A/65/273 generally considered to be relatively safe and affluent, for example EU member States. In this regard, the Special Rapporteur notes with concern the upcoming phasing-out of EU support for centres located within its area and the simultaneous failure of European Governments to step up their support for their own domestic institutions. Rehabilitation centres within the EU assume a crucial role in providing services to thousands of individuals who have had to flee their home countries and seek refuge after experiencing war, persecution and torture. While these survivors may have succeeded in escaping from imminent persecution and from their torturers, their experiences are still very much present and continue to haunt them. Often alone in a foreign country, confronted with xenophobic resentment, general suspicion that there is abuse of the asylum system, and concerns about the outcome of protracted and increasingly restrictive asylum procedures, survivors of torture find themselves in an environment which is far from conducive to a process of healing. The availability in those States of well-functioning rehabilitation centres where many refugees can open up and receive medical treatment for the first time is essential and their value cannot be overestimated. The Special Rapporteur calls for a change of the perception prevalent in many Western countries that torture is a distant issue. Many Europeans would be surprised to learn that their immigrant neighbour is in fact one of many survivors of torture who have found refuge in their country. 74. In addition to their therapeutic role, rehabilitation centres in third countries provide medical records which may also be important when it comes to holding foreign perpetrators accountable, for example through universal jurisdiction proceedings. Furthermore, they fulfil an important role in the development of capacity and the dissemination of state of the art methods of treatment, for example through the training of domestic health professionals or other staff from centres in less affluent countries. V. Role of national preventive mechanisms 75. The ultimate aim must be to prevent acts of torture and ill-treatment before they occur. There are numerous methods of prevention that have been developed in the past, which, if adequately implemented by States, could easily eradicate torture: abolition of secret and incommunicado detention; proper registration of every detainee from the moment of arrest or apprehension; prompt access to legal counsel within 24 hours; access to relatives; prompt access to an independent judge; presumption of innocence; prompt and independent medical examination of all detainees; video/audio recording of all interrogations; no detention under the control of the interrogators or investigators for more than 48 hours; prompt, impartial and effective investigation of all allegations or suspicions of torture; inadmissibility of evidence obtained under torture; and effective training of all officials involved in the custody, interrogation and medical care of detainees. As previously emphasized by the Special Rapporteur and his predecessors, the most effective preventive measure against torture and ill-treatment is the regular inspection of places of detention. Regular inspections can ensure the adequate implementation of the above-mentioned safeguards against torture, create a strong deterrent effect and provide a means to generate timely and adequate responses to allegations of torture and ill-treatment by law enforcement officials. 76. Many countries already have national mechanisms in place for the inspection of places of detention, such as visiting judges and prosecutors, inspection boards 18 10-48049