OSCE/ODIHR Opinion on the Draft Law Amending and Supplementing the Ombudsman Act of Bulgaria 7. Specific Provisions pertaining to NPM 36. Pursuant to Article 4 of the OPCAT, any State Party shall allow the NPM to visit “any place under [each State Party’s] jurisdiction and control 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”. Article 28a par 1 of the Ombudsman Act states that the competences of the NPM concerns “places with persons deprived of liberty, or detained or accommodated pursuant to an act or with the consent of a state authority, which cannot be left at their will”, which is a more restrictive wording. It is recommended to amend the Ombudsman Act to ensure that the content of Article 28a is consistent with the requirements of Article 4 of the OPCAT. 37. Additionally, paragraph 29 of the NPM Guidelines sets out that “[t]he State should inform the NPM of any draft legislation that may be under consideration which is relevant to its mandate and allow the NPM to make proposals or observations on any existing or draft policy or legislation. The State should take into consideration any proposals or observations on such legislation received from the NPM”. It is suggested that the Ombudsman Act, and/or other relevant legislation, is amended to reflect the responsibility of the legislator to inform the NPM of any draft legislation in its area of competence. 8. Other Comments 38. Currently, Bulgaria has two institutions listed as NHRIs with B Status by GANHRI, namely the Ombudsman of the Republic of Bulgaria and the Commission for the Protection against Discrimination of the Republic of Bulgaria.64 If there is more than one NHRI in the country or where another institution exists that also deals with issues related to human rights and could touch upon the mandate of the NHRI (e.g. an election commission), it is particularly important to, as far as possible, avoid duplication of work.65 The Paris Principles require NHRIs to “maintain consultation with the other bodies, whether jurisdictional or otherwise, responsible for the promotion and protection of human rights”.66 The SCA “recommends that NHRIs should develop, formalize and maintain regular, constructive and systematic working relationships with other domestic institutions and actors established for the promotion and protection of human rights. Interaction may include the sharing of knowledge, such as research studies, best practices, training programmes, statistical information and data, and general information on its activities”.67 In light of this, the Ombudsman may consider formalizing its relationship by outlining the division of competencies, and the modalities of cooperation with the Commission for Protection against Discrimination, e.g. through a Memorandum of Understanding. 39. In addition to the recommendations made in pars. 19, 21 and 35 supra, the Ombudsman is encouraged to make the Office’s Rules of Procedure consistent with the Ombudsman Act after adoption of the Draft Amendments, in order to 64 65 66 67 See http://www.ohchr.org/Documents/Countries/NHRI/Chart_Status_NIs.pdf. UNDP-OHCHR Toolkit, op. cit. footnote 4, page 145. See Section C(f) of the Paris Principles. See General Observation 1.5. 15