ff making torture an extraditable offence, and assisting other States parties in connection with criminal proceedings brought in respect of torture (Articles 5, 7 and 8); ff taking alleged perpetrators into custody (Article 6); ff training of law enforcement and other relevant personnel (Article 10); ff the systematic review of rules, instructions, methods and practices of law enforcement activities (Article 11); ff the operation of an adequate complaints system (Article 13); ff the availability of fair and adequate compensation (article 14); and ff ensuring that any statement found to have been made as a result of torture is not admitted as evidence against victims (Article 15). This list is non-exhaustive and has been updated by the OPCAT. It incorporates universal minimum standards on monitoring arrangements in the form of a system of regular visits to places of detention by independent expert bodies, including national preventive mechanisms. The connection between the obligation to prevent ill-treatment and the duty to investigate has been expressly underlined by the CAT, with an emphasis upon state representatives and the anti-terror context: “The Committee emphasizes that the State’s obligation to prevent torture also applies to all persons who act, de jure or de facto, in the name of, in conjunction with, or at the behest of the State party. It is a matter of urgency that each State party should closely monitor its officials and those acting on its behalf and should identify and report to the Committee any incidents of torture or ill-treatment as a consequence of anti-terrorism measures, among others, and the measures taken to investigate, punish, and prevent further torture or ill-treatment in the future, with particular attention to the legal responsibility of both the direct perpetrators and officials in the chain of command, whether by acts of instigation, consent or acquiescence.”22 The European human rights treaties are less specific, leaving modalities open. The CPT guidance is therefore instructive. Its views as to other components of the proactive approach are illustrated in its 14th General report: “26. Positive action is required, through training and by example, to promote a culture where it is regarded as unprofessional – and unsafe from a career path standpoint – to work and associate with colleagues who have resort to 22. General Comment N2, CAT/C/GC/2, para.7. Explanatory note ► Page 21