the Commission, and it constitutes a fundamental guide to evaluate the degree of health of the rule of law in a specific state at a specific time. So updating of this checklist, there were two major topics dealt with. The first one, among the checks and balances, was the checks and balances. And the second topic was artificial intelligence. So what role should Ombuds persons institutions play? And specifically the Venice Principles, what should they play on these two topics? These are the major challenges that I

want to touch upon.

And on this, I want to say that. Ombuds persons offices are one of these essential checks and balances to prevent regression in the rule of law. We have observed that regressions in the rule of law, backsliding in the rule of law derive first and foremost not from a frontal attack on the principles of the rule of law that have formally been adopted, but rather a slow regressive erosion that undermines the basis of the rule of law, weakening the instruments of control over the exercise of power that exist. Ombudsperson's office are one of those counterweights and institutional guarantee. Their institutional guarantee is an essential priority to safeguard the rule of law. And let's not forget that the rule of law is not an exclusively formal concept, it's a substantive concept. You can't defend the rule of law if at the same time you do not defend human rights and democracy, as was very well stated by members of this panel with regard to artificial intelligence. The moderator will take the flow away from me. But the Checklist on the Rule of Law does offer a guide to evaluate whether AI is being used correctly or incorrectly by both the private institutions as well as public powers. And here there's a huge scope that opens up for bus person's office, as was mentioned here, in terms of protecting citizens, not only protecting their rights, but protecting good governance when public authorities are using artificial intelligence. And I think the Checklist on the Rule of Law, in that checklist you can find a very interesting guide to evaluate when. When is a respectful use of AI by public authorities. What can the Venice Principles do to assist in this whole process? Well, it was said here, and I would insist on this, that the Venice Principles are three different things at the same time. The Venice Principles are a legal framework, a legal framework that makes it possible for ombudsperson's institutions to function as an appropriate control over power. It establishes this legal framework, a legal framework that needs to be updated. Perhaps it needs to be further developed in certain aspects, may be made more granular in certain aspects. But also the Venice Principles, secondly, are an evaluation framework, a framework to determine whether a specific institution or a non buns person's institution is designed and is respected the way it should be in a rule of law. In other words, if the legal status and economic status and political status of a specific ombuds person's institution complies with the requirements of the Venice Commission. So it's an evaluation mechanism, a mechanism that will need to be made more specific in terms of mechanisms of self evaluation, peer review, etc. To ensure that indeed ombudspas persons offices can fulfill their mandate. And lastly, It's an issue of culture. It's a matter the Venice Commission guaranteeing the rule of law requires a culture of the rule of law. It's a notion of culture. Ombudsperson's offices require culture. Ombuds persons, citizens and public institutions must recognize the importance of the Ombuds person's Office to defend the right of law, human rights and democracy. It requires for public authorities and citizens to understand what are the minimal characteristics that an ombuds person's institution must have to fulfill its functions only by creating this kind of culture and will guarantee the role of the Ombuds person's Office can be implemented in practice. Thank you very much.


OHCHR · Chief · Anne Sioute [46:43]:

Thank you very much, Mr. Bustos, particularly for elaborating how the Venice Principles play a key role serving as an institutional guarantee and as an evaluation mechanism, and how we closely link these efforts with the Venice Commission's recently updated Rule of Law checklist. I now open the floor for comments and statements. There is no established list of speakers for this meeting. Delegations wishing to speak are requested to press the microphone button. Delegations are requested to limit their statements to three minutes when speaking in their national capacity and five minutes when speaking on behalf of a group of states. Time limits will be strictly enforced through an automatic microphone cut off. A timer will be projected on screen. Delegations may also submit their full length written statements through email to estatementsn.org which will be posted under Estatements of the UN Journal. I thank you for your cooperation. I now give the floor to the distinguished representative of the European Union, followed by Bahrain, on behalf of the gcc.


EU · EU [47:59]:

Thank you, Madam Chair. I have the honor to speak on behalf of the European Union and its member States and share some reflections on this important topic. As you all know, the Ombudsman Institution originated in Sweden over 200 years ago and has over time spread internationally as a model to ensure oversight of public administration and protect citizens from unfair treatment by the state, reflecting the historical shift from perceiving governments as instruments of rulers towards governments as a service accountable to its citizens. In today's environment of democratic backsliding and growing authoritarian tendencies in many parts of the world, the role of the Ombudsman institution is more important than ever. The Ombudsman institution is an essential watchdog to ensure that fundamental rights become a reality for all. This has been recognized in several General assembly resolutions, and UN Member States have been encouraged to create and strengthen ombudsman institutions to promote and protect human rights, good governments and respect for the rule of law. As the Panel has highlighted, the Venice Principles provide important practical guidelines in this regard. By establishing clear standards for appointment to noor and legal protection, the Principles set the foundation to ensure that ombudsman institutions can operate with the independence and autonomy required to fulfill their mandates. Within the eu, we have National Ombudsman overseeing central public administration in all Member states, with the exception of two, who instead have regional ombudsmen overviewing regional and local administration. All the EU National Ombudsman apply the European Convention on Human Rights and the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights in their work and assessment as well as relevant UN conventions, they also may contribute to the universal periodic reviews of their respective countries. Although there are substantive differences in terms of functions, powers and orientation between the EU National Ombudsman, they all have four essential characteristics in that they first investigate complaints as major part of their activities, 2 treat plaintiffs as bearers of rights, 3 take an objective view of the elements in dispute and four are independent from the administration or authorities concerned by their investigations and other activities. Despite the strength of our frameworks, EU National Ombudsman Institute institutions also continue to face challenges, including recurrent pressures that threaten their autonomy and independence. The lack of human and financial resources is a primary obstacle, particularly when new mandates are assigned, and in some jurisdictions, governments or national parliaments may attempt to exercise pressure through budget cuts or delaying elections of new ombudsman. Ensuring that investigations lead to meaningful change can also remain a challenge and an important priority. All public sector ombudsman from the EU member states, either national or regional, are members of the European Network of Ombudsmen, which serves as a platform to ensure the institutional independence and strength of ombudsmen in understanding how the Venice Principles and the Paris Principles on National Human Rights Institutions can complement and strengthen each other. It's important to recognize that the ombudsman world and the NHRI world are deeply interconnected, that they remain distinct identities in the EU. Thirteen of the National Ombudsman are accredited as NHRIs, and while the Paris Principal principles emphasize pluralist representation and the optional nature of individual complaints, many ombudsman successfully bridge these roles. The European Commission's strategy to strengthen the application of the EU Charter for Human Rights, adopted in 2020, recognizes that both these independent bodies are crucial for upholding the rights protected in the Charter. And the upcoming 2026 charter report, which will be released in December, will focus specifically on the role of the independent human rights bodies, including Ombudsman and nhris. The way we see it, the Ombudsman institutions, by the very nature of the work, contribute concretely to the implementation of the Sustainable Development Goal, and we also believe that they've stood the test of time as an important and a model for.


