28 4. Register of domestic places of detention and the NPM’s annual schedule of visits Pursuant to Article 20(a) of the OPCAT, the States Parties, in order to enable the National Preventive Mechanisms to fulfill their mandate, grant them “access to all information concerning the number of persons deprived of their liberty in places of detention as defined in article 4, as well as the number of places and their location.” On December 13, 2016, referring to Article 20(a) of the OPCAT, I sent letters to the heads of the governmental organs concerned, requesting them to provide me with the data, as of December 31, 2016, of all places of detention as defined in Article 4 of the OPCAT.83 All the requested organs complied with my data request. According to the data provided to me, on December 31, 2016, in the nearly 4,000 places of detention under Hungarian jurisdiction84 with the total capacity of 122,927 detainees, there were 113,388 persons being detained.85 Type Social care institutions Number of places 81,404 72,174 826 19,721 20,635 5 562 395 32 14,530 17,972 1,007 3,241 1,827 3 29 14 55 2,359 26 3 790 257 152 291 88 Juvenile correctional institutions Penitentiary system Airport Police Directorate (separately) Healthcare: closed or partially closed wards in psychiatry and addictology Guarded refugee reception centers Administration of justice (detention rooms on the last business day of December 2016) Altogether Number of detainees 1,962 Child protection services (including foster families, but excluding children in aftercare) Police Capacity 4,045 122,927 113,388 The aggregate list of places of detention under Hungarian jurisdiction as of December 31, 2016 (except indicated otherwise in the table) 4.1. The 2017 schedule of visits of the NPM Pursuant to Article 20(e) of the OPCAT, the NPMs shall be granted the liberty to choose the places they want to visit. On December 15, 2016, based on the list of places of detention, and taking into account the recommendations of the CCB, I determined the 2017 schedule of visits of the NPM. 86 When preparing the schedule of visits, in addition to selecting institutions of different types and geographical locations and with different supervising authorities, my colleagues also tried to take into account the age of detainees and the experiences gained during the visits of previous years. The locations for the follow-up visits were selected based on the impressions of previous visits, keeping in mind two criteria. On the one hand, follow-up visits were conducted at places of detention where earlier the visiting delegations had detected serious ill-treatment or the threat thereof, affecting a large The letter requesting data services are registered under file number AJB-8858/2016 in my Office. On the subject of jurisdiction, see Section 18 of Act CXL of 2004 on the General Rules of Administrative Proceedings and Services 85 The data provided to my Office are registered under file number AJB-700/2017 86 „Guidelines on national preventive mechanisms”, CAT/OP/12/5, Clause 33 83 84