PART TWO: CONTENT OF COMPREHENSIVE ANTI-DISCRIMINATION LAW MONITORING AND OVERSIGHT: EXAMPLES FROM DENMARK AND THAILAND PART TWO – IV As concerns monitoring and oversight of the implementation of ordered measures, equality bodies should be empowered to order respondents to report to them on the measures taken within a specified time limit or, following the issuing of an order, have the power to monitor and supervise compliance. In the event of a failure to observe an order, equality bodies should have powers to issue a fine for non-compliance. For example, if decisions made by the Board of Equal Treatment of Denmark are not complied with, the Board, at the request and on behalf of the complainant, must bring the matter before the civil courts.788 Some equality bodies have been provided with even more stringent powers to address non-compliance: in Thailand, any person violating the orders of the Committee on Consideration of Unfair Gender Discrimination is subject to imprisonment for a maximum period of six months, or a fine of up to 20,000 baht, or both. D. Ensuring the effectiveness of equality bodies The establishment of equality bodies is essential to meeting States’ obligations to respect, protect and fulfil the rights to equality and non-discrimination.789 Indeed, it is difficult to find jurisdictions that have made significant progress in implementing the rights to equality and non-discrimination without having established and adequately resourced an independent institution to oversee implementation, provide expertise and assist victims. Different models of equality body have been established at the national level, which may be more suited to some contexts than others. While States possess some flexibility in determining the mandate, functions and powers of the institutions that they establish under national law, equality bodies must be effective in advancing the protection of the rights to equality and non-discrimination. This requires that each of those institutional guarantees of independence, adequate resourcing, accessibility, reflectiveness and participation be met. It also requires that the body be appropriately mandated and empowered. Consistent with States’ international law obligations, the work of equality bodies – either singularly or as a whole – should cover all grounds, forms and manifestations of discrimination, in all areas of life regulated by law, including both the public and private sector.790 In some countries multi-mandate bodies – usually a human rights ombudsperson or national human rights institution – have been established with a dual equality and human rights mandate. To ensure their effectiveness, it is important that the equality mandate of such institutions is well defined and that each of the institutional requirements set out above is guaranteed.791 Measures must also be put in place to ensure “appropriate and close cooperation between” different entities established under national law.792 When provided with sufficient funding, clear mandates and institutional guarantees to ensure their independence, equality bodies have proven extremely effective in practice. Equality bodies themselves play an important role in ensuring the effective discharge of their mandates – by engaging in strategic planning, target setting, and establishing indicators and benchmarks to monitor the outputs of their work and the achievement of their goals.793 It is important that States support these processes and work to ensure the effectiveness of their institutions. On this point, the Special Rapporteur on contemporary forms of racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance has called on States to “identify the challenges faced by [equality] bodies and provide the support necessary for the work carried out by them”.794 788 Similar mechanisms are provided in the case of the Defender of Rights in France, the National Non-Discrimination and Equality Tribunal in Finland and the Equality Ombudsman in Sweden. 789 See section I.B of part one of the present guide. 790 See further section I.A of part two of the present guide. See also Council of Europe, European Commission against Racism and Intolerance, “ECRI general policy recommendation No. 2”, para. 4. Relatedly, see A/71/301, paras. 6 and 8. 791 Council of Europe, European Commission against Racism and Intolerance, “ECRI general policy recommendation No. 2”, paras. 7–9. 792 Guidelines on independent monitoring frameworks and their participation in the work of the Committee on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, para. 14. 793 Council of Europe, European Commission against Racism and Intolerance, “ECRI general policy recommendation No. 2”, para. 33. 794 A/71/301, para. 12. 113