CAT/OP/SEN/CNPMRO/1 31. Reply: The Observatory wishes to point out that, in general, this practice is well respected. Follow-up visits have been carried out in this regard; for example, a follow-up visit was conducted to Thiès remand prison and detention centre after the incident that occurred there during the Observatory’s joint visit with the Subcommittee. The Subcommittee underscores the importance of the national preventive mechanism systematically holding constructive debriefing sessions with the heads of places of detention as soon as possible following the visits, with a view to sharing with the persons concerned preliminary observations and recommendations and highlighting the matters that warrant immediate intervention or that should be urgently addressed for humanitarian reasons. The risk of potential reprisals should always be mentioned as a preventive measure. Similarly, the Subcommittee urges the Observatory to carefully apply the final paragraph of rule 25 of its rules of procedure, which outlines the actions the Observatory is expected to take in case of failure to respect fundamental rights. 32. Reply: The Observatory wishes to stress that, at the end of every visit, it always holds constructive debriefing sessions with those in charge in order to highlight corrective measures that urgently need to be taken to reduce the risk of torture and other violations. Nonetheless, it has taken careful note of the need to go into more detail in these meetings in order to better protect the rights of detainees. The Subcommittee recommends that the principles of confidentiality always be applied during interactions with detainees and the authorities. It is important that, in its interactions with the authorities and its reports, the Observatory be mindful not to divulge information enabling the identification of interviewees. 33. Reply: The Observatory agrees with this recommendation and wishes to clarify that it systematically ensures that no information enabling the identification of sources is ever deliberately divulged. More generally, the Subcommittee recalls its recommendation to national preventive mechanisms to prepare a report following each visit, in which they should raise their concerns and make recommendations (CAT/OP/12/5, paras. 36 and 37). In principle, the report should be public and safeguard the confidentiality of personal information and should deal chiefly with prevention, highlighting current problems and suggesting solutions in the form of practical recommendations. Recommendations should be tangible, measurable and focused on the formulation of preventive measures to address the shortcomings of current practices and mechanisms. They should also take into account applicable national and international norms relating to the prevention of torture and other ill-treatment, as well as the recommendations of the Subcommittee. Once a report has been transmitted, the Observatory should formulate a strategy to monitor the implementation of its recommendations and use the report as the basis for dialogue with the authorities of the detention place concerned and relevant ministries. 34. Reply: The Observatory agrees with this recommendation and wishes to underline that most of its final visit reports are published on its website. With regard to the follow-up and dialogue procedure, the Observatory is of the view that cooperation with the State authorities should be strengthened. The Subcommittee is of the view that having to submit its annual report to the President does not prevent the Observatory from making it public. The Subcommittee recommends that the Observatory implement article 9 of Act No. 2009-13, which gives it the power to publish its annual reports, in keeping with article 23 of the Optional Protocol. Publishing the annual reports of national preventive mechanisms is an opportunity to make the mechanisms more visible, to keep the authorities and the public informed of their activities, just like any other public institution, to identify and analyse issues related to the prevention of torture and, above all, to establish and maintain an ongoing dialogue with the relevant authorities. 35. Reply: The Observatory agrees with this recommendation and wishes to specify that, in accordance with article 9 of Act No. 2009-13 of 2 March 2009, it took administrative steps to submit its first annual report to the President as soon as it had been completed. It has since 8 GE.21-03421