4. ACCESS TO CLOSED INSTITUTIONS. MONITORING CONDITIONS As active participants of the MoU the state authorities undertook the obligation to facilitate as needed access to places of detention for partner civil society organizations, defence attorneys and international organizations, including monitoring groups that are established by them. 17 It should be mentioned that, by and large, the leadership of internal affairs bodies and administration of TDFs and reception centres under internal affairs bodies demonstrated a rather serious approach to the above-mentioned commitment, and access to TDFs was indeed by and large unimpeded, while staff members were treating observers amiably. From a monitoring group report. Temporary detention facility, At-Bashy region: “From the moment of our first visit, the attitude toward monitoring group members has changed much for the better. At the present time, staff members of TDFs and other units of internal affairs bodies are much more affable toward us, and they engage in conversations and co-operation much more willingly. Common staff members of TDFs are always asking us to conduct training on human rights and international law.” To a large extent, this can be explained by the fact that all heads of TDFs participated in two training courses where they learned, in great detail, about the obligations of the Ministry of Interior within the MoU and exchanged their views as to how to increase the effectiveness of monitoring visits. Their subsequent reports to higher-level authorities about the goals and objectives of the monitoring study changed the perception of the latter of this issue. For instance, deputy head of the Naryn province Police Department, M. Jupaev, provided great assistance in conducting monitoring visits by allowing unimpeded access to all TDFs of internal affairs bodies in Naryn province. A monitoring group talking with the head of the TDF under the Chief Interior Department in Bishkek The majority of monitoring visits were carried out without prior notification. Rare cases of untimely access could be explained by the fact that not all heads and staff members of regional internal affairs bodies had been informed about the participation by the Ministry of Interior in the MoU and the obligations undertaken in that multilateral framework. In 25% of cases, monitoring groups had to wait until a duty officer of the CDI/DDI confirmed with higher-level authorities whether the group had the right to visit the institution. From a monitoring group report. Temporary detention facility, Tyup region: “We could not start a monitoring visit because the Chief of the TDF was not there. The Head of the District Department of the Interior did not allow us to go in without him.” From a monitoring group report. Temporary detention facility, Jeti-Oguz region: “Despite numerous visits, every time we had to explain to the officer on duty in the District Department of the Interior the obligations within the Memorandum.” However, after a certain period of time, these issues were resolved positively and observers would receive permission to enter the facilities. In this case, great assistance was provided by police 17 Memorandum of Understanding on human rights and fundamental freedoms, page 1, para. 4, 11. 27