Part II: Tools for an effective follow-up and implementation and other ill-treatment, particularly in relation to less ‘traditional’ places of deprivation of liberty such as psychiatric institutions, institutions for persons with disabilities, and juvenile centres. Others have stated that particularly in large countries, a broad cooperation with CSOs is difficult due to the many actors and a tailored interaction on a case-to-case basis would be more suitable. œœ Integration of civil society in the NPM The relationship between an NPM and CSOs depends in part on the extent to which the CSOs may be formally part of the NPM. In Slovenia, for example, CSOs (currently eight) are part of the NPM conducting visits and drafting reports and recommendations together with NPM staff of the Ombudsman office. In Croatia, two members of civil society and the academic community are part of the NPM and mainly participate in visits. In Austria, civil society experts are part of the NPM within the six regional visiting commissions. They are however not involved in the official communication with the authorities and are largely excluded from the follow-up measures taken by the Ombuds institution. In Denmark, the parliamentary Ombudsman has concluded formal agreements with the Danish Institute of Human Rights (the National Human Rights Institution) and the NGO DIGNITY (formerly the Rehabilitation and Research Centre for Torture Victims, to provide direct support in the delivery of the NPM mandate.203 These bodies provide direct practical assistance and advice to the NPM through essential specialist medical and human rights experts.204 Appointed staff from these three organisations form an OPCAT Working Group, which carries out the NPM mandate - both the inspection activity itself as well as the drafting of reports and statements concerning new legislation.205 In addition an OPCAT Advisory Council has been established to manage cooperation between these three bodies. The Council meets regularly to discuss OPCAT related issues.206 œœ Regular meetings with civil society Many NPMs also have regular meetings with CSOs, although these are usually not institutionalised but organised on an ad hoc basis. In Malta, the NPM not only exchanges information with CSOs but also specifically examines their reports. In Portugal the NPM has also participated in meetings organised by CSOs to present its mandate and work and discuss issues of concern. Interesting practices come from Poland and Slovenia. In Poland, CSOs have formed a Coalition for the Implementation of the OPCAT that meets annually with the NPM to share knowledge and experiences.207 Additionally, there are quarterly meetings with a selected NGO and irregular meetings with others. The Slovenian Ombudsman organises monthly meetings with all interested NGOs on different themes, including those of relevance to the NPM.208 The Estonian NPM stated that ‘there is a constant on-going (formal as well informal) exchange of information about the situation in closed institutions, actual topics and problems that need to be resolved etc., between members of NGOs and advisers of the Chancellor of Justice.’209 Additionally, the NPMs with advisory councils or inter-institutional working groups have established a forum for regular exchange with CSOs. The extent to which these meetings are used to discuss issues of follow-up, however, is not entirely clear. Overall, although it appeared from the consultations that NPMs recognise the importance of cooperating with CSOs, this cooperation does not always extend to supporting the NPM in the follow-up to See Denmark, Parliamentary Ombudsman, ‘OPCAT Tasks General Principles’ (2009). Ibid 1. 205 Ibid para 4.2. 206 See ibid para 4.1. 207 Poland, Human Rights Defender, Report on the activities of the Human Rights Defender on the activities of the National Preventive Mechanism in Poland in 2012 (2013) 10. 208 Slovenia, Human Rights Ombudsman of the Republic of Slovenia, Annual Report of the Human Rights Ombudsman of the Republic of Slovenia for 2013 (2014). 209 See CoE NPM Newsletter of April – May 2011: <http://www.coe.int/t/dghl/cooperation/capacitybuilding/Source/npm_ newsletter/npm_newsletter_no15-16.pdf> 203 204 - 71 -