in cooperating with the selected organisations, and in consideration of their proposals for amendments and annexations to the reimbursement of costs and remunerations, the valid rules were amended in 2011 (and were published in the Official Gazette of the RS, No. 20/2011 as of 18 March 2011 upon prior approval of the minister competent for finance). Upon receiving new proposals by the selected organisations for amendments and annexations to the existing Rules, it was decided, in 2016, that a consolidated text of the Rules should be prepared. Additional proposals by the selected organisation were considered, especially the findings and proposals of the internal audits of the Ombudsman from this field. Attempts were made to eliminate editorial and other errors in the text of the previous Rules, and to clarify individual provisions (e.g. when the Monitor is entitled to remuneration for preparing a site visit report – Article 8 of the Rules). The method of calculating the costs and their amount was clarified, i.e. by referencing the regulation stipulated for public servants unless otherwise specified in these Rules (Article 4 of the Rules). An attempt was also made to specify more appropriately the calculation of the compensation for loss of income when the Monitor cooperates voluntarily with the selected nongovernmental or humanitarian organisation during the implementation of monitoring (Article 7 of the Rules). The observation by one of the selected organisations that the time which a Monitor spends on preparing their site visit report is not attributed any value was also considered (Article 9). Another change was the remuneration in the amount of EUR 100 for a person from the selected non-governmental or humanitarian organisations who, following prior agreement with the Ombudsman, prepares an individual content segment for the Annual Report on the implementation of the duties and powers of the National Preventive Mechanism. Article 13 now stipulates that the Rules apply mutatis mutandis for the reimbursement of costs and payment of remunerations to people from non-governmental or humanitarian organisations for their participation in other organised events of the Ombudsman for the purposes of implementing the duties and powers under the Optional Protocol to the Convention against Torture and other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (e.g. participation at press conferences, coordination and other meetings, consultations, etc.). The previously valid Rules did not enable the reimbursement of any of these costs to the selected organisations, even though their participation was necessary at these events. The new Rules were published in the Official Gazette of the RS, No. 13/2017 as of 17 March 2017. In the implementation of the duties and powers of the NPM in 2017, the Ombudsman again cooperated with representatives of organisations which applied to the public tender to cooperate in the implementation of the duties and powers of the NPM in the 2015–2017 period, with the possibility of prolongation for one more year.3 Eight NGOs applied to the public tender, i.e. Novi paradoks (NP), the Association for Developing Voluntary Work Novo mesto (Association or DRPDNM), Humanitarno društvo Pravo za vse (Pravo za vse), Caritas Slovenia (Caritas), SKUP – Community of Private Institutes (SKUP), the Legal Information Centre for NGOs (PIC), the Peace Institute (MI) and the Slovenian Federation of Pensioners’ Associations (ZDUS). As previously reported, it was decided at the end of 2014 that a special NPM unit would be established in 2015, which would not review individual initiatives, but only perform visits and other NPM duties. This work method continued in 2017. The two activities of the Ombudsman (preventive, including NPM duties, and reactive, including the review of individual initiatives) were thus separated. The need for this separation is explicitly stipulated in Item 32 of the Guidelines on National Preventive Mechanisms by the SPT,4 adopted in Geneva in November 2010, which determine that “where the body designated as the NPM performs other functions in addition to those under the Optional Protocol, its NPM functions should be located within a separate unit or department, with its own staff and budget”. The operation of a separate internal organisational unit of the Ombudsman, which focuses exclusively on the duties and powers of the NPM, was also stipulated in 2017 by Article 50c of the Act Amending the Human Rights Ombudsman Act – ZVarCP-B (Official Gazette of the RS, No. 54/17 as of 29 September 2017). It further stipulates that the work of the NPM should be managed by the Deputy Ombudsman, authorised by the Ombudsman for a specific period. The decision to make this division of the Ombudsman’s activities was found to be appropriate. The implementation of the duties and powers of the NPM is now much more organised and effective, which is also reflected in the number of visits to different locations (for example, 39 visits under the role of the NPM were conducted in 2014, 67 in 2015, and as many as 80 in 2016 and 2017). The improved organisation of work also contributes to better preparation for individual visits, their implementation, and the drafting of reports on the visits. More visits also incur higher costs (for the 3 Official Gazette of the RS, No. 92/2014 as of 19 December 2014. 4 Available at: http://www.ohchr.org/EN/HRBodies/OPCAT/Pages/NationalPreventiveMechanisms.aspx. 6 IMPLEMENTATION OF THE DUTIES AND POWERS OF THE NPM IN 2017 NATIONAL PREVENTIVE MECHANISM UNDER THE OPTIONAL PROTOCOL TO THE UN CONVENTION AGAINST TORTURE AND OTHER CRUEL, INHUMAN OR DEGRADING TREATMENT OR PUNISHMENT