OSCE ODIHR Comments on the draft Law on the Protector of Human Rights and Freedoms of Montenegro included in the Chapter III of the draft Law, to ensure that all competences of the Human Rights Protector are contained in one law. In case these additional competences are not mentioned specifically in the draft Law, the draft Law should at least contain specific references to additional competences of the Human Rights Protector laid down in the Law on Prohibition of Discrimination. 77. Furthermore, the public information and awareness-raising duties of the Protector with regard to discrimination issues should also be reflected in the draft Law, which focuses more on complaints procedures and legal initiatives than on awareness-raising activities. Here again, it may be worthwhile to consider similar awareness-raising duties for all human rights issues, not only discrimination. It is recommended to include these points into the draft Law. 4.4. The Human Rights Protector as a National Preventive Mechanism under the OPCAT 78. The draft Law contains special powers for the Human Rights Protector to help him/her implement his/her duties under the OPCAT. While Article 28 focuses on the Protector’s authorization to monitor detention facilities and visit and talk to persons deprived of their liberty, Article 29 of the draft Law focuses on the prevention of torture, and in this context mainly on a working body established by the Human Rights Protector to help him/her understand the situation of persons deprived or their liberty and other persons with limited movement. 79. It is important to reiterate here that the aim of the OPCAT is to establish national preventive mechanisms that carry out a system of regular visits to all places where persons are or may be deprived of their liberty, in order to prevent torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.27 80. Based on Article 28, the Protector, his deputies or an officer authorized by the Protector have the right to monitor facilities where persons are deprived of their liberty, as well as visit such persons without prior notification or approval, and talk to them in the absence of officials or other persons. 81. First of all, it is important to clarify in Article 28 who the “officer authorized by the Protector” would be. Since the Protector is the national preventive mechanism, any authorized officer should be part of the Protector’s office (Technical Service). Further, Article 28 states that the Protector, deputies or authorized person may, without prior notification, “undertake a checkout of all facilities in prisons and other places where persons deprived of their liberty are held, or may be held”. The above persons may also, without prior notification and approval, visit persons deprived of their liberty and verify the respect of their rights, and have the right to talk to persons deprived of their liberty, in person or with an interpreter, as well as to other persons who he/she believes may provide significant information, without the presence of an official or other person. It is recommended to clarify this in Article 28. 27 See Article 1 of the OPCAT, fully cited in footnote 1. 22