CAT/OP/HUN/2 16. The Subcommittee urges the national preventive mechanism, in close cooperation with the State party, to review the legal framework in which the mechanism operates and bring it into full conformity with all relevant international norms and guidelines, with a view to resolving any existing or potential issues that may prevent the mechanism from carrying out its mandate effectively. The practical needs and the operability of the mechanism must be also taken into account. 17. The Subcommittee recommends that the national preventive mechanism be enabled, by means of legislation, to effectively perform its core functions, as stipulated by the Optional Protocol. 18. The Subcommittee also recommends that the national preventive mechanism carry out a mapping exercise to assess the range of activities it ought to undertake in accordance with the Optional Protocol, the Paris Principles, the Subcommittee’s guidelines on national preventive mechanisms and the analytical assessment tool for national preventive mechanisms (see CAT/OP/1/Rev.1), and compare it to the current structure and activities of the mechanism. 19. The Subcommittee further recommends that the national preventive mechanism carry out a review of the existing legal acts governing its functioning, in order to have a full overview of all those aspects that must be revised to enable the mechanism to carry out its mandate effectively. The mechanism must be involved in the drafting of any resulting amendments, in close cooperation with the Ministry of Justice. Furthermore, the mechanism, together with the authorities, must work proactively to find ways to increase its efficiency and independence. 2. Human and financial resources 20. According to the provisions of Act CXLIII of 2011, the work of the national preventive mechanism is to be performed by at least 11 staff members of the Office of the Commissioner for Fundamental Rights. 4 At the time of the Subcommittee’s visit, the mechanism was composed of nine staff members: two medical positions were currently vacant. 21. The Subcommittee is concerned that only nine staff members have been assigned to perform tasks related to the national prevention mechanism’s mandate, a situation that affects the ability of the mechanism to fully carry out its mandate under the Optional Protocol. The goal of an effective system of regular visits to all the places of deprivation of liberty located in the State party cannot be achieved if human resources are limited and medical positions are left vacant. Moreover, the mechanism should have full operational autonomy with regard to recruitment of its staff, including medical staff, which is not currently the case. According to representatives of the mechanism, there were legal caveats hindering the recruitment of medical personnel in that all mechanism staff had to be civil servants, whereas, in Hungary, doctors could not be civil servants. 22. The Subcommittee is also concerned that a lack of financial resources presents a major obstacle to the effective and efficient functioning of the national preventive mechanism. Although the Office of the Commissioner for Fundamental Rights was designated as the national preventive mechanism of Hungary, it has not subsequently been allocated sufficient resources to enable it to perform this additional role. The Subcommittee is further concerned that the failure to allocate the necessary resources seems to be due to the fact that the Hungarian authorities do not consider that the mechanism requires additional support to carry out its mandate effectively. This is a misconception that the mechanism needs to address urgently. 23. The Subcommittee recalls that any assessment of the financial requirements of the national preventive mechanism must take into account all the mechanism’s mandated activities under the Optional Protocol, including, where necessary, the provision of interpretation in order to communicate with detained migrants. 4 See Act CXI of 2011 on the Commissioner for Fundamental Rights, chap. III/A, sect. 39 (D) (3). 5