128 11. Legislation-related activities of the NPM degrading treatment or punishment. Indicating the involvement of physicians as a possibility does not seem to be an adequate guarantee. The Minister of Justice hopes that both physician’s positions will be filled as soon as possible and also, he drew attention to the fact that part-time employment is also made possible by the effective regulation.250 11.1.3. According to Section 18(2) of the OPCAT, the states “shall take the necessary measures to ensure that the experts of the National Preventive Mechanism have the required capabilities and professional knowledge. They shall strive for a gender balance and the adequate representation of ethnic and minority groups in the country.” In its report on the country visit to Sweden between 10 and 14 March, 2008, the Subcommittee pointed out that “prevention necessitates the examination of the rights and conditions from the beginning of deprivation of liberty until the moment of release. Such examination should take a multi-disciplinary approach, e.g. a physician, a child and gender specialists and a psychologist should be involved, in addition to a strict legal focus.” Being aware of the above-quoted expectation of the Subcommittee, in the amendment of Section 39/D (4) of the Ombudsman Act, it would make sense to add a new Section 5 to Section 39/B of the Ombudsman Act, which would stipulate that “On-site inquiries should take a multi-disciplinary approach, e.g. a physician, a child and gender specialists and a psychologists should be involved, in addition to a strict legal focus.” The Minister of Justice thinks that my proposal is primarily a methodological issue, and it should not be represented on the level of the law.251 11.1.4. After the visit of the Subcommittee to Hungary between March 21 and 30, 2017, they indicated, among their conclusions drawn regarding the NPM that “the National Preventive Mechanism does not have an identity which is different from that of the Office of the Commissioner for Fundamental Rights, not only with regard to the legal frameworks of its operation but also, with regard to the institutional frameworks and the guarantees of independence”.252 Related to the above-quoted comment made by the Subcommittee, I would like to draw attention to their guidelines meant for National Preventive Mechanisms, in which it is pointed out that as long as a body is obliged to fulfil its NPM responsibilities in addition to its other functions, a separate organisational unit or department should be established for performing the NPM’s tasks, with its own staff members and budget.253 In Hungary, the Commissioner 250 251 252 253 Point I.2 of Justice Minister ’s letter No. XX-AJFO/ID/267/2018/8 dated on February 27, 2019. Section I.3 of Justice Minister ’s letter No. XX-AJFO/ID/267/2018/8 dated on February 27, 2019. SPT visit to Hungary between March 21 and 30, 2017: conclusions and recommendations for the National Preventive Mechanism (CAT/OP/HUN/R.2), Section 15. SPT: Guidelines on national preventive mechanisms (Clause 32 of CAT/OP/12/5), Section 32.