OHCHR · Chief · Anne Sioute [53:02]:

I thank the distinguished representative of the European Union. I now give the floor to the representative of Bahrain on behalf of the Gulf Cooperation Council, followed by Cyprus and Turkmenistan.


Bahrain · GCC [53:22]:

Madam President, it's an honor for me to deliver this statement on behalf of the GCC and the Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Qatar, the Sultanate of Oman and my country Bahrain. We appreciate the presence of the President of the General assembly here, considering the importance of the Venice Principles for Ombudsman and the importance of NHRIS for human rights and the rule of law. Justice is the foundation of stability. Respect for human rights is the basis for domestic law and a pillar for sustainable development and stability. The States of the GCC have pursued the development of their laws. They've done this through laws on administration, on efficiency and through all administrative and national measures. The States of the GCC have developed a number of national tools which have undertaken to protect human rights and consider a number of complaints. This includes through human rights institutions which are the protectors of justice and human rights. This is happening in all institutions that receive complaints and complaints are followed up on. The states of our group emphasize expertise training among all institutions at the international and regional levels. The countries of the Gulf Cooperation Council are convinced of the importance of strengthening principles that will strengthen these institutions. That includes the Venice Principles, so as to leverage international best practices. Our countries have made major strides in developing a number of digital services at the national level that allows individuals to access the appropriate channels. This has bolstered the social role of human rights protection in line with cultural and national priorities. Finally, our countries reiterate their support to the United nations for strengthening systems of justice and for shoring up the rule of law through fruitful dialogue with the United nations and all international parties with a view to sharing best practices on human rights and through strengthening the effectiveness of national institutions. Thank you, Madam President.


OHCHR · Chief · Anne Sioute [56:42]:

Thank you. I thank the distinguished representative of Bahrain on behalf of the Gulf Cooperation Council. I now give the floor to the distinguished representative of Cyprus, followed by Turkmenistan.


Cyprus [56:58]:

Independent oversight institutions are essential pillars of democratic governance, the protection of human rights and the rule of law. Their effectiveness rests on a robust legal framework, genuine institutional autonomy, adequate resources as well as safeguards that protect them from any form of interference. Interference? In this context, the Venice Principles provide a clear and practical benchmark complementing existing international standards, including the Paris Principles and guiding efforts to strengthen the independence and effectiveness of ombudsman and mediator institutions. In this regard, today's high level panel is particularly timely. In Cyprus, the Commissioner for Administration and the Protection of Human Rights, namely the National Ombudsman, was established in 1991 under national legislation as an independent institution with a broad and evolving mandate. The institution serves as an independent and extrajudicial oversight mechanism for the examination of complaints concerning maladministration. It focuses also on promoting good administration and accountability as well as the protection of human rights, equality and non discrimination and carrying out preventive and monitoring functions under international human rights instruments. Since its establishment, the institution has been further strengthened. In 2004 through harmonizing legislation, it was designated as an equality body. It subsequently assumed the role of the National Preventive Mechanism under the Optional Protocol of the Convention Against Torture and the Forced Returns Monitoring Mechanism, an independent Mechanism under Article 33 of the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities. Furthermore, following accreditation by the competent UN Subcommittee, it was also recognised as a national human rights institution. Cyprus places strong emphasis on multilateral cooperation and capacity building through active participation in international networks. The institution contributes to the exchange of best practices, training initiatives and thematic cooperation on human rights monitoring, good governance and institutional independence. These engagements reflect consistent understanding that strong oversight institutions are not peripheral structures, but essential safeguards of accountability, public trust and democratic resilience. At the same time, Cyprus recognizes the challenges highlighted in Resolution 79, 177 these include pressures on independence, resource constraints, politicization risks and emerging challenges linked to technological transformation in complex government environments. Finally, Cyprus underlines the complementarity of the Venice and Paris Principles as part of a coherent international framework for independent oversight institutions and reaffirms their essential role in strengthening institutions constitutional independence, effectiveness and resilience. In line with GA Resolution 77,


OHCHR · Chief · Anne Sioute [1:00:00]:

I thank the distinguished representative of Cyprus. I now give the floor to the distinguished representative of Turkmenistan, followed by Morocco and then Austria.


