Overview of the National Preventive Mechanism
The following graph provides a breakdown of criticisms according to individual
issues and the percentage share of all criticisms. It must be taken into account
here that the number of deficiencies observed is not equivalent to the number
of visits made, as multiple areas were inspected on each visit and therefore
the criticisms relate to multiple topics. The most frequent reasons for criticism
were living conditions, including sanitary and hygiene standards, food and
the offer of leisure activities. The proportion of criticism relating to medical
care was almost as high. Measures that restrict freedom as well as insufficient
human resources were also grounds for criticism.
Topics of criticism voiced by the commissions
(share in %)
Living conditions
Health care system
Measures that restrict freedom
Personnel
Infrastructural fixtures and fittings
Educational and occupational opportunities
Right to family and privacy
Signs of torture and abuse
Complaint management
Care plans and enforcement plans
Building structure in general
Location
Access to information
Forced returns and releases
Contact with the outside
Security measures
14.5
14.2
12.1
11.8
7.9
6.4
5.6
5.2
5.0
4.8
2.9
2.2
2.0
1.9
1.8
1.7
0
3
6
9
12
15
1.3 Budget
In 2017, a budget of EUR 1,450,000 was available to remunerate the heads
and members of the commissions, as well as the members of the Human
Rights Advisory Council. Of this amount, around EUR 1,257,000 (2016: EUR
1,163,000) was budgeted for reimbursements and travel expenses for the
commission members alone and around EUR 83,000 (2016: EUR 87,000) for
the Human Rights Advisory Council. Around EUR 110,000 was available
for workshops for the commissions and the AOB staff members working in
the OPCAT sector, as well as for other activities. It was therefore possible to
avoid budget cuts, thanks in particular to the National Council as the federal
legislative body in financial matters but also the Federal Ministry of Finance.
Both of them emphasised the necessary financial independence for preventive
activities and showed understanding for a sufficient budgetary allocation to
the NPM.
17