OSCE ODIHR Comments on the draft Law on the Protector of Human Rights and Freedoms of Montenegro 91. Finally, also to bring the relevant provisions of the draft Law in line with the requirements of the OPCAT, it is recommended to include in the draft Law the requirement to report on the Protector’s activities as a national preventive mechanism in a separate section of the annual report under Article 50 of the draft Law.32 4.5. Transitional Provisions 92. Article 63 of the draft Law stipulates that the Deputy elected before the entry into force of the Law, shall continue to exercise his/her duties until the expiry of his/her term of office. It is presumed that this applies to all existing deputies. At the same time, it is noted that the Human Rights Protector is not mentioned in this provision. Terminating the Human Rights Protector’s term of office due to the enactment of new legislation would severely interrupt the work of the Human Rights Protector’s office at a time when the implementation of new legislation may already lead to delays in this office’s work. In order to ensure the proper functioning of the Human Rights Protector and his/her office, it is recommended to include in Article 63 a provision stating that not only the deputies, but also the Human Rights Protector, shall continue to exercise his/her functions until the termination of his/her term of office. 93. Finally, it should be stressed that in particular due to the Human Rights Protector’s additional competences as anti-discrimination body and national preventive mechanism of the OPCAT, sufficient funds should be allocated to ensure that the Technical Service will have the capacity to deal with these additional functions. These funds should also include additional staff, as well as appropriate facilities and adequate training for such staff. 94. In this context, it should be noted that the issue of sufficient funding cannot be stressed enough. The international obligations and commitments of Montenegro cannot be implemented merely by changing the law – they will also need to be implemented in a practical sense as well. Adding to the competences of the Human Rights Protector without providing additional staff, facilities and training would prevent a proper implementation of the law. It is strongly recommended to avoid this by allocating the proper funds to its realization. [END OF TEXT] 32 See the APT Comments on the 2009 draft Law and the 2003 Law on the Human Rights Protector cited in footnote 12, p. 8, citing a recent recommendation to this effect of the Chair of the OPCAT’s Subcommittee on Prevention. 25