A/HRC/7/3/Add.2 page 93 474. The Government has been providing compensation to the victim of torture as directed by the court of law. Compensation packages depend on what the Government can afford. They are provided only after the final court verdict and therefore may sometimes appear to be slow. The government has already provided Rupees (Rs.) 1,625,000 as financial aid to 12 victims who were recommended by the National Human Rights Commission (see A/HRC/4/33/Add.2, para. 459). 475. The Government provides medical treatment to prisoners. 476. Recommendation (l) stated: The declaration be made with respect to article 22 of the Convention against Torture recognizing the competence of the Committee against Torture to receive and consider communications from individuals who claim to be victims of a violation of the provisions of the Convention; 477. Recommendation (m) stated: The Optional Protocol to the Convention against Torture be ratified and a truly independent monitoring mechanism established to visit all places where persons are deprived of their liberty throughout the country; 478. The Optional Protocol has yet to be ratified and an independent monitoring mechanism has yet to be set up. These issues were discussed at a meeting organised by the Association for the Prevention of Torture in September in which civil society and state officials participated but no progress has been made yet. 479. The Government informed that it is considering accession to the Optional Protocol to the Convention against Torture. 480. Recommendation (n) stated: The appointments to the National Human Rights Commission, in the absence of Parliament, be undertaken through a transparent and broadly consultative process; 481. Under the Interim Constitution, the NHRC was transformed into a constitutional body. In early September 2007, a Parliamentary hearing confirmed the nomination of five individuals as commissioners, who had been named by the Constitutional Council. Although there were concerns expressed that the appointments procedures themselves did not match international standards, OHCHR noted that the appointments were a very important opportunity for the NHRC to develop into an independent, credible and effective institution that works for the human rights of all Nepalese. As a result of the appointments, the NHRC has stepped up its activities. The work of the NHRC had been seriously hampered for many months due to delays in appointing new commissioners since the previous commissioners appointed under the King’s regime resigned in June 2006. As a result, the International Coordinating Committee (ICC) which monitors the status of national human rights institutions had also put under review the NHRC’s accreditation to the ICC. However, in the light of the appointments and other progress made, the ICC, in October 2007, restored the ‘A’ status accreditation, with observations about certain issues that are still to be resolved and which will be reconsidered in October 2008. These include adequate funding and