Section One Context While OPCAT does not dictate how NPMs should be structured, it does set out the criteria that they should meet. Perhaps the most important of these is that NPMs should be independent. The NPM must be adequately resourced to carry out its role and its personnel should have the necessary capabilities and expertise. There should also be a gender balance among the personnel and they should be representative of ethnic and minority groups. The SPT has expanded upon the minimum requirements set out in OPCAT. In preliminary guidelines for the development of NPMs published in 2008, the SPT recommended, for example, that the mandate and powers of the NPM be set out in law.6 The UK’s NPM The UK ratified OPCAT in December 2003 but did not designate its NPM until March 2009. A number of complexities may have prolonged the designation process. Firstly, a number of existing bodies already carried out roles which were similar to that of the NPM. While an initial decision was made that the functions of the NPM in the UK would be performed by the collective action of existing bodies, the government still had to consider which existing bodies were OPCATcompliant and which should be designated. Secondly, despite the pre-existing bodies, there remained gaps in coverage of places of detention. For example, while inspection of prisons was well established, inspection of military detention and police custody, at that time, was limited. Thirdly, the UK government had to liaise with the devolved administrations in Wales, Northern Ireland and Scotland over arrangements in those countries. Finally, the government also had to think about whether and how to coordinate the activities of the multiple bodies being considered for designation. During 2006 and 2007, the government consulted with relevant bodies about the composition of the UK’s NPM and the extent to which existing bodies complied with OPCAT. In deciding which bodies should be designated, the government applied the following criteria: • the statutory basis upon which the bodies operate gives them unrestricted access to places of detention and to detainees, including the power to make unannounced visits, and unrestricted access to information about detainees and their conditions of detention (or at least contains nothing to prevent such access and such visits) • bodies should possess the independence, capability and professional knowledge to carry out visits. In a written ministerial statement made to Parliament on 31 March 2009, the government formally designated 18 bodies which would make up the UK’s NPM.7 The government also mentioned that additional inspection bodies may be added to the NPM in future. 6 See First annual report of the Subcommittee on Prevention of Torture and other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (February 2007 to March 2008), CAT/C/40/2 (14 May 2008). 7 The written ministerial statement is included at Appendix 1. 9