organisations in other countries to support rehabilitation and torture prevention work. He noted the importance of ensuring non-discrimination towards women, children and minorities in the provision of rehabilitation services. Mr Merisaari also agreed that one of the main challenges is to ensure that states are held accountable for providing as full rehabilitation as possible. He further highlighted the importance of advocating for a greater ratification and implementation of UNCAT and OPCAT. In Finland, he noted the need to ensure the sustainability and quality of services with more tailored services to meet the needs of the victims. He outlined the importance of multistakeholder cooperation and the need for support from civil society organisations, even in cases where the state may meet all its obligations under Article 14. Dr Abdel Salam Sidahmed (Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights, Lebanon) outlined the organisation’s supporting role to the UN Committee against Torture. He noted that the visits conducted by the Subcommittee on Prevention of Torture (SPT) are carried out with the agreement of states, and as such they are usually able to access places of detention and enjoy a degree of cooperation from the state. In addition, the work of OHCHR’s field offices ensures collaboration with governments and civil society organisations at the national level. OHCHR provides technical support and help to governments when reporting to the Committee, and in relation to other human rights concerns, e.g. the conduct and training of police and security forces. He welcomed the General Comment on Article 14 as a landmark development, particularly as an encouragement to states to consider the issue of redress more seriously. He considered that the victim-centred approach to rehabilitation, which focuses on enabling the individual to reassert their position in society and rebuild their life, is a particularly positive aspect of the right to rehabilitation. He also noted that the General Comment was followed by a resolution of the Human Rights Council (HRC) in March 2013,4 which emphasises that states should take persistent steps towards the eradication of torture. Both the General Comment and the Resolution are significant steps to strengthen the mechanisms to hold states accountable and to give civil society a greater voice in the dialogue. María Sánchez Gil-Cepeda (EU Delegation to the Lebanese Republic) reflected on the multidisciplinary approach that the EU Delegation follows in order to encourage dialogue. She reflected on the importance of interacting with government, civil society organisations and other stakeholders. In addition to showing commitment, an open dialogue must be maintained 4. UN Human Rights Council, 22nd session, Torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment: rehabilitation of torture victims, A/HRC/22/L.11/Rev.1, 19 March 2013. between the EU Delegation and the state in order to understand the challenges faced. She underlined the importance of civil society involvement in providing input to reports sent by the EU Delegation to its counterparts in Brussels. She stressed the importance of the UN treaty bodies in the role they play highlighting individual cases. She outlined the funding support given through the European Instrument for Democracy and Human Rights (EIDHR) process, including to rehabilitation work. Finally, she emphasised the fundamental role that civil society plays in the provision of rehabilitation services and advocacy and lobbying; the state cannot replace this role, but it is vital that there are strong state institutions in order to make collaboration between the state and civil society work. Astrid Melchner (UN Voluntary Fund for Victims of Torture) outlined the work of the UNVFVT highlighting its victim-centred approach to funding. UNVFVT distributes assistance through a variety of non-governmental channels, taking into account the cultural and political context. Its assistance is victimcentred, can be accessed by victims’ families and is offered independent of the need to pursue judicial remedies. Moreover, the fund recognises that a longterm, tailored and specialised response is necessary. Aside from being the only financial international tool exclusively dedicated to the rehabilitation of torture victims, the fund is also global, predictable and non-politically motivated, making it a unique mechanism. In 2013, it is expected that the fund will have helped a total of 57,000 victims with grants totalling more than 7 million USD (approximately 5.1 million EUR). The UNVFVT provided input to the drafting of the General Comment, and believes it will help to take forward the imperative of assisting victims. Ms Melchner also highlighted the HRC Resolution of March 2013 as a landmark resolution supported by 66 states. She hopes that the momentum created by these two important developments will make governments realise how critical civil society organisations are in this field and provide a useful strategic tool for NGOs. She highlighted that while many organisations may seek to maintain their independence, often partnership and cooperation with state institutions will enable capacity development and reinforcement of services. She reflected on the reporting processes, both to the Committee and in the UN’s Universal Periodic Review (UPR) process, as one form of partnership or cooperation envisaged by the General Comment. Finally, she reflected that the fund is part of a partnership as it supports non-governmental channels of assistance but receives contributions from State Parties. However, she highlighted a major challenge faced by the fund is that, in the past five years, it has lost some 30 percent of its contributions (11.6 million USD (approximately 8.5 million EUR) in 2008, but Right to Rehabilitation for Torture Victims, Beirut, Lebanon – 27/28 June 2013 21