CAT/OP/KAZ/1/Add.1 55. In 2015, members of the national preventive mechanism carried out 528 preventive visits, of which 20 were special visits. The monitoring visits included: 151 to temporary detention units, 8 to pretrial detention facilities, 103 to correctional institutions, 5 to remand houses, 26 to special holding facilities, 9 to rehabilitation centres for young persons, 33 to psychiatric clinics, 31 to drug addiction clinics, 62 to tuberculosis clinics, 5 to special educational institutions, 6 to Security Committee pretrial detention facilities, 9 to military police detention units, 18 to police stations and 12 to district internal affairs offices. 56. During 2016, members of the national preventive mechanism conducted 680 preventive visits, of which 15 were special visits. The monitoring visits included: 156 visits to temporary detention centres, 2 to pretrial detention facilities, 103 to correctional institutions, 24 to remand houses, 31 to special holding facilities, 23 to rehabilitation centres for young persons, 10 to special educational institutions, 39 to psychiatric clinics, 39 to drug addiction clinics, 89 to tuberculosis clinics, 5 to Security Committee pretrial detention facilities, 9 to military police detention units and 120 to police stations (including 60 to internal affairs premises). 57. There is ongoing consideration of whether the mandate of the national preventive mechanism should be expanded. Corrections will make it possible to expand the range of institutions that fall under the national preventive mechanism mandate, to include, for instance, residential units for orphans and children without parental care in the health-care system, medical and social institutions for children with disabilities, remedial boarding schools for children with special needs and other social service organizations offering 24hour residential care. Paragraph 25 The Subcommittee notes with concern that the legislation related to the national preventive mechanism provides that persons suspected of a crime cannot be members of the mechanism. This not only stands at odds with the presumption of innocence but may lead to abuse. Persons registered in psychiatric and/or drug-treatment institutions do not have the right to be members of the mechanism. The Subcommittee finds this overly restrictive and even potentially contradictory to article 5 of the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities. 58. The legislation contains eligibility requirements for membership of the national preventive mechanism in respect of suspects, accused persons and persons declared by a court as having limited or no legal capacity. 59. However, from when the mechanism was set up, there have been persons with disabilities among its participants, which shows that there are no restrictions on such persons taking part in its activities. 60. In practice, when considering candidatures for membership of the national preventive mechanism, the members of the Coordinating Council are guided by the principle of the presumption of innocence, and no confirmation is required concerning participation in criminal proceedings. 61. Furthermore, where it has transpired that future members of the national preventive mechanism are participants in legal proceedings or pretrial investigations, the members of the Coordinating Council have considered each case individually when discussing them in their meetings and withdrawn the mandate of such participants until the court judgment was pronounced. 62. Persons registered in psychiatric and/or drug addiction facilities are not referred to as having disabilities, since they are ill or suffering from certain (mental) diseases or addictions that could in practice have an effect on activities within the mandate of the national preventive mechanism. 63. These restrictions result from the fact that national preventive mechanism members must remain impartial in carrying out their duties and objectively assess the situation in 8 GE.19-01981