The staff composition should be representative of the diversity in society. As noted above, in order to be effective, the minority ombudsman institution must seek to be perceived by all as being trustworthy and free from influence; while the institution may be sympathetic to the needs of minority communities, it is important that it not be perceived to be an advocate for such communities or to be in their service. It must be impartial and professional. Nevertheless, it should strive to reflect, at least to some extent, the diversity of the communities it represents, and this should be reflected in its staffing policies. This is important for at least two reasons. First, it may be a practical necessity: members of minority communities will bring special knowledge of those communities, and will help the ombudsman in assessing the environment in and, indeed, the politics of the minority communities; also, special language skills may be required in dealing with a particular community (in taking complaints, in conducting investigations and other research, in preparing publicity and in dealing with the media, etc.), and staff from the minority group who are competent in its language are very important. Second, a staff which broadly reflects the composition of the minority communities is symbolically important: if the institution has members of minorities in positions of responsibility, people from such communities may be more likely to view the organization as acting and speaking with greater authority, and being worthy of greater trust. PART III The value of independence should inform the staffing policy of the minority ombudsman institution. Membership in a minority should obviously not disqualify a person from employment – indeed, given the other values that the institution should adhere to, having staff from minority communities is essential to its effectiveness. Similarly, past membership or participation in an organization with which the ombudsman institution will be dealing, such as a minority group NGO or other advocacy body, a political party and so forth, must not be a bar to employment; indeed, a person may have gained some useful insights and contacts from such work. However, if staff members hold positions in such organizations, the potential damage to the institution’s image as being impartial and free from influence must be carefully considered. To be effective, it must be, and be seen to be, impartial, by the communities it serves and the governmental bodies it scrutinizes, as well as by the wider public. “The composition of specialized bodes … should reflect society at large and its diversity.” ECRI General Policy Recommendation No. 2, Principle 4. The degree to which the minority ombudsman institution is representative will also be enhanced by ensuring that it has offices in regions in which there are significant numbers of minorities, and that the staff in such offices is, at least in part, composed of members of those minorities, for reasons described above. The presence of offices and the devolution of functions, particularly investigative and fact-finding functions, to such offices both increases the effectiveness of the institution and helps to create the sense that the institution is open and accessible, and that the services it offers are close at hand. Physical remoteness from the communities it serves may impose not only psychological barriers, but also real costs to the community in being able to gain access to the institution’s services. 53