established. This manifested itself in many forms, from disagreement between NGOs, the government and national human rights institutions as to which bodies should constitute the NPM, to lack of financial support and expertise (See Section Four “The OSCE and implementation of the Optional Protocol to the UN Convention against Torture”). One field operation answered that a problem was that anti-torture activities were not a priority for national or international actors working on justice-sector reform. Another difficulty reported was that of co-ordinating and involving all relevant actors such as law enforcement officials, medical staff, prison officials, and civil society and international organizations. Finally, there were a number of references to public perceptions of arrested persons as “criminals”, thus providing a perceived justification for the use of torture. Field operations based in countries with ongoing territorial disputes noted that access to information in conflict areas is often limited. As a result, assessments of the extent of torture and ill-treatment are often difficult, as is the implementation of activities. Information is frequently anecdotal and originates from broad-based human rights reporting by NGOs. In addition to their own activities, field operations also assisted the European Committee for the Prevention of Torture and Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment in facilitating access to disputed areas. Following is an overview of obstacles mentioned: Systemic, conceptual and resource problems:              The absence of a democratic system of government A lack of political will on the part of governments and a low priority for human rights issues in general Corruption in various sectors of the legal system A weak or non-existent NGO community, or one in which none of the actors focuses on torture issues A low regard or lack of regard for international opinion and/or the near absence of international organizations A lack of financial resources for the legal system Overcrowding in prisons and a lack of financial resources, leading to poor conditions for those in detention A lack of public awareness of persons’ rights in relation to torture The absence of official awareness of national and/or international legal protections relating to torture Fear and/or mistrust of the justice system by victims of torture, resulting in a reluctance to make formal allegations The presumption of guilt by public and justice officials with regard to arrested persons, leading to a tolerance of torture A lack of independent national bodies to provide systematic monitoring of places of deprivation of liberty and the absence of international monitoring An absence of expertise for monitoring specialized places of deprivation of liberty, such as psychiatric hospitals, children’s care facilities or centres for those seeking asylum 23