Turkmenistan [1:00:14]:

Good afternoon, everyone. Chair, colleagues, ladies and gentlemen, I'd like to extend my gratitude for the invitation to such a significant panel discussion on the implementation of the Venice Principles, which are an important lodestar for the institution of the Ombudsman. In terms protecting human rights is a critical task of every State at the current stage of the development of human society. States create various institutions and they give them various powers for ensuring the rights and freedom of peoples. One such institution is the institution of the Ombudsman, the Human Rights Institution. Our Ombudsman Institution was established some time ago and it was preceded by a number of on constitutional acts culminating in a constitutional norm in 2016. And in November of 2016 there was a law that we passed on the Ombudsman. This law enshrines the principles of independence, lawfulness, impartiality, accessibility, confidentiality, non discrimination and affirms the rights of of humans as well as objectivity and openness. It also enshrines social and other rights. It lays out the principles of Ombudsman in line with the Paris and Venice Principles. Our Ombudsman also work with international and other organizations. We have. We work with UNICEF and the ILO and others. The Asia Pacific Forum also assessed the activities of our Ombudsman in terms of his compliance with the Venice and Paris Principles. In October 2024, our Office of the Ombudsman has been accredited by GANRI and it received the appropriate status and it received some recommendations for full compliance with the Paris Principles. And we're working to implement those recommendations in the Office of the Ombudsman. But most importantly, we need to note that there is independence on the part of the Ombudsman Office that's enshrined in law and it is borne out by practical activity and we're working in accordance with SDG 16.1. The influence of the Venice Principles on the Office of the Ombudsman. The microphone has been cut off.


OHCHR · Chief · Anne Sioute [1:03:14]:

I thank the distinguished representative of Turkmenistan. I now give the floor to the distinguished representative of Morocco for followed by Austria and then Israel.


Morocco [1:03:24]:

Very much we thank you for organizing this important high level panel convened in accordance with the GA Resolution 79177 that Morocco has the honor to be penholder. Morocco attaches particular importance to strengthening institutions that promote good governance, the rule of law, administrative fairness and the protection of human rights. In this regard, the Moroccan Institution of the Mediator constitutes an essential pillar of the Moroccan institutional architecture and reflects our national commitment to improving relations between citizens and the administration. Today, Morocco is entering a new phase aimed at reinforcing the strategic and forward looking role of the institutional mediation. In this regard, the Institution of the Mediator is currently developing a new Strategic Plan 202362030 which seeks namely to strengthen the institutional contribution to public debate on the quality of public services, consolidate its role as a reliable source of expertise and knowledge regarding transformations in the relationship between citizens and public administration, develop analytical and proactive tools to address institutional challenges and broaden strategic partnerships with national and regional stakeholders in order in order to bring mediation services closer to citizens throughout the Kingdom. Morocco also wishes to highlight several innovative initiatives undertaken by the Institution of the Mediator, including Project Administration of Equality, aimed at identifying and addressing forms of undeclared discrimination in administrative relations Project Territorial justice and Proximity, intended to strengthen administration administrative equity for vulnerable population and underserved territories initiatives promoting equal access to information and public assistance through greater transparency and administrative accountability. Furthermore, Morocco launched in 2025 the public service Governance Forums, a participatory initiative designed to involve youth, civil society experts and institutional stakeholders in discussions on improving governance and the quality of public services. For Lack of Time Just to conclude, At a time when ombudsman institutions face emerging challenges linked to digital transformation, artificial intelligence and increasing social expectation, it is essential to ensure that these institutions benefit from strong legal foundations, adequate resources and operational independence. Morocco reiterates its commitment to continuing efforts aimed at modernizing institutional mediation, strengthening good governance and promoting a citizen centered public administration guided by transparency, equity and accountability. I thank you.


OHCHR · Chief · Anne Sioute [1:06:13]:

I thank the Distinguished Representative of Morocco. I now give the floor to the distinguished representative of Austria, followed by Israel and Czechia.


Austria [1:06:23]:

Madam Moderator, thank you for convening this important meeting today and let me also thank the Briefers for their valuable insights. Austria aligns itself with the statement delivered on behalf of the European Union. Independent ombudsman institutions are essential for safeguarding human rights and the rule of law. To perform their mandates effectively, these institutions require an enabling environment grounded in independence and autonomy as defined by the Venice Principles. Domestically, the Austrian Ombudsman Board. The so called Volkswagen Waltsaft holds a status accreditation and operates with the full structural autonomy demanded by these international standards to ensure public accountability globally. Austria has the honor to host the General Secretariat of the International Ombudsman Institute ioi. In its capacity as seat of the ioi, Austria supports compliance with the Venice Principles to protect the independence and operational space Ombudsman offices worldwide. Strong, accountable national institutions are essential for international stability. This conviction drives Austria's candidacy for an elected seat on the UN Security Council for the period 2027 28. If elected, Austria will remain a steadfast champion for the rule of law, robust institutional guardrails and human rights as the necessary foundations for sustainable peace. And I thank you.


OHCHR · Chief · Anne Sioute [1:07:56]:

I thank the distinguished representative of Austria. I now give the floor to the Permanent Resident of Austria. I'm sorry, of Czechia. No, sorry. Of Israel followed by Czechia apologies.


Israel [1:08:12]:

Thank you.

Chair.

I'm honored to present the Israeli Ombudsman Institution and share the principles and values that guide its work. Work the Israeli model is unique in the world as it combines two central responsibilities within one independent state audit and the protection of individual rights through the Ombudsman function. This unique structure strengthens accountability, transparency and public trust in democratic institutions. The Israeli Ombudsman views the Venice Principles as guiding framework and cornerstone for Ombudsman institutions worldwide. In accordance with these principles, the Israeli Ombudsman enjoys full independence from the executive branch in legal, organizational, administrative and budgetary matters. This independence is anchored at the constitutional level through Israel's fundamental Law of State Comptroller and Ombudsman. The Israeli Ombudsman is responsible only to the Knesset, the Israeli Parliament, and is elected through a qualified parliamentary majority in a secret ballot for for a single seven year term. The office also benefits from financial independence as its budget is approved directly by the Knesset Finance Committee and is not subject to government influence. These safeguards ensure that the institution can fulfill its duties independently and effectively. The commitment to leaving no one behind guides the work of the Israeli Ombudsman. Any individual, whether a citizen, resident or foreign national, including children as well as any legal entity, including NGOs, has the right to free and unhindered access to Ombudsman and may file complaint in any recognized language free of charge. Another important area of the Israeli Ombudsman work is the protection of whistleblowers in the public sector. The Israeli Ombudsman has unique legal authority to issue binding orders that protect whistleblowers from retaliation. In this field. Israel has become a pioneer in promoting transparency, accountability and the fight against corruption. We have also shared our experience internationally through a best practice paper approved by the International Ombudsman Institute. In addition, the Israeli Ombudsman has developed innovative methods of mediation to resolve complaints through dialogue and mutual understanding, helping strengthen trust between citizens and public institutions. The Israeli Ombudsman is integrating advanced AI and cloud technologies into its work while training investigators and auditors in the responsible use of AI tools. In addition, the Israeli Ombudsman has proposed the establishment of an international IOI Working Group to promote shared knowledge and guiding principles for the integration of AI into Ombudsman institutions worldwide. Finally, we strongly believe in international cooperation, peer learning and ensuring of best practices among Ombudsman institutions worldwide. Together, guided by the Venice Principles, we can strengthen strengthen the independence and operational autonomy of Ombudsman institutions at both the national and international levels. I thank you.


