strengthening the forces at work for the prevention of torture and other forms of ill-treatment. The CPT is also very pleased to note that, within the Council of Europe, the European Court of Human Rights makes increasing reference in its judgments to both the Committee’s standards and the specifc fndings in its visit reports. Nevertheless, the work of the CPT has not been immune to the increased instability in Europe and the economic crisis. Across the continent, austerity measures have been adopted which can be prejudicial to the vulnerable population that persons deprived of their liberty represent, and in particular as regards the conditions under which they are held. As already signalled in the 19th General Report, there are particular problems posed by unresolved confict zones, geographical areas where the CPT encounters difculties in exercising its mandate or is even prevented from doing so. These problems not only persist but even seem to be spreading. There is a clear need to redouble eforts to enable the Committee to carry out its monitoring role unimpeded in all such areas. The principle of co-operation enshrined in the Convention should form the basis for fnding, in good faith, solutions with the member states concerned, in the sole interest of upholding the protection of individuals against all forms of ill-treatment. Large numbers of irregular migrants arrive in Europe every year. Without minimising the challenges this poses for receiving countries, it is a fact that the treatment of foreign nationals deprived of their liberty under aliens legislation in certain parts of Europe is not acceptable, leading to situations that CPT reports have described as inhuman and degrading. General Report of the CPT, 2013-2014 ► Page 6 Another, more general, issue should be mentioned here. It is a matter of concern to the Committee that, in respect of several states parties, it has been obliged to repeat recommendations made in the context of earlier visits, having found no signifcant improvement or, in some cases, even a worsening of the situation. In the same vein, the responses of some states parties limit themselves to merely invoking the domestic legislative framework, whereas the CPT’s recommendations in question pointed to the need for practical improvements, policy changes or even the amendment of legislation. Clearly, the efectiveness of a preventive mechanism based on facts found during visits will depend very much on cooperation and meaningful dialogue with the states parties concerned. Fortunately, there are numerous examples of precisely that: of states parties taking CPT reports seriously and implementing concrete measures to remedy the problems found. Like other monitoring bodies, national or international, the CPT has also encountered situations where detained persons faced intimidation or retaliatory action on the part of the authorities before or after these persons were in contact with the CPT. Any such action is clearly incompatible with the obligations of the states parties under the Convention and strikes at the very heart of the preventive mechanism which the Committee embodies. This General Report contains a statement setting out the CPT’s position on the phenomena of intimidation and reprisals. Co-operation with the national authorities is central to the Convention, since the aim is to strengthen the protection of persons deprived of their liberty from illtreatment rather than to condemn states for abuses. Reports that are issued by the Committee are the starting point for an