Independence of National Preventive Mechanisms (NPMs) 4.4 Conclusions Having reviewed the relevant legal bases and the manner in which the NCPT functions, the authors of the legal opinion conclude that the administrative status of the Commission, as the Swiss NPM, does not fulfil the criteria required for functional independence within the meaning of OPCAT Art. 18(1). They view this as evidence of a structural disregard for the principle of functional independence, which is causally linked to the attachment of the NCPT to the FDJP-GS.80 Notwithstanding the fact that the Commission’s independence is anchored in administrative law and the fact that it is accordingly not subordinate to direction, it is evident that administrative attachment to the FDJP-GS is prejudicial to the NCPT’s appearance of independence, in particular with regard to its monitoring activities in connection with of deprivation of liberty measures for which the Confederation and, in particular, the FDJP are responsible. The situation is further aggravated by the difficulties mentioned in connection with the Commission’s financial autonomy. There is no doubt that the NCPT, as a national preventive mechanism, must be institutionally embedded. The manner in which it is institutionally embedded, however, must be largely consistent with the prescriptions of the OPCAT and ensure, to the greatest extent possible, that the NCPT remains functionally independent, so that its efficacy and effectiveness are not impaired. However practical the administrative attachment of the NCPT to the FDJP-GS may appear from the Swiss perspective, the current situation is likely to meet with criticism internationally. In view of the expansion of the NCPT’s monitoring activities, this could in the long run become problematic. Were the SPT to visit Switzerland, it must be assumed that the administrative attachment of the NCPT would meet with censure.81 In exchanges with NMPs from other countries, with whom the NCPT maintains regular contacts, this question raises critical issues particularly in connection with fragile states. The prevention of torture is ranked by the FDFA as a matter of strategic priority in Switzerland’s foreign policy82 and the responsible directorate at the FDFA is actively Kälin/Nowak, p. 16. 80 See also Kälin/Nowak, p. 10. 81 FDFA Human Rights Strategy 2016-2019, p. 19. 82 Activity Report NCPT 2017 45