CAT/OP/ECU/2 psychiatric institutions, social welfare homes, detention centres under military jurisdiction, clandestine clinics that “treat” homosexuality, etc., in order to provide the greatest possible protection to persons deprived of their liberty. The Subcommittee recalls that article 4 of the Optional Protocol covers private establishments from which a person is not permitted to leave at will with the consent or acquiescence of a public authority. The Subcommittee recommends that the national preventive mechanism continue to mainstream a gender perspective into all its activities. During the visits 52. The Subcommittee noted that during its visits to both the National Police Provisional Detention Centre in Quito and the centre of deprivation of liberty in Cotopaxi, the members of the national preventive mechanism introduced themselves correctly to the authorities in the places of detention, explaining their mandate, and the purpose of their visit and placing emphasis on the principle of confidentiality. The Subcommittee observed that the national preventive mechanism staff engaged in a constructive dialogue with the directors of the establishment, who were familiar with the work of the mechanism. 53. The Subcommittee was pleased to note that, when talking to persons deprived of their liberty, the members of the national preventive mechanism explained the purpose of their visit to them and asked for their consent to the interview, clarifying its confidential and voluntary nature. 54. The Subcommittee believes that it would be good practice to hand out an information brochure to the interviewees which explains the mandate and working methods of the national preventive mechanism and provides contac t information. The Subcommittee recommends that the mechanism should produce such a brochure. The brochure should also state that persons deprived of their liberty can report to the mechanism any reprisals taken against them for having been in contact with the national preventive mechanism. 55. Private interviews with persons deprived of their liberty are a fundamental aspect of preventive visits and are specifically authorized by the Optional Protocol. As a rule, and unless there are substantive reasons for doing otherwise, the Subcommittee recommends that the national preventive mechanism conduct individual, private interviews with persons deprived of their liberty and employees of the institution in question, including medical personnel. 56. The Subcommittee noted that the national preventive mechanism staff have been trained to interview persons deprived of their liberty and succeeded in establishing rapport with them by listening actively and asking specific questions. The Subcommittee took note that the national preventive mechanism teams used checklists and in-house questionnaires during the interviews to ensure that all important aspects were covered. The interviewers also conducted the interviews in such a way that the persons deprived of their liberty could feel at ease and speak spontaneously. 57. The Subcommittee witnessed group and individual interviews. In the National Police Provisional Detention Centre in Quito, the Subcommittee observed a group interview which allowed the team to identify common problems, identify the informal leaders and obtain an idea of the group’s overall state of mind. The team was able to manage the 30-person group with authority, establishing rules for taking turns to speak from the outset. The Subcommittee noted, however, that the national preventive mechanism has no security protocols, which gave rise to potentially dangerous situations for the team. For example, in one of the wards, the team conducted a group interview at the end of a long, narrow corridor where the te am members were GE.15-11962 13/20