performance. This could, for example, be a focus on gender, children, legal frameworks, rehabilitation or documentation of torture. These members have no formal prerogative to address their issues of interest, but due to their often strong knowledge and focus on clearly defined issues, they may have a larger influence on the outcome of the State review in this particular area than members with other interests. To give an example, if a Committee member is an expert in torture rehabilitation and continuously addresses this issue during State reviews, it is likely that the other members will give weight to his/her views when developing recommendations in this area. The State is not obliged to consult with any external stakeholders, such as NGOs, during the review cycle. However, when States conduct broad and open stakeholder consultations in connection with the different stages of the reporting cycle, it often results in a more constructive dialogue with NGOs and Committee members since many critical issues will already have been discussed directly with national NGOs. Practically, a majority of the States who appear before the Committee undertake some form of external stakeholder consultations. Further, the Committee often questions the State delegation on their inclusion of NGOs in the preparation of its report. To avoid conflicts of interest, Committee members do not participate in the review of their own State. When addressing State representatives, it is important to distinguish between those that are mainly concerned with domestic policies and those that are concerned with foreign policies, notably from the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and from the Permanent Mission of the respective country to the UN in Geneva. The persons concerned with foreign policy are often more knowledgeable about the functioning of international human rights mechanisms like the CAT and their main purpose is to make the State look good internationally. These persons may be important bridge builders among NGOs, Committee members and those State representatives mainly concerned with domestic policies, who can have a tendency to protect these against external influence at any cost. State Representatives State representatives make a number of decisions throughout the review cycle, which also influence how likely NGOs are to achieve their objectives. These decisions can be grouped in two main categories: (i) the State approach to the dialogue with the Committee; and, (ii) the State approach to the involvement of external stakeholders including NGOs. It is for the State to decide how it will approach the dialogue with the Committee. This includes the process for drafting the State report; which representatives will be present for the hearing in Geneva; and how it will implement the recommendations of the Committee. These decisions have a significant impact on whether the objectives of a quality constructive dialogue will be achieved since the State can either focus on creating a political dialogue or a technical dialogue with the Committee. The Committee’s secretariat Staff in the Committee’s secretariat are professionals who are tasked with servicing the Committee in its work. They, thus, have no decision-making power in a State review. Their main task is to prepare and Engaging with State reviews in the UN Committee against Torture: A practical guide 13