CAT/C/48/3 have been made public at the request of those States parties. The Subcommittee has provided its own responses and/or recommendations to the submissions of Benin, Lebanon, Mauritius and Sweden, while a follow-up visit was undertaken to Paraguay, with a followup visit report transmitted to the State party. Both the follow-up visit report and the followup reply have been made public following requests from Paraguay in May and June 2011. Reminders were also sent to States parties that have not yet provided replies to the Subcommittee visit reports. It should be noted that the six-month deadline for submission of replies had not expired for Liberia, Ukraine and Brazil during the reporting period. The substantive aspects of the dialogue process arising from visits are governed by the rule of confidentiality and are only made public with the consent of the State party in question. E. Developments concerning the establishment of national preventive mechanisms 17. Out of 61 States parties, 28 have officially notified the Subcommittee of the designation of their NPMs, information concerning which is listed on the Subcommittee’s website. 18. Two official notifications of designation were transmitted to the Subcommittee in 2011: the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia and Serbia. It should be noted that, in the cases of Chile, Mali, Mauritius, Senegal and Uruguay, the designated bodies have not yet commenced their functioning as NPMs. 19. Thirty-three States parties have therefore not yet notified the Subcommittee of the designation of their NPMs. The one-year deadline for the establishment of an NPM provided for under article 17 of the Optional Protocol has not yet expired for five States parties (Bulgaria, Pakistan, Panama, Tunisia and Turkey). Furthermore, four States parties (Bosnia and Herzegovina, Kazakhstan, Montenegro and Romania) have made declarations under article 24 of the Optional Protocol permitting them to delay designation for up to an additional two years. 20. Twenty-five States parties have therefore not complied with their obligation under article 17, which is a matter of major concern to the Subcommittee. It should, however, be noted that the Subcommittee understands that four States parties (Armenia, Croatia, Nigeria and Ukraine) have designated NPMs, but that it has not yet been officially notified thereof. 21. The Subcommittee has continued its dialogue with all States parties which have not yet designated their NPMs, encouraging them to inform the Subcommittee of their progress. Such States parties were requested to provide detailed information concerning their proposed NPMs (such as legal mandate, composition, size, expertise, financial and human resources at their disposal, and frequency of visits, etc.). 22. The Subcommittee has also established and maintained contact with NPMs themselves, in fulfilment of its mandate under article 11 (b) of the Optional Protocol. At its thirteenth session, the Subcommittee held a meeting with the Estonian NPM in order to exchange information and experiences and discuss areas for future cooperation. At its fourteenth session, the Subcommittee held a similar meeting with the Georgian NPM. Finally, at its fifteenth session, the Subcommittee held a meeting with the Honduras (meeting supported by the Association for the Prevention of Torture (APT)) and Costa Rican NPMs. During this session, it also held a meeting with the Senegalese authorities in order to discuss measures taken to enable the designated NPM to become operational. The Subcommittee is also pleased that 18 NPMs have transmitted their annual reports during 2011, which have been posted on its website. 6