CAT/OP/SEN/CNPMRO/1 26. Reply: The Observatory agrees with this recommendation. It is also of the view that interviews should focus on aspects relevant to prevention and be conducted in an atmosphere that instils trust in interviewees, in order to allow them to express themselves freely. The Subcommittee recalls that the purpose of interviews is to assist the national preventive mechanism in understanding the situation of persons deprived of their liberty and determining the best way of reducing cases of torture and ill-treatment. If other problems are raised during an interview, the Observatory should draw the detainee’s attention to the available mechanisms and remedies and direct him or her to them. It would also be advisable for any complaints received during a visit to be transmitted to the competent mechanism, such as the ombudsman. 27. Reply: The Observatory duly notes that, if other problems are raised during an interview, it should draw the detainee’s attention to the available mechanisms and remedies and direct him or her to them, and will ensure compliance with this recommendation, where necessary. The Observatory notes that it might need to broaden its scope in terms of the range of competent national mechanisms to which individual complaints may be referred. In the past, in view of the nature of the allegations referred to it, the Observatory has transmitted individual complaints to the competent judicial authorities and ensured follow-up until the resolution of those complaints. The Observatory considers that, by giving the example of the Office of the Ombudsman, the Subcommittee is encouraging it to diversify the range of competent national mechanisms that might be called upon to resolve complaints and to avoid focusing solely on the judicial authorities. Since registers enable a reading of reality at the place concerned, the Subcommittee recommends that the Observatory refine its register-checking strategy with the aim of focusing on prevention. 28. Reply: The Observatory agrees with this recommendation and regrets the inadequacy of its financial, material and human resources, which is an obstacle to a more rational organization of its work that would allow it to secure the services of specialists for a more in-depth handling of all relevant issues. In general, all contact with persons deprived of their liberty should remain confidential, in other words, out of the sight and hearing of third parties. The Subcommittee underlines the importance of the principle of confidentiality in the Observatory’s working methods. It is of the highest importance that the Observatory’s teams always bear this principle in mind and integrate it into their work in order to avoid exposing detainees, professionals or any other person to potential reprisal of any kind. Furthermore, the relationship between members of the Observatory’s delegation and prison officials should be strictly professional in order to strengthen the officials’ perception that the Observatory is independent. 29. Reply: The Observatory takes due note of this recommendation, while pointing out that it takes special care to observe the principle of confidentiality in its working methods. It agrees that the relationship between members of the Observatory and prison officials must be strictly professional. However, in order to foster a constructive dialogue with the prison administration, it is important to adopt an attitude that is in keeping with national customs and traditions; this in no way undermines objectivity. The Subcommittee recommends that the Observatory always consider that there is a risk of intimidation, sanctions or reprisals and therefore take steps to address that risk. In addition to taking the necessary precautions, the Observatory should warn the authorities that reprisals of any kind are inadmissible, that the authorities will be informed of reprisals and that the Observatory will monitor the situation to ensure that those responsible for reprisals are duly punished. 30. Reply: The Observatory agrees with this recommendation and wishes to specify that, in accordance with its visiting methodology, it systematically reminds those in charge of the places visited, during its final interview with them, that all forms of reprisals are prohibited. The members of the Observatory should also inform interviewees that they can report any reprisals taken against them following the visit, and encourage them to do so. If necessary, follow-up visits should be conducted. GE.21-03421 7