Part I: Basis for an effective follow-up constructive dialogue. These principles must guide all aspects of the mandate of NPMs including any follow-up and monitoring of the implementation of NPM recommendations. 3.1 A preventive approach An NPM is a preventive body and this shapes its working methodology and engagement with the state and other relevant stakeholders. This preventive approach has implications not only for the way an NPM issues its recommendations, but also for their content as well as the NPM’s role with respect to follow-up. The overall purpose of an NPM is to contribute to the improved treatment of persons deprived of their liberty. A preventive approach implies: • that action is taken before torture and ill-treatment occur, with a view to proactively creating an environment where torture is less likely to happen; • a holistic view focusing on the root causes of torture and the complex factors allowing torture to happen rather than on the individual level of violations. The UN Committee against Torture (CAT Committee) understands the obligation of prevention as ‘wideranging’48 and the ‘understanding of and recommendations in respect of effective measures (…) in a process of continual evolution.’49 Indeed, article 2(1) CAT requires that ‘Each State Party shall take effective legislative, administrative, judicial or other measures to prevent acts of torture in any territory under its jurisdiction’. Thus the SPT has maintained that the obligation to prevent torture and other ill-treatment cannot be defined in abstracto but rather concluded: [T]he prevention of torture and ill-treatment embraces – or should embrace – as many as possible of those things which in a given situation can contribute towards the lessening of the likelihood or risk of torture or ill-treatment occurring. Such an approach requires not only that there be compliance with relevant international obligations and standards in both form and substance but that attention also be paid to the whole range of other factors relevant to the experience and treatment of persons deprived of their liberty and which by their very nature will be context specific.50 In this sense, the SPT has emphasised that the prevalence of torture is influenced by numerous factors such as ‘the general level of enjoyment of human rights and the rule of law, levels of poverty, social exclusion, corruption, discrimination’51 and highlighted that the SPT must engage with the broader regulatory and policy frameworks relevant to the treatment of persons deprived of their liberty and with those responsible for them. Additionally, the SPT has stressed that the availability of procedural safeguards play a key role for effective prevention.52 Therefore, a preventive approach requires a holistic, sensitive and deep understanding of the context in which an NPM is located. From such a perspective, NPMs have the possibility to gather the relevant data to understand the structural causes of torture and ill-treatment, going beyond the consideration of its symptoms.53 The NPM must therefore look at all levels where the causes might be found, including the broader legal, policy and institutional frameworks. Moreover, an NPM must have a clear vision and understanding of its role and what it wants to achieve. The adoption of a preventive approach thus requires thorough reflections on, and awareness of, the role and responsibilities on the part of the preventive body as well as the establishment of adequate processes UN Committee Against Torture (CAT Committee) ‘General Comment No. 2: implementation of article 2 by States parties’ (24 January 2008) UN Doc CAT/C/GC/2, para 3 [hereinafter: CAT Committee, UN Doc CAT/C/GC/2]. 49 Ibid para 4. 50 SPT ‘The approach of the Subcommittee on Prevention of Torture to the concept of prevention of torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment under the Optional Protocol to the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment’ (30 December 2010) UN Doc CAT/OP/12/6, para 3 [hereinafter: SPT, UN Doc CAT/OP/12/6]. 51 Idib para 5. 52 Ibid para 5(c). 53 See also APT, Regional Forum in Latin America (2014) 42. 48 - 28 -