Influencing the review General approach to engaging with treaty bodies The CAT State review process is implemented as a dialogue between independent experts (the Committee members) and representatives of the State under review. The main objective of this review must always be that it has a positive influence on the enjoyment of human rights on the ground in the State concerned. Since the State will ultimately be the one responsible for realising this objective, it is important that the review and the Concluding Observations are of the highest possible quality and that these are made in a constructive atmosphere that does not unnecessarily antagonise the State. This entails that: 1. the review is conducted on the basis of accurate and reliable information and adequately addresses all relevant issues of concern within the mandate of the Committee; and, 2. Committee members and State representatives participate actively in a constructive dialogue about the issues of concern. These two process objectives are not easy to reconcile since many States see even the slightest criticism as an illegitimate attack on their sovereignty. Nevertheless, it is important that all possible efforts are made to achieve both objectives since States who feel that the Concluding Observations are a result of an illegitimate process are less likely to subsequently initiate a genuine process of implementation. NGOs wishing to promote a strong outcome of the State review must therefore work with the Committee, as well as State representatives, to ensure the best possible outcome. The above-mentioned objectives relate to the process of the review, and they are thus applicable to all CAT State reviews. In addition to these, each organisation that decides to get involved in the State review process must establish clear objectives for what it wishes to achieve in terms of substantive outcomes of the review. These objectives will largely depend on the domestic situation and the focus and priorities of the individual organisations. However, there are a few general considerations to keep in mind when establishing these objectives: 1. The outcome must have a realistic chance of instigating or promoting domestic change in policy or practice. 2. The review conducted by the Committee is technical rather than political in nature. It is thus possible to aim for some fairly detailed and concrete recommendations, such as proposing changes to specific legislation or practice. This also means that objectives that are politically highly contentious may be difficult to achieve through a State review. 3. Evaluate how different outputs can contribute to the achievement of your Engaging with State reviews in the UN Committee against Torture: A practical guide 11