A/76/168 domestic and international levels, through the acknowledgement of su ch violations and the commitment to create effective mechanisms of redress and rehabilitation. III. Accountability and prevention 37. Accountability is not just an ex post facto obligation. Rather, the meaningful pursuit of accountability for torture or ill-treatment should be understood to be a continuous endeavour, not limited to the aftermath of violations of the prohibition. The proactive and continuous nature of accountability is tied to the obligation of States to prevent torture and ill-treatment, which is well elaborated both in treaty instruments 34 and in a rich corpus of human rights jurisprudence. 35 It requires mechanisms and procedures to be in place to establish whether torture or ill-treatment is taking place, identify the risks factors conducive to torture and ill-treatment, and assess what is being done in the “here and now” to prevent and/or put an end to practices of torture or ill-treatment. 38. The establishment of effective mechanisms of accountability enco urages a culture of transparency in State institutions and promotes human rights -compliant practices. National preventive mechanisms created in accordance with the Optional Protocol to the Convention against Torture, with a view to promoting independent monitoring and accountability of institutions where persons are deprived of their liberty, through a system of unannounced visits to places of detention, are an example of preventive accountability. Such institutions aim to continuously analyse the system of deprivation of liberty and all its structural aspects, considering risks factors at the institutional, legal and policy levels and providing recommendations and advice to State authorities with the purpose of improving the treatment and conditions of persons deprived of their liberty and establishing a society where the principles of human rights and the rule of law are observed. 39. Among other legal mechanisms of accountability which include fundamental safeguards that need to be systematically observed and guaranteed are the rights of detained persons to contact a lawyer and to be examined by a medical doctor, which constitute mechanisms of accountability and prevention. 36 Access to a lawyer from the outset of detention, and throughout judicial proceedi ngs, represents a significant safeguard against torture and ill-treatment. Lawyers warrant the application of the law, detect and report abusive practices, inform the detainees about their rights to complain without being subjected to reprisals, and provid e legal support to obtain redress and rehabilitation. Furthermore, judges and lawyers can be guarantors of the observance of principles of fair trial, including the exclusion of any evidence obtained under torture or coercion. 40. The pursuit of non-recurrence is not only an integral element of the duty to investigate but is also associated with the “guarantees of non -repetition”, which are part of the reparations outlined in the Basic Principles and Guidelines on the Right to a Remedy and Reparation for Victims of Gross Violations of International Human Rights Law and Serious Violations of International Humanitarian Law. 37 As previously highlighted by the Special Rapporteur on violence against women, its causes and consequences, the need to guarantee the n on-repetition of the violation at issue should trigger “a discussion about the underlying structural causes of the violence”, including its “gendered manifestations”, as well as “about the broader __________________ 34 35 36 37 21-09914 See, notably, Convention against Torture, arts. 2, 11 and 16; see also CAT/C/GC/2. A/74/148, paras. 22–23. A/73/207, para. 26. General Assembly resolution 60/147, annex, paras. 18 and 23. 13/23