         Drawing on lessons learned from other organisations that have used the international treaty body and thematic mechanism to good effect. Establish a broader coalition amongst NGOs, or at least joint meetings to be conducted in the country of origin for familiarisation of the issues. A strategy should be devised amongst the NGO group on the themes and issues to be raised. Even if joint reports are not feasible, nor desirable, agreement must be reached on prioritisation and framing of each issue. It is too late to leave this activity to a few days before or at the NGO/pre-session. References on issues or themes raised must be made in direct reference to the State report, wherever possible. Providing statistics on the numbers of victims concerned and other relevant statistics in presenting robust arguments, since reporting on the rights demands concrete information on the scope of the problem. Providing an introduction to the broader context in which the report takes place (e.g. post-conflict situation in Peru), including data on the numbers of people tortured and in need of rehabilitation. Preparing arguments which identify key issues in relation to specific rights, as well as attempting to link to other rights in a comprehensive and meaningful way to facilitate the questioning of the country delegations. Establishing and maintaining good contact with the treaty bodies and thematic mechanism secretariats to ensure positive and pragmatic support in pushing the aims of reporting on torture rehabilitation. Being aware that the NGO pre-session takes place two days before the initiation of the country-session where procedures are clarified. NGOs need to spend significant amount of time in Geneva, which raises the costs of participating substantially. Advocacy on right Case study in Peru to health and rehabilitation of torture survivors: An NSA initiative in Peru involved using information on rehabilitation of torture survivors and their experiences to develop advocacy to monitor the State in relation to obligations under the Convention of Economic, Social and Cultural Rights. The initiative resulted in mixed outcomes, summarised below. In March 2012 the IRCT submitted an alternative report to the Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (CESCR) in cooperation with a NSA project partner and member centre, Centro de Atención Psicosocial, Peru (CAPS). The advocacy intervention can be found at: http://www2.ohchr.org/english/bodies/cescr/docs/ngos/CAPS-IRCT_Peru48.pdf The report was an attempt to demonstrate how torture and ill-treatment constitutes a violation of the right to health, as well as of other economic, social and cultural rights. The initiative was the first attempt of its kind to access a UN treaty body other than CAT on behalf of torture victims. Specifically, the report addresses paragraph 23 of the list of issues prior to reporting on Peru, which states: “Please provide information on steps taken to improve access to and quality of health services, especially in rural and remote areas, including addressing economic, cultural and social barriers to such access.” Advocacy interventions included: 41