and the judiciary could generally contribute to improving detention conditions. Ultimately, by improving conditions of detention in a national context, which would also indirectly contribute to strengthening mutual trust and thus cooperation in criminal matters across the EU. The Study looks at possibilities and existing practices to improve the visibility of NPMs to promote better use of their work, resulting in increased effectiveness of their mandates. Much of this relates to the publication of reports, and widespread dissemination, as well as creating formal and informal channels of communication between judges and NPMs, for example, through trainings and sharing information and reports, always within the bounds of both parties maintaining independence and respecting confidentiality. Another area of engagement identified related to giving expert evidence in Court. This proved to be problematic for some NPMs, who firmly felt that this infringed on independence, raised potential challenges to confidentiality, and generally felt that this could go beyond their prescribed mandate. Others embraced it as another concrete way in which their work could be given greater practical effect. While NPMs largely advocate for alternatives to detention, only a small number of them do so relying specifically on the Framework Decisions. Looking at alternatives to detention and providing respective recommendations could thus constitute another way in which NPMs could contribute to strengthening mutual trust. Prevention of ill-treatment in the implementation of the Framework Decisions: Role of the international community Through projects such as this, and ongoing training programmes the Commission also seeks to support and fortify NPMs and judges. One project that is envisaged for 2017 and 2018 is an “EU NPM network,” bringing together EU NPMs and contributing to the implementation of EU mutual recognition instruments in keeping with NPMs very specific mandate relating to the prevention of torture and ill-treatment. Other areas of support discussed during the consultation process throughout this project related to the level of support and guidance that the SPT could provide to NPMs on the engagement between NPMs and Judiciary. Another possibility explored, relates to the establishment of a database, comprising a comprehensive overview of all NPM reports, so that judges and other stakeholders can easily locate and access them. In this regard, the EU Agency for Fundamental Rights has announced a pilot project on compiling information on detention conditions in EU Member States to be commenced in 2017. International bodies, such as Eurojust, are tasked with assisting international cooperation and specifically mutual recognition instruments, and seek to support judges in their cross-border work. The SPT sets out the guidelines for the operation of NPMs, and this Study considers how it can further support the work of NPMs in the context of their mandate to prevent ill-treatment and torture, and develop their work in the context of addressing the challenges that arise when implementing mutual recognition instruments. 9