National Preventive Mechanism the Commission had the impression that crisis situations (e.g. the injuring of officials) that were associated with particular suspicious factors (e.g. suspicion of Islamism, initially vague, though subsequently rebutted) could easily lead to escalation. The low level of professionalism in dealing with these situations resulted in rendering human rights aspects entirely meaningless. In situations of high-security incarceration basic rights such as outdoor exercise and food intake became of such secondary importance, that it was not possible for the NPM to carry out any examinations due to the lack of documentation. Across all categories of institutions observed, on some occasions insufficient sensitivity was shown towards the special needs of persons who, in addition to the general vulnerability arising under conditions of deprivation of liberty, required special attention and care due to mental disorders. This affected mentally ill persons in police custody or serving a sentence as well as traumatised refugee children in youth welfare facilities, mentally impaired minors/young adults in socio-pedagogical facilities or mentally ill persons in retirement homes. There is often a general lack of efforts to raise awareness – extending far beyond the discussions about preventive measures in the specific type of facility – in order to protect this group with multiple vulnerabilities and to be able to react adequately to their needs. Inadequate consideration for the needs of mentally ill persons An elusive problem for the commissions has been the “disappearance” of minor refugees widely reported in the media and by NGOs, including in particular young girls who were initially registered and cared for. If an unaccompanied minor refugee fails to return to his/her care facility, he/she is officially removed from its care. No institution feels responsible for quickly clarifying the whereabouts of these individuals. Consequently, not only does an information deficit arise in relation to the fate of these children but also a serious problem as to the responsibility of custody for this group. 3.2.7 International collaboration and cooperation The Austrian NPM is always interested in intensively sharing experience and cooperating with other NPMs on an international level. Since October 2013, the AOB has also been a member of the South-East Europe NPM Network, the so-called SEE NPM Network and held the annually rotating presidency of this network in 2016. Prevention mechanisms from Greece, Romania and Hungary participated as new members of the network. In 2016 two working meetings of the network in Salzburg and Vienna were organised together with the Austrian Human Rights Institute of the University of Salzburg. The meetings focused on the development of a methodology and the standards applicable during preventive monitoring and control activities in retirement and nursing homes. In the view of the AOB it is particularly significant that, South-East-European NPM Network 91