CAT/C/BEL/CO/3 The Committee urges the State party to expedite the establishment of a national human rights institution in accordance with the Principles relating to the Status of National Institutions for the Promotion and Protection of Human Rights (Paris Principles) by conferring the broadest possible mandate for the promotion and protection of human rights on the institution and ensuring that it is autonomous, independent and pluralistic. The Committee encourages the State party to actively involve civil society actors in this process. Ratification of the Optional Protocol to the Convention 10. While taking note of the explanations provided by the State party during the dialogue, the Committee regrets that the process involved in ratifying the Optional Protocol to the Convention has not advanced in recent years. Furthermore, the Committee remains concerned about the lack of systematic, effective and independent monitoring and inspections of all places of detention (art. 2). The Committee invites the State party to take the necessary measures to ratify the Optional Protocol to the Convention with a view to putting in place a system of regular, unannounced visits by national and international observers for the purpose of preventing torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment. Fundamental legal safeguards 11. While applauding the adoption of the “Salduz law”, which affords greater protection for the rights of persons from the moment that they are placed in custody, the Committee remains concerned that the right of access to a lawyer is effective only from the time persons are first questioned by the police rather than as soon as they are placed in custody, that private consultations with a lawyer are limited to 30 minutes, which is all the more restrictive for persons who are detained, and that, in practice, there are limitations on this right in respect, for example, of lawyers’ prompt access to case files. In addition, the Committee notes that the right to be examined by an independent physician and the right to contact family members or other persons of the detainee’s choice are restricted and that persons are informed of their rights in writing, without any explanation, which makes it difficult for some persons who have been deprived of their liberty to understand them (arts. 2 and 11). The Committee recommends that the State party take effective steps to ensure that all persons who are held in custody actually have the benefit, from the very outset of their deprivation of liberty, of all the fundamental legal safeguards, namely, the right to be informed in an appropriate language of the reasons for their detention, the right to have prompt access to a lawyer and to consult him or her immediately following their detention, the right to contact family members or other persons of their choice and the right to have an independent medical examination performed without delay by a doctor of their choice. Register of persons in police custody 12. The Committee notes with concern that the general register of persons held in police custody provided for in article 33 bis of the Police Functions Act has not yet been introduced. The Committee also regrets that, according to the information provided by the State party in its report, each police district has created its own register, which does not always contain enough information to make it possible to ensure that detainees’ rights are respected (arts. 2 and 11). The Committee reiterates its earlier recommendation (CAT/C/BEL/CO/2, para. 20) and urges the State party to take appropriate measures to establish a standardized, GE.14-40046 3