Guidebook 277 278 279 280 281 Reply to the project survey, Slovenia; reply to the project survey, Lithuania. Reply to the project survey, Croatia. International Consultation Workshop, Budapest, 12-13 February 2019. International Consultation Workshop, Budapest, 12-13 February 2019. European Network of National Human Rights Institutions (ENNHRI), ’Strategic Plan 20182021’, p 7; ENNHRI, ‘Strategic Plan 2014-2017’. 282 Interview with ENNHRI representative, 2 July 2018. 283 Interview with ENNHRI representative, 2 July 2018. 284 See also GANHRI, SCA GO, G.O. 1.2. 285 Interview with NHRI representative 2, Austria, 30 April 2018. 286 CRPD/C/1/Rev.1, Annex; SPT, ’Analytical Assessment tool for national preventive mechanisms’ (2016) CAT/OP/1/Rev.1, §para9(b). 287 SPT, CAT/C/57/4, Annex, para 14. 288 French representative, International Consultation Workshop, Budapest, 12-13 February 2019. 289 Polish Commissioner for Human Rights, Alternative Report to the seventh periodic report of the Republic of Poland on its implementation of the provisions of the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment for the period from 15 October 2011 to 15 September 2017, p 18 (hereinafter Poland, Alternative report). 290 Final Conference Report, Vienna, 24 October 2019.. 291 The Venice Principles, para 19 (1). 292 CRPD/C/1/Rev.1, Annex. 293 The Paris Principles, Art 3(a)(i). 294 Hungarian Commissioner for Fundamental Rights, Annual report on the activities conducted in 2017, p 211 (hereinafter: Hungary, Annual Report 2017). 295 SPT, CAT/OP/12/5 para 28 and 35; CAT/OP/1/Rev.1 para 40. 296 See in this regard SPT, Assessment Tool, 2016, para 40. Wouters/Meuwissen/Barros, ‘The European Union and National Human Rights Institutions’ in Wouters/Meuwissen (eds), The European Union And National Human Rights Institutions (Intersentia 2013) pp 198 ff. 297 Slovenian Ombudsman, Annual Report 2015, p 85. 298 Netherlands Institute for Human Rights, Annual Report 2018, p 33. 299 BIM, Enhancement impact study, 2015, p 62. 300 Polish Commissioner’s motion to the Minister of Justice from 26 April 2016, II.510.363.2016.VV. 301 Reply to the project survey. 302 e.g. The Polish Commissioner’s motion to the Minister of Justice from 5 June 2017, II.5150.9.2014; The Commissioner’s motion to the Prime Minister from 4 July 2018, II.5150.9.2014.MM. 303 e.g. The Polish Commissioner’s motion to the Police Commander in Chief Representative on Human Rights from 29 April 2016, II.5150.9.2014.MK; the Commissioner’s motion to the Police Commander in Chief Representative on Human Rights from 29 April 2016, II.5150.9.2014.MK. 304 Croatia: Art 6 Ombudsman Act of 3 July 2012 (hereinafter Croatia: Ombudsman Act); Poland: Art 16 Act on the Commissioner for Human Rights of 15 July 1987 (hereinafter Poland: Commissioner's Act); Spain: Art 29 NHRI law; Lithuania: Art 19(11) Law on the Seimas Ombudsmen of 3 December 1998 NoVIII-950 (as last amended on 13 May 2010 – NoXI-808); Portugal: Art 20(3) Ombudsman law; Hungary: Art 1, Section 2, para 3, Act 142 FOOTNOTES 305 306 307 308 309 310 311 312 313 314 315 316 317 318 CXI of 2011 on the Commissioner for Fundamental Rights (hereinafter Hungary: Commissioner's Act). Austria (Art 139 (1) 5 and 6; Art 140a) however, not of laws (see Art 140Austrian Federal Constitution). Slovenian Ombudsman, Annual Report 2017, p 14. Judgement of the Constitutional Court from 25 November 2014, case no. K 54/13; see also Press Release after the Hearing, ‘Pre-Trial Detention; The Lack of the Possibility of Telephone Communication between a Person Detained Pending Trial and his/her Counsel for the Defence’. Poland, Alternative report p 18. Partners in this action were: Association for the Prevention of Torture (APT), National Bar Council, National Chambers of Attorneys, Kantar Millward Brown Agency, the Council of Europe, ODIHR/OSCE and Association for the Prevention of Torture in Geneva. Helsinki Foundation for Human Rights, ‘Constitutional Crisis In Poland – Attacks On The Independence Of The Constitutional Tribunal’ (2017). Bodnar at the Public Hearing on ‘The situation of the Rule of Law in Poland, in particular as regards the independence of the judiciary’, 20. November 2018; see also RPO przedstawia Informację o stanie praw człowieka i obywatela sejmowej komisji sprawiedliwości. Przewodniczący komisji przerywa jego wystąpienie, 18.July 2018; as well as Grzelak, ‘Choosing between two Evils: the Polish Ombudsman’s Dilemma’, Verfassungsblog 6 May 2018 (hereinafter Grzelak, 2018). e.g. Bodnar withdrew from the Constitutional Tribunal motion regarding the Act of 10 June 2017 on Counter-Terrorism Measures, 2 May 2018; see also: Grzelak, 2018. Poland (Art 16 point 2 Commissioner Act in connection with Art 83 Act on the Supreme Court from 8 December 2017). CRPD/C/1/Rev.1, AnnexSPT, ’Analytical Assessment tool for national preventive mechanisms’ (2016) CAT/OP/1/Rev.1, para 9(f). Reply to the project survey, Poland. It has published a monograph (see Kolendowska-Matejczuk, Konstytucyjne prawo do obrony: w działalności Rzecznika Praw Obywatelskich [Constitutional Right to Defence in the Activity of the Human Rights Defender] (Biuro Rzecznika Praw Obywatelskich 2013), which to a large extent, referred to certain aspects of the right of access to a lawyer (the book was published before Directive 2013/48/EU was adopted and as such it does not make any reference to it). Another joint publication (see Kolendowska-Matejczuk and Szwarc (eds), Prawo do obrony w postępowaniu penalnym: Wybrane aspekty [Selected aspects on the right to defence in penal procedure] (Biuro Rzecznika Praw Obywatelskich 2014)), which partly referred to the right to legal aid and right of access to a lawyer mentioning the Directive 2013/48/EU. The Polish Commissioner for Human Rights, People with intellectual and mental disabilities (2017), which mentions the Directive 2016/800 on procedural safeguards for children and Directive 2013/48/EU on the right of access to a lawyer as well as the Commission Recommendation 2013/C 378/02 on procedural safeguards for vulnerable persons. Officials from the Ministry of Justice, the police, Boarder Guard and representatives from the Estonian Union for Child Walfare as well as members of the advisory body to the Ombudsman for Children set up at the Chancellor´s Office. Reply to the project survey. The activity was conducted under the mandate of the ombuds institution for children. 143