OHCHR · Chief · Anne Sioute [1:11:12]:

Thank you very much and apologies again. I thank the distinguished representative of Israel. I now give the floor to the distinguished representative of Czechia, followed by the Russian Federation and then Lithuania.


Czechia [1:11:25]:

Well, thank you, Madam Moderator. First, let me thank all the panelists for their valuable insights. The Czech Republic welcomes this opportunity to reflect on the positive steps we have taken to strengthen the institution of the Ombudsman and to further align the national framework with the Venice Principles. The Czech Republic remains firmly committed to the continuous strengthening of its human rights framework. We have taken a proactive approach to addressing legal and and institutional challenges identified in this field. In this context, the amendment to the Ombudsman act, which entered into Force on 1 July 2025, represents a significant step towards enhancing the protection and promotion of human rights in the Czech Republic. Thanks to this amendment, the mandate of the Public Defender of Rights has been expanded to enable it to fulfil the role of the national human rights institution in accordance with the requirements of the UN Paris Principles. the same time, the amendment has strengthened the protection and promotion of children's rights through the establishment of the Children's Ombudsman Institution. The first Children's Ombudsman has already been elected by the Czech Parliament. When preparing the new legal framework, the Venice Principles, together with the Paris Principles, served as a crucial point of reference for the legislative changes. This is reflected in a number of targeted measures aimed at reinforcing the independence, transparency and professional integrity of the Ombudsman institution. These measures include transparent procedures for the nomination of candidates, as well as a credible and participatory process for their assessment and selection. Our efforts to advance compliance with the Venice Principles represent an important step towards improving the legislative and administrative environment in which ombudsman institutions can operate effectively independently. The Czech Republic remains committed to building on these good practices in order to further strengthen the ombudsman institution in the fulfilment of its mandate, including its role as a national human rights institution. Thank you.


OHCHR · Chief · Anne Sioute [1:14:02]:

Thank you very much, Excellency. I now give the floor to the distinguished representative of the Russian Federation, followed by Lithuania and Timoleste.


Russian Federation [1:14:13]:

Madam Moderator, I'd like to thank you and all the panelists as well for participating in the discussion the issue of national human rights institutions. NHRIS in the Russian Federation is an issue given close attention in our country for several decades. What has been successfully functioning is not only the institution of the Federal Ombudsman for Human Rights, but there's also a broad network of regional and thematic ombudsman. What plays a great role, or who plays a great role in the development of the Russian Ombudsman system is Tatiana Nikolaevna Moskalkova, who, in addition to her traditional duties of ensuring human rights, has placed great attention on humanitarian issues. Issues including searching for residents of Kursk Oblast that have gone missing, providing humanitarian assistance, reuniting families and visiting prisoners, and ensuring dignified conditions for their detention. And she's actively working with the Ukrainians and with international officials of the icrc. Despite the unprecedented pressure, political pressure coming from abroad. At a time when certain international organizations and formations, including the global alliance of NHRIs, have submitted their activity to the political expediency, the former Ombudsman has helped to strengthen international cooperation among NHRI. Specifically, Ms. Moskalkova is actively worked on strengthening and broadening membership of the Eurasian alliance of Ombudsman. On 14 May, the Ombudsman on Human Rights in Russia became Yana Valerie. The new Ombudsman has already set out her priorities. She's helping in supporting those in most difficulty, people with disabilities, orphan children, older persons, families with children and legal education for young people. International activities are also emphasized, including strengthening ties with human rights institutions of other countries. Madam Moderator, in the context of international standards, we trust that right now what is successfully working are the Paris principles adopted in 1993. These principles around the status of national institutions engaged in the promotion and protection of human rights. These principles, not only do they regulate the status of NHRIs, but they're a full set of criteria and standards for ensuring independent, competent and efficient work of NHRIs. In that regard, there's something we see as unjustified. I mean the attempts to portray the European Commission for Democracy through Law of the Council of Europe's set of Principles for the Protection and strengthening of Ombudsman Institutions. The Venice Principles as a sort of standard for work of nhris Microphone has been cut off.


OHCHR · Chief · Anne Sioute [1:17:21]:

I thank the distinguished representative of the Russian Federation. I now give the floor to the distinguished representative of Lithuania, followed by Timor Leste and then Portugal.


