14 Pursuant to Article 11 of the UN Convention against Torture, “each State Party shall keep under systematic review interrogation rules, instructions, methods and practices as well as arrangements for the custody and treatment of persons subjected to any form of arrest, detention or imprisonment in any territory under its jurisdiction, with a view to preventing any cases of torture.” By virtue of Article 16 of the UN Convention against Torture, the State Party’s obligation to take effective measures, stipulated in Article 2 of the UN Convention against Torture, shall also cover the prevention of ill-treatment.37 The State Party also has an obligation to prevent torture and ill-treatment, stipulated in Articles 2 and 16 of the UN Convention against Torture, whether committed by public officials, other persons acting in an official capacity or private individuals. It is the responsibility of States Parties to prevent acts of torture and ill-treatment in all contexts of deprivation or restriction of liberty, including, for example, in prisons, hospitals, schools, institutions that engage in providing care for children, older persons, persons with mental illness or persons with disabilities, in military service and in other institutions as well as in contexts where the failure of the State to intervene encourages and enhances the danger of privately inflicted harm.38 Prevention extends to any type of treatment of any individual deprived of liberty that, without checks, may lead to torture or any other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.39 Under its obligation to respect and protect fundamental rights, the State shall also provide the conditions necessary for their enforcement of those fundamental rights.40 The efficient implementation of the provisions related to the prevention and prohibition of torture and ill-treatment is the State’s responsibility; therefore, the OPCAT also compels the States Parties to provide for the domestic legal conditions of the efficient operation of the National Preventive Mechanisms.41 Both in his fundamental-rights-protection activities and in performing tasks related to the National Preventive Mechanism, the Commissioner for Fundamental Rights is entitled to review the practical implementation of international treaties constituting part of the domestic legal system. His “mandate,”42 necessary for the operation of the National Preventive Mechanism, and the required material and procedural legal rules43 are provided for in the Ombudsman Act. 1.4. Costs related to performing the tasks of the NPM in 2017 The administration and preparation related to my tasks are performed by the Office of the Commissioner for Fundamental Rights (hereinafter the “Office”).44 The Office has a separate chapter in the central budget adopted by the Parliament.45 The costs related to the performance of the tasks of the NPM are borne by my Office. Expenditure Amount Personal allowances (8 persons*) 51,269,299 Contributions 12,130,823 Professional and administrative materials IT and communication expenses 792,826 1,630,553 Services supporting professional activities 876,722 Delegation expenses 393,725 Clause 3 of CAT/C/GC/2 Clause 13 of CAT/OP/27/1 39 See Clause 4 of the Report on the Visit of the Subcommittee on Prevention of Torture and other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment to The Maldives (February 26, 2009) 40 See Constitutional Court decision 64/1991 (XII. 10.) AB 41 See Part IV of the OPCAT 42 See Article 19 of the OPCAT 43 See Articles 3, 4, 17, 18, 20–22, and 23 of the OPCAT 44 See Section 41(1) of the Ombudsman Act 45 See Section 41(4) of the Ombudsman Act 37 38