CAT/OP/KAZ/1/Add.1 for young persons, 10 to special educational institutions, 39 to psychiatric clinics, 39 to drug addiction clinics, 89 to tuberculosis clinics, 5 to Security Committee pretrial detention facilities, 9 to military police detention units and 120 to police stations (including 60 to internal affairs premises). 57. There is ongoing consideration of whether the mandate of the national preventive mechanism should be expanded. Corrections will make it possible to expand the range of institutions that fall under the national preventive mechanism mandate, to include, for instance, residential units for orphans and children without parental care in the health-care system, medical and social institutions for children with disabilities, remedial boarding schools for children with special needs and other social service organizations offering 24hour residential care. Paragraph 25 The Subcommittee notes with concern that the legislation related to the national preventive mechanism provides that persons suspected of a crime cannot be members of the mechanism. This not only stands at odds with the presumption of innocence but may lead to abuse. Persons registered in psychiatric and/or drug-treatment institutions do not have the right to be members of the mechanism. The Subcommittee finds this overly restrictive and even potentially contradictory to article 5 of the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities. 58. The legislation contains eligibility requirements for membership of the national preventive mechanism in respect of suspects, accused persons and persons declared by a court as having limited or no legal capacity. 59. However, from when the mechanism was set up, there have been persons with disabilities among its participants, which shows that there are no restrictions on such persons taking part in its activities. 60. In practice, when considering candidatures for membership of the national preventive mechanism, the members of the Coordinating Council are guided by the principle of the presumption of innocence, and no confirmation is required concerning participation in criminal proceedings. 61. Furthermore, where it has transpired that future members of the national preventive mechanism are participants in legal proceedings or pretrial investigations, the members of the Coordinating Council have considered each case individually when discussing them in their meetings and withdrawn the mandate of such participants until the court judgment was pronounced. 62. Persons registered in psychiatric and/or drug addiction facilities are not referred to as having disabilities, since they are ill or suffering from certain (mental) diseases or addictions that could in practice have an effect on activities within the mandate of the national preventive mechanism. 63. These restrictions result from the fact that national preventive mechanism members must remain impartial in carrying out their duties and objectively assess the situation in institutions covered by their mandate, and also result from concerns for the members’ own security and that of other persons involved in preventive activities. Paragraphs 26 and 27 The Subcommittee is greatly concerned about reported cases of criminal prosecution against members of the national preventive mechanism for work carried out under the mandate of the mechanism. According to the information available to the Subcommittee, a civil libel case was brought against two members of the mechanism. 64. The Subcommittee recommends that an impartial investigation into the circumstances surrounding the above-mentioned cases be conducted. In this connection, the Subcommittee would like to draw the State party’s attention to article 21 of the Optional Protocol. 65. Paragraphs 1 to 26 of the report do not contain any specific information to allow investigations of cases to be conducted. 8 GE.18-05420