Lithuania [1:17:33]:

Thank you, Madam Moderator, for convening this timely discussion. We also wish to thank all the distinguished panelists for their insightful contributions between airlines itself with the stage statement delivered on behalf of the European Union and its member states. In today's increasingly complex geopolitical environment, democracies must remain vigilant. Authoritarian tendencies, hybrid threats, disinformation and pressure on civic space all undermine security, public trust and confidence in democratic institutions. In this context, ombudsperson institutions play a vital role. They help to safeguard democratic governance, the rule of law, good administration, and the protection of fundamental rights. At a time when democratic standards and human rights are facing global backsliding, we are reminded that freedoms can never be taken for granted. They must be protected and upheld every day through principled and determined action. The effectiveness of ombudsparts and institutions depends first and foremost on strong guarantees of independence, autonomy, impartiality and adequate resources. This is precisely why the Venice Principles are so important. They provide a clear international framework for protecting ombudsperson institutions from undue influence. For Lithuania, these principles are directly linked to the daily work of the Parliamentary's Ombudsperson's Office, an independent institution with a broad human rights mandate. The Office has four core mandates. First, it safeguards the right to good public administration. The Office examines complaints, conducts initiative investigations, issues, recommendations, and promotes better administrative practice across public institutions. Second, as a national human rights institution reaccredited with a status under the Paris Principles, the Office addresses issues of systemic human rights concern. These include freedom of assembly, detention conditions, the rights of persons with disabilities, asylum procedures, and public participation and decision making. Third, as national preventive mechanism under opcad, the Office regularly monitors places of deprivation of liberty, including prisons, psychiatric institutions, social care homes, infectious disease facilities, and detection of accommodation centers for foreigners. Fourth, as the National Rapporteur on trafficking in Human Beings, the Office contributes to the implementation of sustainable development goals 16.2 and 16.4 by analyzing trends, institutional responses, and the effectiveness of victim protection. The importance of strong and independent ombuds person institutions is also evident beyond national borders. In this period, we wish to acknowledge the value based and humanitarian work of the Ukrainian Ombudsman's Institution protecting deported and forcibly transferred Ukrainian children. In conclusion, independent ombuds person institutions are cornerstone of democratic resilience. They are essential for upholding human rights.


OHCHR · Chief · Anne Sioute [1:20:35]:

Thank you very much. I now give the floor to the distinguished representative of Timor Leste, followed by Portugal and then Armenia.


Timor-Leste [1:20:45]:

Madam Moderator, at the outset, allow me to thank all the panelists for their insightful interventions. The Venice Principle serves as an international benchmark for ensuring the ombudsman institutions are autonomous, effective, accessible and equipped to uphold the rights of all individuals. For Timor Leste, a nation whose modern history is defined by struggle for human rights, these principles are not abstract ideals. They resonate deeply with our constitutional values and with the aspirations of our people. A core principle of the Venice Principles is the requirements to establish ombudsman institutions within a constitutional or equivalent legal framework. Timor Leste fulfills this criterion by creating the Provideria Regisratus Humanos y just in 2002 as its national embarrassment institution, which is constitutionally mandated and supported by national legislations. This constitutional foundation ensures that the ombudsman institution is not merely administrative body. It is a pillar of the state, protected from political interference and empowered to act independently in the public interest. To emphasize transparent merit based appointment processes and the security of tenure for Ombudsman leadership, the Ombudsman and its deputy are appointed through a clear legal process with protections against arbitrary dismissal. These safeguards ensure the Ombudsman can investigate complaints, issue recommendations and speak truth to power without fear. Furthermore, Timor Leste has undertaken substantial measures to extend the reach of the Ombudsman beyond DILI by establishing regional offices and engaging in outreach initiatives with rural communities. This policy is designed to guarantee that ombudsman institutions are accessible to all individuals without discrimination or unnecessary obstacles. No Ombudsman institution can function effectively without adequate resources. The Venice Principles are clear. The State must provide sufficient funding, staffing and infrastructure. Timor Leste continues to strengthen the Ombudsman institutions capacity through challenges remain, particularly operational challenges, such as geographical and logistical barriers to nationwide coverage. The molested adherence to the Venice Principle is not merely a procedural obligation. It symbolizes a fundamental aspect of our national identity, an enduring nation forged through the pursuit of justice, dignity and human rights. I thank you.


OHCHR · Chief · Anne Sioute [1:23:23]:

I thank the distinguished representative of Timor Leste. And I give the floor to the distinguished representative of Portugal, followed by Armenia and then Spain.


Portugal [1:23:34]:

Thank you, Madam Moderator. Portugal welcomes this important discussion and considers the Venice Principles, together with the Paris Principles, to be essential international standards for safeguarding democracy, the rule of law, and the protection of human rights. They provide concrete guarantees for the independence, impartiality and effectiveness of bootsman institutions, including transparent appointment procedures, secure tenure, adequate legal mandates, and sufficient financial and administrative autonomy. Portugal's own experience demonstrates the importance of these safeguards. The Portuguese Ombudsman is constitutionally established as an independent state body and elected by Parliament by a qualified majority, ensuring broad democratic legitimacy and institutional autonomy. The Ombudsman also serves as Portugal NHRI with a status accreditation under the Paris Principles. The Portuguese Ombudsman exercises a broad mandate, including investigating complaints against public authorities, acting on its own initiative, issuing recommendations, promoting human rights education, and requesting constitutional review before the Constitution Constitutional Court. Portugal has also strengthened the institution through concrete mechanisms and programs, including the National Preventive Mechanism under opicat, as well as the dedicated work on the rights of the child, persons with disabilities, including its role as a member of the monitoring mechanism for the implementation of crpd migrants, detainees and older persons. These efforts contribute directly to SDG 16 by promoting accountable institutions, access to justice and public trust. Portugal also underlines the importance of regional and international cooperation among ombudsman institutions, including within European, Ibero, American and other international networks, as well as through bilateral cooperation initiatives. In this context, Portugal wishes to highlight the importance of cooperation among Portuguese speaking countries to through the CPLP Human Rights Network, which brings together ombudsman institutions and national human rights institutions to exchange best practices, strengthen institutional capacity and support the consolidation of independent ombudsman institutions in line with the Venice Principles. At the same time, we recognize that many ombudsman institutions continue to face recurring challenges including insufficient funding, political pressure, limited mandates or restriction on engagement with international mechanisms. Emerging challenges, including artificial intelligence, digital governance and global crisis, further highlight the need for strong and independent ombudsman institutions capable of protecting rights and ensuring accountability in rapidly evolving context. Strong independent and effective ombudsman institutions are therefore indispensable for democracy, resilience, human rights protection and good governance. Thank you.


