CAT/C/SVK/CO/3 National human rights institution 16. The Committee is concerned that the Slovak National Centre for Human Rights does not have a sufficiently broad mandate. It is also concerned at the non-transparency of its recruitment procedure, the lack of diversity in its staff, and its insufficient degree of immunity and independence. The Committee recommends that the State party amend the relevant legislation, with a view to strengthening the mandate and independence of the Slovak National Centre for Human Rights in order to bring it into full compliance with the principles relating to the status of national institutions for the promotion and protection of human rights (Paris Principles) and take steps to ensure the provision of sufficient financial and human resources to enable the Centre to carry out its mandate independently and effectively. Non-refoulement and use of diplomatic assurances 17. The Committee is concerned that the State party does not fully comply with its obligations under article 3 of the Convention with regard to respect of the principle of nonrefoulement. It is also concerned that the State party has accepted diplomatic assurances in relation to the extradition of persons from its territory to States where their life or personal integrity could be threatened, including in the case of Anzor Chentiev (arts. 3 and 16). The Committee recommends that the State party: (a) Ensure that it complies fully with its obligations under article 3 of the Convention and that individuals under the State party’s jurisdiction receive appropriate consideration by the competent authorities and are guaranteed fair treatment at all stages of proceedings, including an opportunity for effective and impartial review by an independent decision-making mechanism on expulsion, return or extradition, with suspensive effect; (b) Fulfil its non-refoulement obligations and guarantee the right to appeal the issuance of an extradition warrant when there are substantial grounds for believing that a person would be at risk of being subjected to torture; (c) Refuse to accept diplomatic assurances in relation to the extradition of persons from its territory, since those assurances cannot be considered as a safeguard against torture or ill-treatment in States in which there are substantial grounds for believing that such persons would be in danger of being subjected to torture upon their return. Training 18. The Committee is concerned at the absence of specific methodologies to evaluate the effectiveness and impact of training and educational programmes provided to law enforcement personnel and other public officials on the provisions of the Convention that relate to reducing the number of cases of torture and ill-treatment. It is also concerned that training on the Manual on the Effective Investigation and Documentation of Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment of Punishment (the Istanbul Protocol) is not provided to all medical professionals dealing with persons deprived of liberty (art. 10). The State party should: (a) Develop and implement specific methodologies to assess the effectiveness and impact of training and educational programmes provided to law enforcement and other public officials on the provisions of the Convention; 7