CAT/OP/KGZ/2 78. The Subcommittee highly recommends that the national preventive mechanism, as a matter of priority, prepare a comprehensive methodology and strategy on prevention of reprisals and ensure that its staff are familiar with the content and how to implement it. The approach should be focused on prevention, confidentiality and the principle of do no harm. 79. The Subcommittee recommends that the national preventive mechanism always consider there to be a risk of intimidation, sanctions or reprisals and, therefore, that it take steps to address that risk. As a preventive measure, the issues of possible reprisal should always be mentioned. In addition to the precautions mentioned above, the mechanism should warn the authorities that any kind of reprisal is impermissible and will be reported, and that the mechanism will follow up in order to satisfy itself that those responsible have been subjected to appropriate penalties. The mechanism should also, inter alia, undertake preventive follow-up visits. 3. After the visit (a) Post-visit reports 80. The Subcommittee took note with satisfaction of the established, although not envisioned in the law, practice of the national preventive mechanism to draft reports destined for the relevant authorities two to seven days following the visit to a place of deprivation of liberty. 81. While the Subcommittee encourages this practice, it notes that the report of the joint visit conducted with the Subcommittee contained an excessive amount of factual information and focused on the mechanism’s findings on minor issues rather than a reflection of the more systemic findings of the visit. The recommendations formulated in the visit report did not necessarily reflect those findings. Moreover, the report did not contain an assessment of the degree to which the detention facility had implemented the recommendations of the previous visit. 82. The Subcommittee recommends that the national preventive mechanism continue with the practice of preparing a report with concerns and recommendations after each visit conducted (CAT/OP/12/5, paras. 36–37). If the mechanism deems it appropriate under its mandate, it may release the report as a public document, while ensuring the confidentiality of any personal data.18 83. The Subcommittee recommends that the national preventive mechanism train its members on reporting techniques, formulation of recommendations and follow-up strategies. It should be borne in mind that each visit report should focus on prevention, on clearly highlighting any problems that exist and on proposing solutions in the form of practical recommendations. The recommendations must be concrete and wellfounded, should be directed towards developing practicable preventive measures to deal with shortcomings in systems and practices, and should also take account of the relevant national and international norms in the field of prevention of torture and other ill-treatment, including recommendations of the Subcommittee. Following the transmittal of the report, the mechanism should develop a strategy for following up on the recommendations and using the report as a platform for dialogue with the authorities of the visited institution as well as with the relevant ministries. (b) Annual reporting 84. The Subcommittee observes that the national preventive mechanism has refrained from publishing its annual reports that have not been heard by the parliament. The Subcommittee is also unclear as to the procedures followed by the mechanism in preparing its annual reports. 85. Pursuant to article 23 of the Optional Protocol, the Subcommittee encourages the national preventive mechanism to consider ways in which it can publicize its 18 14 Article 21 of the Optional Protocol.