OHCHR · Chief · Anne Sioute [1:26:33]:

Thank you very much. I now give the floor to the representative of Armenia, followed by Spain and then Latvia.


Armenia [1:26:41]:

Madam Chair Independent and effective ombudsman institutions play an essential role in promoting and protecting human rights, as well as strengthening good governance and the rule of law. Armenia remains committed to advancing its national human rights architecture in line with international standards, including the Venice and Paris Principles, which provide an important framework for safeguarding the independence, credibility and effectiveness of such bodies. The human rights defender of Armenia continues to play a central role in Promotion and Protection of human Rights. At the national level, it holds the highest level a status accreditation Last granted in 2024 by the Subcommittee on Accreditation of the Global alliance of National Human Rights Institutions. Reflecting its full compliance with the Paris Principles, the Office of the Human Rights Defender addresses a broad range of human rights issues affecting people in vulnerable situations, with particular attention to the protection of children, women and girls, persons with disabilities, persons with mental health conditions and persons deprived of liberty. The Draft Law and the Prevention of the Prevention of and the Protection from Discrimination designates the Human Rights Defender as a national anti discrimination body, including through the establishment of a specialized unit dedicated to these issues. Within the framework of its constitutional mandate, the Human Rights Defender regularly submits proposals and written opinions aimed at improving legal and regulatory act. In 2025, more than 70% of recommendations of systematic nature submitted by the Defender were fully or partially implemented by state bodies. The number of applications and complaints received throughout 2025 increased significantly, including those related to criminal proceedings and judicial decisions. Through its interventions, the Human Rights Defender contributed to the effective resolution of numerous individual cases, reflecting growing public trust in the institution and its mandate. In this regard, Armenia highly values its close cooperation with the Council of Europe and other international partners in strengthening national human rights protection mechanisms. Madam Chair, the effective functioning of the Human Rights Defender remains an important indicator of democratic consolidation and institutional reforms in Armenia. We firmly believe and committed to further strengthening to the Human Rights Defender institution in line with the Venice Principle Principles, ensuring an enabling environment for the effective implementation of its mandate. I thank you.


OHCHR · Chief · Anne Sioute [1:29:11]:

I thank the distinguished representative of Armenia. I now give the floor to the distinguished representative of Spain, followed by Latvia and then Georgia.


Spain [1:29:21]:

Thank you, Madam Chair. Spain aligns itself with the statement of the European Union. On behalf of the EU and its members states and in our national capacity, we'd like to say the following. Based on our national experience, Spain would like to share some elements that we consider particularly relevant in light of the Venice Principles. First of all, is the institution being rooted in the Constitution Article 54 of the Constitution, which provides strengthened guarantee of its stability. The second element is it's a procedure for electing the ombuds person. The ombuds person is not designed by the government. It's not appointed. It's elected by the Parliament through a measure, through a procedure, established procedure. This procedure seeks to achieve consensus so that the person elected has a broad support both in the Senate and the lower House. Ultimately, it's a practical guarantee of independence and reflects the spirit of the Venice Principles. All this is strengthened by the fact that its mandate is five years, the Ombuds Person mandates five years, so longer than the mandate of the Members of Parliament. The third aspect is the the breadth, the scope of its mandate. The Ombuds Person's office can act can supervise the action of all public administrations in Spain, whether they're at the state, at the federal level, at a regional level or local level. It can also act on the basis of public services provided by private entities when they've been given that power in a state based on autonomous regions. This institution also plays an important role at the regional level, which makes it possible to reach the local level. The institution also has a particularly important function in our system, that is submitting complaints for unconstitutionality and protection. As far as budget, it has a separate budgetary line within all the different budgets budgets of the state. So it doesn't define by it's not. Does not depend on decision by the executive. Also, I'd like to underscore the importance of international cooperation, both at the European level, the Ibero American level. At the international level, the European Network of Human Rights Defenders and the Global alliance are very important. These networks facilitate exchange of good practices and strengthen institutional independence and strengthen a common culture among Hamburg persons. Office Spain would like to reaffirm its commitment to strengthening the institution in conformity with the Venice Principles and the Paris Principles. Thank you.


OHCHR · Chief · Anne Sioute [1:32:24]:

Thank you very much. I now give the floor to the distinguished representative of Latvia, followed by Georgia and then Kyrgyzstan.


Latvia [1:32:34]:

Thank you, Madam Chair and I thank the panelists for their important contributions. Latvia aligns itself with the statement delivered by the European Union and would like to add the following remarks in national capacity. Latvia reaffirms the central importance of full compliance with the Venice Principles as a cornerstone for strengthening Ombudsman institutions globally. These principles are a collective commitment to independence, autonomy and integrity in the protection of human rights. However, the Venice Principles risk remaining at the level of principles if not actually implemented. To avoid this, the first and most important step is the incorporation of the Venice Principles into national legislation. In this regard, I highlight the Law on the Ombudsman of the Republic of Latvia as an example of good practice. It integrates both the Venice and Paris Principles, which allow our Ombudsman institutions to operate independently. The second essential step in safeguarding the independence of the Ombudsman is the complete removal of any form of direct or indirect influence. To achieve this, the Ombudsman institution must remain entirely free from any hierarchical or subordinate relationship with either the executive branch or the legislature. When Ombudsman institutions operate free from political pressure. With secure mandates and adequate resources, they are able to carry out their role as impartial defenders of fairness and accountability. Compliance with the Venice Principles ensures that these institutions can act without interference, enabling them to address grievances, uphold the rule of law and reinforce the public trust. I thank you.


