no complaints. Yet the OSCE, of all organisations, must be committed to the notion that international action can help to alleviate human rights problems. Accordingly, I venture to make a few proposals: 1. The OSCE could consider whether its virtual total reliance on interstate complaints mechanisms remains appropriate. Perhaps it should envisage an ex officio system, analogous to that found in the UN Torture Convention, whereby an OSCE body could investigate any apparent extensive practice of human rights violation, including torture and ill-treatment. 2. A high-level function, say, a Committee or Commissioner, could be established with a mandate to visit relevant states end engage in dialogue with their governments, with a view to promoting: a) full ratification by participating states of the UN Convention against Torture; b) withdrawal of reservations to Article 20 of the Convention; c) acceptance of the optional individual and (for the sake of completeness ) interstate complaints procedures under Articles 22 and 21 of the Convention respectively; d) ratification of Protocol 1 of the European Convention for the Prevention of Torture which would permit states not members of the Council of Europe to become parties to the Convention; and e) once d) is achieved, full ratification of that Convention by OSCE participating states. About the Author Nigel S. Rodley is Professor of Law in the University of Essex, United Kingdom; also United Nations Commission on Human Rights Special Rapporteur on Torture. The opinions expressed herein are his own and should not be attributed to any organisation or official function. 14 OSCE ODIHR Bulletin Vol. 4 No. 3