1.  The NPM Annual Report 2010 detailed the work of the Office of the Ombudsman of Spain from the time of its designation as the National Preventive Mechanism against Torture under Public General Act 1/2009 of November 3, which incorporated a single final provision into the Public General Act on the Ombudsman. The report gave an account of the 231 inspection visits made to places of deprivation of liberty in all 17 of Spain’s regional autonomous communities and in the autonomous cities of Ceuta and Melilla in the course of the Ombudsman’s first year as the NPM. This large number of visits enabled a preliminary picture to be drawn up of the situation as regards deprivation of liberty in Spain as a whole. The 231 inspection visits 2. With this initial overview of the situation at places of deprivation of liberty having been drawn up, it was considered preferable in 2011 that there should be fewer inspection visits -77 in all- but that they should be made in greater depth, focussing on specific aspects of the establishments visited. The intention was to centre attention not so much on the infrastructures themselves as on living conditions there, and above all to listen to persons deprived of their liberty. The 77 inspection visits in 3.  This second year of the Ombudsman as the NPM has also seen progress towards compliance with the requirements of the OPCAT. Evidence of the commitment entered into can be seen in the stage by stage deployment of the NPM as per paragraph 19 of the NPM’s Annual Report 2010. This has been done by introducing a number of different perspectives, through the incorporation of independent experts – doctors, psychiatrists and psychologists – into the inspection work as detailed below. Multi-disciplinary 4. Once again this year the system employed was to make unannounced visits at any hour of the day or night. Several inspection visits were timed to take place in the early hours or on non-working days. Another new feature with respect to last year is that in 2011 photos were taken of all the establishments visited and incorporated into the visit reports. Some of those photos are included in this report. This report is supported 5.  The main problems and shortcomings detected on the inspection visits were reported to the authorities responsible for the establishments inspected so that the necessary corrective measures could be taken. This marked the start of a constructive dialogue: the Ombudsman monitors the responses of the authorities in question to assess whether they are positive. As laid down by the APT in its Guide: Establishment and Designation of National Preventive Mechanisms, published in 2006, this dialogue must be based on the premise that the recommendations of the NPM “... are an opportunity for the state to benefit from detailed and practical expert advice …”. The inspection visits by 6. As pointed out in paragraph 18 of the Annual Report 2010, if there are complaints concerning improper treatment or allegations of mistreatment on the part of persons deprived of their liberty, without prejudice to the aforesaid analysis, those complaints are submitted to the corresponding area of the Office of the Ombudsman for examination and, if relevant, investigation as required. At the The Ombudsman may THE OMBUDSMAN OF SPAIN  made in 2010 provided an overall picture of deprivation of liberty in Spain 2011 focussed on learning about the living conditions of detainees inspection visits were made, with the participation of independent experts by photos taken during unannounced inspection visits made at any hour of the day or night the NPM set off a constructive dialogue with the authorities responsible for the establishments inspected resort to the resolutions held under law: suggestions, warnings and reminders of legal duty  13