CAT/C/MKD/CO/3 the Ombudsman’s recommendations. The Committee notes with interest the statement by a representative of the State party that the parliament is considering amendments to the Law on the Ombudsman to enable the institution to obtain “A” status from the International Coordinating Committee of National Institutions for the Promotion and Protection of Human Rights. Nonetheless, it remains concerned that the Ombudsman has been given “B” status because its mandate does not include human rights promotion activities, staff (including deputies) appointed are not sufficiently diverse and it is not fully financially independent. The Committee is also concerned by criticism that the Ombudsman was only partially independent and does not operate in full compliance with the principles relating to the status of national institutions for the promotion and protection of human rights (the Paris Principles). Finally, the Committee is concerned that a civil society-based monitoring mechanism, which was in place until few years ago, has been discontinued by the State party. The State party should: (a) Strengthen the independent monitoring of places of deprivation of liberty by the Ombudsman by ensuring that it has access to and, in law and practice, can monitor and inspect all places of detention without prior notice. The State party should ensure that the Ombudsman reports publicly on its findings and raises with the authorities situations of detention conditions or conduct amounting to torture or ill-treatment; (b) Strengthen the Office of the Ombudsman and provide it with adequate human, material and financial resources, in line with the Paris Principles. Ensure that the proposed amendments to the Law on the Ombudsman fully reflect the recommendations for accreditation by the International Coordinating Committee of National Institutions for the Promotion and Protection of Human Rights SubCommittee on Accreditation and that, upon adoption, the amendments are promptly implemented; (c) The Committee recommends that the State party reinstate the monitoring of places of detention by civil society organizations as a supplement to the current monitoring by the Ombudsman. Training 21. While noting the information provided by the State party on training programmes organized for 559 professional staff from social work centres, health-care institutions, educational institutions, local self-government and civil society organizations, the Committee regrets the lack of information on the outcomes of those training programmes. The Committee is also concerned at the paucity of information on specific training programmes for officials involved in the custody, interrogation or treatment of any individual subjected to any form of arrest, detention or imprisonment. Furthermore, training programmes for medical personnel for the identification and documentation of cases of torture, as well as for the rehabilitation of victims, are reportedly inadequate. The Committee is also concerned that not all personnel dealing with persons deprived of liberty are provided with training on the Manual on the Effective Investigation and Documentation of Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment of Punishment (arts. 10 and 16). The State party should provide training programmes for all officials involved in the custody, interrogation or treatment of any individual subjected to any form of arrest, detention or imprisonment that focus on the State party’s obligations under the Convention. In particular, the State party should ensure that all the relevant personnel, including medical personnel, receive specific training on how to identify 9