CAT/OP/CYP/1 external experts, including medical experts, interpreters and others, as necessary, when such expertise is not available internally. The Subcommittee recommends that the State party allocate the resources needed by the national preventive mechanism. The State party should consult directly and in a constructive manner with the mechanism with a view to ascertaining the nature and extent of the resources needed for it to properly fulfil its mandate in accordance with the provisions of the Optional Protocol. 4. Resources: staffing 95. The Subcommittee is also concerned that only two staff of the Office of the Commissioner perform tasks related to the national preventive mechanism mandate, and that they do so on a part-time basis because they also have other duties related to other mandates of the Office. That situation affects not only the ability of the mechanism to fulfil its mandate but also its functional independence, within and outside of the Office. It is simply impossible for two part-time staff members to conduct regular visits to some 50 places of deprivation of liberty. 96. The Subcommittee recommends that the State party allocate to the national preventive mechanism sufficient resources for the mechanism to perform its mandate effectively, in accordance with article 18 (3) of the Optional Protocol and the Subcommittee’s guidelines for national preventive mechanisms (see CAT/OP/12/5, para. 11). The Subcommittee draws the attention of the State party to its views on organizational issues regarding national preventive mechanisms that form part of a national human rights institution (see CAT/C/57/4 and Corr.1, annex, paras. 11-23) and recommends that the State party ensure that its national preventive mechanism is able to organize itself and to undertake its work in accordance with that guidance. 5. Awareness 97. The meetings held by the Subcommittee with some of the relevant authorities revealed that little was known about the national preventive mechanism. Clearly, the mechanism lacks visibility and there may be a lack of understanding of its role and of the nature of its work, which has a detrimental effect on its efficiency. In addition, there needs to be greater awareness of the reports of the mechanism and, especially, of the degree to which the authorities implement the recommendations contained in the reports. The Subcommittee notes that there is very little knowledge of the mechanism among relevant stakeholders, including persons deprived of their liberty, public authorities and other State monitoring bodies, civil society actors and the general public. 98. The Subcommittee recommends that the relevant public authorities meet with the national preventive mechanism directly in order to discuss the implementation of its recommendations, in accordance with article 22 of the Optional Protocol. The Subcommittee also recommends that the State party do the following: (a) take steps to assist the mechanism in making its mandate and its work better known to the general public; (b) ensure that the mechanism is recognized as a key component of the country’s system for preventing torture and ill-treatment; (c) contribute to making the work of the mechanism more visible by, for example, organizing awarenessraising campaigns and other promotional activities, including the production and distribution of materials, in various languages, on the mandate and the activities of national preventive mechanisms to persons deprived of their liberty, public authorities, civil society organizations, lawyers, members of the judiciary and the general public; and (d) engage with a broad spectrum of stakeholders, especially in civil society, concerning the work of the mechanism. 15