OHCHR · Chief · Anne Sioute [1:34:28]:

I thank the representative of Latvia. And now I give the floor to the representative of Georgia, followed by Kyrgyzstan and then the last speaker on the list, Ukraine.


Georgia [1:34:43]:

Thank you, Madam Auditor, Excellencies, their colleagues the Public Defender's Office of Georgia. The pdo, our National Ombudsman institution, stands as a strong example of compliance with the Awareness Principles. The PDO is established as a constitutional body. This framework ensures strong alignment with Awareness Principles and guarantees full independence and protection from any external interference. It has an exceptionally broad mandate covering the protection of all human rights and freedoms and serves as a national preventive mechanism. NPM under the opcat, the PDO is actively engaged in the work with the Venice Commission and OC odhr. The institution also plays an active role and submits Mikos Korea briefs to national courts as well as to the European Court of Human Rights, thereby contributing to the development of human rights jurisprudence in the cases concerning human rights issues in Georgia. These achievements have enabled the PDO to maintain a status accreditation from GNARY under the Paris Principles. The State has consistently supported the PDO. Its budget has steadily increased from 7 million Giorgio Lowry in 2020 to 11 million in 2026. In addition, the law prohibits reducing the budget compared to the previous year without the prior consent of the Public defender. Notably, since 2020, the number of regional offices of the Public Defender of Georgia has increased from 9 to 11. After the public Defender submits the annual report on human rights in Georgia, the Parliament of Georgia adopts a resolution as an official follow up mechanism. The Parliament monitors its implementation by regularly requesting updates from the relevant ministries. The PDO helps monitor and assess national policy documents such as the Human Rights Action Plan and provides independent reviews of their implementation. In conclusion, Georgia reaffirms its strong commitment to the full implementation of the Awareness Principles. We will continue strengthening our National Ombudsman Institution and are ready to share our experiences and best practices with other Member States. I thank you.


OHCHR · Chief · Anne Sioute [1:37:17]:

I thank the distinguished representative of Georgia. I now give the floor to the distinguished representative of Kyrgyzstan and then Ukraine.


Kyrgyzstan [1:37:27]:

Thank you, Madam Chair. The Kyrgyz Republic remains firmly committed to the promotion and protection of human rights and fundamental freedoms as a cornerstone of a democratic and rule based state. This commitment is enshrined in our constitution which recognizes human rights and freedoms as the highest values guiding the activity of the state. Kyrgyzstan now is a party to eight out of the nine core international human rights treaties and continues to implement its international obligations aimed at strengthening the rule of law, improving national human rights mechanisms and ensuring accountability of public institutions. The Ombudsman Institution of the Kyrgyz Republic continues to contribute practically to the implementation of Sustainable Development Goal 16 through reviewing citizens complaints, issuing recommendations to state authorities, contributing to legislative improvements, monitoring human rights protection and promoting legal awareness. In September last year, we adopted a new constitutional law on the Ombudsman aimed at strengthening the independence of the institution. This law was drafted with consideration to the recommendations of the Viennese Commission. An important indicator of effectiveness is the implementation of ombudsman recommendations by state state institutions. Thus, the implementation rate in Kyrgyzstan increased from 13% in 2020 to 68% in 2023 and reached 79% in 2024. We expect that this year it will steadily reach the percentage of 93. And in 2025, amendments were introduced into constitutional laws on martial law and the state of emergency, explicitly guaranteeing that emergency regimes cannot suspend the activities of the Ombudsman institution. At present time, our Parliament has initiated further amendments to the constitutional law on the Ombudsman aimed at strengthening the institutional independence. Thank you.


OHCHR · Chief · Anne Sioute [1:40:01]:

I thank the representative of Kyrgyzstan. And now I give the floor to the final speaker on the list, Ukraine.


Ukraine [1:40:08]:

Thank you, Madam Chair. Ukraine remains firmly committed to ensuring the independence and effectiveness of the Ombudsman institution as an essential safeguard for the protection of human rights, democratic freedom, resilience and the rule of law. The institution of the Ukrainian Parliament Commissioner for Human Rights brings together several key functions within a single framework, serving simultaneously as a classical ombudsman institution, a national human rights institution, the national equality body and the national preventive Mechanism under the Optional Protocol for the Convention against Torture. Despite the unprecedented challenges caused by the Russian aggression against Ukraine, the Office of the Ombudsman of Ukraine continues to operate independently and effectively in accordance with international standards. The institution is an active member of the International Ombudsman Institute and the European Network for National Human Rights Institutions. In May this year, the institution successfully underwent reaccreditation with a status by the Subcommittee on Accreditation of the Global alliance of National Human Human Rights Institutions, confirming its independence and full compliance with the UN Paris Principles. In 2023, the institution also completed a comprehensive capacity assessment conducted within the framework of the Tripartite partnership. Since 2022, the number of Appeals submitted to the Ombudsman of Ukraine has increased dramatically by more than 260% to over 152,000 appeals in 2025. This reflects both the scale of human rights violations caused by the Russian aggression and the institution's broader interpretation of its mandate. In response to emerging challenges, the Government of Ukraine highly appreciates the institution's independent efforts aimed at the return of all deported and forcibly transferred persons, including Ukraine, Ukrainian children, but also civilians and prisoners of war. The institution also addresses complex human rights issues related to internally displaced persons and protection of the rights of Ukrainian citizens residing in temporarily occupied territories. These responsibilities require not only operational capacity, but also strong institutional independence, public trust and international cooperation. In this regard, the Venice Principles remain a crucial framework for ensuring the Ombudsman institutions can perform their mandates freely, effectively and without interference, especially in times of armed conflict. Ukraine firmly believes the full adherence to both the Venice Principles and the Paris Principles is essential to ensuring the independence, credibility and effectiveness of national human rights institutions. The institution of the Ukrainian Parliament, Commissioner for the Human Rights, continues not only to uphold these standards, but also to carry out its mandate under exceptionally challenging circumstances, safeguarding the rights and dignity of individuals across the country. Thank you.


