CAT/C/LVA/CO/6 Treatment of Women Prisoners and Non-custodial Measures for Women Offenders (the Bangkok Rules) and paragraph 67 of the United Nations Rules for the Protection of Juveniles Deprived of their Liberty, which prohibits the use of solitary confinement on juveniles. In addition, rule 43 (3) of the Nelson Mandela Rules provides that disciplinary sanctions or restrictive measures must not include the prohibition of family contact and that the means of family contact may only be restricted for a limited time period and as strictly required for the maintenance of security and order, and never as a disciplinary measure. Lastly, there must be a clear distinction between administrative segregation and isolation on disciplinary grounds. Independent monitoring of places of detention 18. The Committee notes that the Ombudsman is the only human rights-based mechanism that monitors places of deprivation of liberty. It is also concerned that the results of visits to places of deprivation of liberty by the Ombudsman are not made public, that the exact number of visits is not specified and that there is no breakdown of information concerning the places and types of visits carried out. In addition, the Committee is concerned that the State party has not ratified the Optional Protocol to the Convention and that there is no information about whether representatives of independent national or international mechanisms visit places of deprivation of liberty (arts. 2, 11, 12, 13 and 16). 19. The State party should: (a) Take measures to strengthen the human and financial capacity of the Ombudsman to effectively carry out systematic visits to all places of deprivation of liberty, including psychiatric institutions, hold confidential private meetings with persons deprived of liberty and receive and act on their complaints, and make the findings public; (b) Ensure effective follow-up to the complaints received by the Ombudsman and the Ministry of Justice regarding conditions of detention; (c) Ensure that independent international mechanisms are able to carry out independent and unannounced monitoring of all places of deprivation of liberty in the State party in coordination with the Ombudsman and are able to hold confidential private meetings with the detained persons; (d) Take further steps towards ratifying the Optional Protocol to the Convention. National human rights institution 20. While noting the accreditation with A status of the Office of the Ombudsman by the Global Alliance of National Human Rights Institutions in 2015, the Committee is concerned that the Office currently lacks the financial resources required to fully and effectively discharge its mandate, especially if it is to carry out the additional mandate of a national preventive mechanism. The Committee is also concerned that the staff of the Office receive lower remuneration than officials in other institutions, and that financial resources have not been made available to render the building in which the Office is located accessible to persons with disabilities, since it lacks an elevator (art. 2). 21. The State party should provide the Office of the Ombudsman with adequate financial and human resources to enable it to fully discharge its mandate in accordance with the principles relating to the status of national institutions for the promotion and protection of human rights (the Paris Principles), especially if it is to assume the mandate of a national preventive mechanism. The State party should also ensure that the remuneration of the Office’s staff is not below that of officials in governmental and other institutions, and that the building in which the Office is located is rendered accessible to persons with disabilities by installing an elevator. The State party should ensure that effective, independent and accessible complaints mechanisms are available to all persons deprived of their liberty and that they are not 7