CAT/OP/BRA/3 established national public programme, in coordination with state-level authorities, to foster the creation of local mechanisms. This may include meetings with high-level state authorities, regular advocacy visits to the states, technical support for the drafting of legislation and economic incentives through allocation of funds. 98. According to the information available to the Subcommittee during the visit, only five states had legislation on creation of a preventive mechanism, but these laws had not yet come into effect. The Subcommittee remains concerned that there were functional preventive mechanisms in place in only two states, Rio de Janeiro and Pernambuco. In these two states, the Subcommittee observed a lack of political will to strengthen the mechanisms and provide the resources and conditions they need to function effectively. In both states, the mechanisms have been functioning with scarce resources. The Subcommittee commends the provision in 2015 of financial resources and office space for the mechanism in Rio de Janeiro, almost four years after it began operations. Nevertheless, the mechanism remains without any personnel for administrative support and the allocated resources do not seem to be sufficient to permit the mechanism to fully discharge its mandate under the Optional Protocol. 99. The Subcommittee is greatly concerned about an incident involving members of the Pernambuco mechanism who, while carrying out a visit, were harassed, threatened and held at gunpoint by an officer in the Santa Cruz de Capibaribe prison. Not only did the members of the mechanism suffer greatly on account of that incident, but the system for preventing and combating torture also suffered greatly from such blatant interference with its mandate. In addition to the fact that the members of the mechanism were obstructed in the execution of their duties, one of their members, a transgender woman, was subjected to insults and humiliation, and continues to be the object of threats. According to the information received by the Subcommittee, the investigation into this incident was not progressing. 100. The Subcommittee calls on the Government to promptly carry out a full, impartial and detailed investigation into the circumstances surrounding this incident, bring those responsible to justice and take all necessary measures to prevent such incidents from happening in the future. 101. The Subcommittee is equally concerned that the Rio de Janeiro national preventive mechanism as well as the federal mechanism have recently been denied access to places not traditionally understood to be places of deprivation of liberty, such as shelters and psychiatric institutions. This appears to have been the result of a lack of understanding on the part of the authorities of the social protection system of the meaning of “person deprived of liberty” under the Optional Protocol. Access is a basic enabling feature of torture prevention work, and in the absence of access it is important that an investigation into the obstruction of public duties, undertaken by whichever body exists in the country to address such problems, be carried out efficiently and effectively. 102. The Subcommittee emphasizes that, according to the article 4 of the Optional Protocol, the State shall allow visits to any place under its jurisdiction and control where persons are or may be deprived of their liberty, either by virtue of an order given by a public authority or at its instigation or with its consent or acquiescence. 20