8 the ombudsman's task 1.1 The Ombudsman’s task as a National Preventive Mechanism On 7 November 2014, the Parliamentary Ombudsman was designated as the Finnish National Preventive Mechanism (NPM) under the Optional Protocol of the UN Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (OPCAT). The Human Rights Centre (HRC) and its Human Rights Delegation, which operate at the Office of the Parliamentary Ombudsman, help fulfil the requirements laid down for the NPM in the OPCAT, which makes reference to a set of international standards known as the Paris Principles. The NPM is responsible for conducting visits to places where persons are or may be deprived of their liberty. The scope of the OPCAT has been defined as broadly as possible. It includes prisons, police departments and remand prisons, but also places like detention units for foreigners, psychiatric hospitals, residential schools, child welfare institutions and, under certain conditions, care homes and residential units for the elderly and persons with intellectual disabilities. The scope covers thousands of facilities in total. In practice, the NPM makes visits to, for example, care homes for elderly people with memory disorders, with the objective of preventing the poor treatment of the elderly and violations of their right to self-determination. The OPCAT emphasises the NPM’s mandate to prevent torture and other prohibited treatment by means of regular visits. The NPM has the power to make recommendations to the authorities with the aim of improving the treatment and the conditions of the persons deprived of their liberty and preventing actions that are prohibited under the Convention against Torture. It must also have the power to submit proposals and observations concerning existing or draft legislation. Under the Parliamentary Ombudsman Act, the Ombudsman already had the special task of carrying out inspections in closed institutions and overseeing the treatment of their inmates. However, the OPCAT entails several new features and requirements with regard to visits. In the capacity of the NPM, the Ombudsman’s powers are somewhat broader in scope than in other forms of oversight of legality. Under the Constitution of Finland, the Ombudsman’s competence only extends to private entities when they are performing a public task, while the NPM’s competence also extends to other private entities in charge of places where persons are or may be deprived of their liberty, either by virtue of an order given by a public authority or at its instigation or with its consent or acquiescence. This definition may include, for example, detention facilities for people who have been deprived of their liberty on board a ship or in connection with certain public events as well as privately controlled or owned aircraft or other means of transport carrying people deprived of their liberty. International bodies have considered it advisable to organise the work of the NPM under a separate unit. At the Office of the Parliamentary Ombudsman, however, it has seemed more appropriate to integrate the tasks of the NPM into the work of the Office as a whole. Several administrative branches have facilities that fall within the scope of the OPCAT. However, there are differences between the places, the applicable legislation and the groups of people who have been deprived of their liberty. Therefore, the expertise needed on visits to different facilities also varies. As any separate unit within the Office of the Ombudsman would, in any case, be very small, it would be impossible to assemble all the necessary expertise in such a unit, and the number of visits conduct-