CAT/OP/ARM/2 Expert Council, which does not foster team spirit when mechanism-related activities are undertaken. The Subcommittee believes that this undermines the functioning of the institution, jeopardizes the institutional credibility of the mechanism and is not conducive to the establishment of a credible, visible and effective mechanism for the prevention of torture in Armenia. 25. Nonetheless, the Subcommittee believes that making the necessary amendments to the legal framework of the national preventive mechanism, irrespective of the format of that framework (whether it is a separate piece of legislation or an amendment to the current one), will provide a definitive solution to the current legal and operational ambiguity. 26. The Subcommittee recommends that the national preventive mechanism take proactive steps to submit proposals and comments concerning its legal, institutional and structural framework. In conformity with the guidelines on the national preventive mechanisms, the Subcommittee recommends clearly separating the activities and functions of the mechanism from those of the Human Rights Defender’s Office (see CAT/OP/12/5, para. 32). 1. Visibility and identification 27. The Subcommittee believes that the visibility of the national preventive mechanism could be improved by it being a completely separate institution from the Human Rights Defender’s Office, especially since persons deprived of their liberty and civil society organizations do not perceive the mechanism as independent. The Subcommittee is of the view that the mechanism’s lack of visibility may have a detrimental effect on its efficiency and credibility. 28. The Subcommittee is concerned about the confusion between the roles of the national preventive mechanism and those of the NGOs that make up the Expert Council. The mechanism should be clearly identified in all visits, meetings, written communications with the authorities, places of detention and other institutions. All members of the mechanism and the experts participating in its activities should refrain from taking up any role other than the one assigned to them for the fulfilment of the mandate of the mechanism. 29. The Subcommittee recommends that the national preventive mechanism enhance its institutional visibility through public awareness campaigns and other promotional activities. The Subcommittee also recommends producing material on the mechanism’s mandate and activities and distributing it in places of deprivation of liberty and among civil society at large, clearly identifying such materials as having been produced by the mechanism. Finally, the national preventive mechanism should disseminate its annual reports, including by transmitting them to the Subcommittee, as provided for and for the purposes set out in the Optional Protocol (see CAT/OP/12/5, para. 40). 2. Resources 30. The lack of financial resources, despite not being the national preventive mechanism’s responsibility, is a major obstacle for its efficient functioning. 31. The Subcommittee recommends that, in evaluating the financial needs of the national preventive mechanism, account be taken of all the activities mandated under the Optional Protocol. In that connection, the continuous problem of insufficient resources, including of staff, will be raised by the Subcommittee in its final report to the State party. In its report, the Subcommittee will highlight that it is only by solving the problems connected with resources that the State party will be able to create the preconditions necessary for an effective national preventive mechanism and, as such, fulfil its obligations under the Optional Protocol. 5