resentations, and with NHRIs in the country in order to share information and co-ordinate contacts with human rights defenders. Both the Norwegian and the Swiss guidelines also acknowledge that in certain cases human rights defenders require support – including financial and practical assistance – in order to move temporarily to another city or a nearby country.429 All OSCE participating States should engage their diplomatic missions in supporting human rights defenders and enhancing their protection whenever required. In particular, they should ensure that in taking such measures they also reach out to human rights defenders located outside of the capital in rural and remote areas of the country. 430 280. In addition to acting through its diplomatic representations abroad, the Norwe- gian guidelines also highlight the importance of raising concerns regarding the general situation of human rights defenders and individual cases in political meetings and during official visits. The guidelines also recommend, for example, that information on the situation of human rights defenders be included in the background material prepared for the political leadership before an official visit, and that during such visits officials should consider meeting with representatives of civil society and human rights defenders in the country in question.431 Other participating States should also take such actions. 281. Likewise, the Dutch government has developed an action plan as part of its exter- nal human rights policy, which states that the Dutch Ministry of Foreign Affairs “will facilitate the expedited issue of Schengen short-stay visas for human rights defenders in distress who are seeking a temporary stay in the Netherlands”.432 Similarly, the Swiss Guidelines state that “[s]hould a detailed examination of the case at hand confirm that leaving the country is the most expedient option the [Swiss Ministry of Foreign Affairs] will intervene to permit a degree of flexibility in the Swiss visa awarding process.”433 Further to the recommendation of the Council of Europe Committee of Ministers mentioned above, PACE has recommended that states establish humanitarian visa schemes or take other appropriate measures,434 and has called specifically on national parliaments to “support 429  See Norwegian Guidelines, p. 14, and Swiss Guidelines, p. 15. 430  The above-mentioned study on the implementation of the EU Guidelines found that, for example, visits or trial observations by diplomatic missions rarely happen outside of the capitals in the countries reviewed (see European Parliament, Directorate-General for external Policies of the Union, “Assessing the implementation of the European Union Guidelines on Human Rights Defenders – The cases of Kyrgyzstan, Thailand and Tunisia”, June 2013). The Swiss Guidelines highlight the need, for example, to also visit human rights defenders in rural areas in order to provide moral support and improve their protection (see Swiss Guidelines, p. 12). 431  See Norwegian Guidelines, p. 20. 432  See “Action Plan for Human Rights Defenders”, <http://www.government.nl/issues/human-rights/supporting-human-rights-defenders (Dutch Action Plan)>, p. 5. 433  Swiss Guidelines, p. 16. The Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights defenders has singled out Ireland as an example of good practice, after the country set up a dedicated humanitarian visa scheme in 2006 that provides those human rights defenders facing temporary security issues with a fast-track mechanism to travel to Ireland for short periods of time for respite. See HRC/22/47/Add.3, 26 February 2013, para. 56. 434  See Council of Europe Committee of Ministers Declaration, para. 2(xi) and PACE Resolution 1660 (2009), para. 12.2. Guidelines on the Protection of Human Rights Defenders 131