OHCHR · Chief · Anne Sioute [1:43:09]:

I thank the representative of Ukraine. As previously stated, that was the last speaker on the list. I'd also like to thank all of you for your very important and insightful statements and recall that you may submit your full length written statements to estatementsn.org I now turn back to the panelists to respond to some of the comments made and provide concluding thoughts. Ms. Mayung, you have the floor.


IOI · President · Nadine Mailloux [1:43:39]:

Thank you, Madam Moderator. Once again I want to say that we heard perspectives from all continents during this exchange and that they confirm essential thing. The Venice Principles are not merely a Western debate. They're universal grammar of institutional independence interpreted and practiced by states with different legal traditions, with different democratic histories and their own challenges. I'd like to share with you three convictions that that I have come to first of all, conformity with the Venice Principles is not an issue of institutional model. It is a matter of political will. States conform to them have done so in very different contexts. Parliamentary monarchies, federal republics, emerging democracies. What unites them is not their constitutional form, but a decision at a specific time of their history to protect a counter power checks and balances that do not control. Secondly, in the international context we live in is a time when we cannot postpone this decision. Democracies are under pressure, oversight institutions are fragile, civic space is shrinking and yet all around the World citizens continue to believe that somewhere there is an institution that will hear them, that will investigate without further fear, that will speak without asking for permission. This belief, which is fragile, precious and essential, cannot survive without the active commitment of states that have created this organization. Thirdly, the international community now has all the necessary elements to move to the next stage. The the normative framework exists, the Venice Principles. Multilateral recognition exists. The resolution adopted by consensus in December of 2024 by this organization. The Global Professional Network exists, the IOI with its 200 institutions on all continents. What remains to be built is a mechanism that transforms these elements into an effective obligation. IOI is ready to do its part in moving this project forward. I will end with an image at the headquarters. This organization, as you know, is the sculpture non violence. It's a revolver with its that it's tied into a knot. The sculpture represents truly not only the absence of force, but the domestication or the taming of force by law. The ombuds person's office at their level is this sculpture, but a living sculpture. We are the proof that a state can be powerful, can be powerful enough to impose its will on its citizens, but also mature enough to accept, to be questioned by them. This maturity is the capacity to tie the revolver and to tie its own authority. That is precisely what the Venice Principles protect. Thank you.


OHCHR · Chief · Anne Sioute [1:46:46]:

Now turn to Ms. Crickshank for final remarks. You have the floor.


Costa Rica · Ombudsman · Angie Cruickshank Lambert [1:46:54]:

Muchas gracias.

Thank you, Excellencies. We have discussed at this meeting the strategic values that underpin the Venice Principles. They require a solid legal basis for these institutions, transparent and clear and meritocratic positions and appointments, and independence in the face of any institutions of authority. Broad access to information, sufficient and independent budgetary resources, as well as sufficient staff to be able to fulfill its functions. Functional immunity and protection against state actions that could. That could prevent its action. The challenge is huge. And in in Latin America they are particularly huge given the human rights issues confronted by our societies. However, through these institutions we can understand that today we need to protect the rights of all peoples and individuals. We need an economic system that is more humane. We need political systems that understand that without respect for human rights, there is no state. We need societies that opt for peace as a form and path of coexistence. We need a planet that understands that without its nature there's no future. To take the ombuds person's institution to the highest level is the most important decision that we can make. We are at a historic moment when humankind is confronting decisions about the kind of future we're going to live and to elect among all the possible futures, the one we want to build. And for this, each country is represented in this room, as well as organizations of civil society of our countries have to work together to. We're convinced that the Ombuds Persons offices and national institutions of human rights are a strategic institution to make these decisions. Thank you.


OHCHR · Chief · Anne Sioute [1:49:12]:

Thank you very much, Ms. Kozka. And now I turn to Mr. Bustos for final remarks.


Venice Commission · Member · Rafael Bustos Gisbert [1:49:19]:

Thank you very much. Once again, it's really difficult to try to say something better than what my colleagues have said. I just want to highlight from this exchange of views that the Venice Principles establish conditions of independence of the homeless persons institutions, both in the appointment and the way they carry out their work. They also establish conditions of effectiveness and efficiency, both in terms of functions, mandates, as well as the need for resources. They also establish some of the conditions for the guarantee of their function through these interventions. I understood the importance of the Ombudsperson's Office to ensure the rule of law. But it's a symbiotic relationship between the rule of law and Ombuds Person's office. The Ombuds Person's Office requires a rule of law. It's one of the preconditions to have the kind of environment that makes it possible for the institution to operate without a rule of law. The possibility for an Ombuds Person's Office to fulfill their functions appropriately is reduced severely. Therefore, the first, the very first guarantee in terms of the existence and the smooth functioning of the Ombuds Person's Office is our Is respect for the rule of law. And the constitutional legal guarantee is very important. It's a necessary condition, but it's not sufficient. And the Ombuds Person's Office is one of the key institutions to defend the rule of law. It's one of the soldiers in defense of the rule of law. And the Venice Commission would like to underscore that beyond the work of supporting or consulting Member States, Zoe was ready to assist all states in any aspect pertaining to the support and the operation of the Ombuds Person's Office. Thank you.


OHCHR · Chief · Anne Sioute [1:51:34]:

Thank you very much, Mr. Bustos. Well, distinguished delegates, ladies and gentlemen, we have now concluded today's panel discussion. In today's meeting, please join me in warmly thanking our panelists. I think you can all agree that today's discussion was rich with useful ideas and good practices shared on how the international community can translate the Venice Principles into practice. As the President of the General assembly stated earlier, strengthening Ombudsman and mediator institutions is ultimately a commitment to people, and the Venice Principle should be a guide for action to that end, ensuring that they can serve the public with integrity, impartiality and courage. I thank you very much for your active participation during this afternoon's panel discussion. The meeting is adjourned.