CAT/C/55/2 9. Where the information is considered not reliable, the alleged victim should be informed that no further action will be taken at that stage. Article 20 10. As a preliminary measure before the visit, the Committee should explicitly include the clause of non-retaliation in the official document containing the terms of reference of a visit to the State party under inquiry that the Committee usually sends to the State authorities, making direct reference to article 13 of the Convention. 11. In the standard questionnaire that is usually prepared for interviews with persons in places of detention during a mission of inquiry, a question should be included on whether the person or group interviewed would agree to establish contact (by e-mail, postal address or other means) with the Committee, through its secretariat. Establishing such willingness would make it possible rapidly to alert the Committee members concerned of an act or threat of reprisal. 12. Similarly, United Nations country teams, national human rights institutions, nongovernmental organizations, lawyers and national preventive mechanisms, as appropriate, could be provided with a contact in the secretariat, so as rapidly to alert the Committee when cases of reprisals come to their knowledge. 13. It should be made clear to all concerned that any action on allegations of reprisals would take into account, as a matter of priority, the need to preserve the security of the person or persons threatened. No name of persons or places or any sensitive information will be disclosed if such information jeopardizes the security of the complainants, their representatives or witnesses. At the end of the mission, during their last meeting with the authorities of the State concerned, the Committee members conducting the inquiry should explain that they are keeping the contact information of those interviewed to ensure followup and update the information received during the visit, as necessary. 14. Doing so would signal to the authorities concerned that the Committee could receive information on cases of reprisals against those who have cooperated with it. 15. In certain cases, when the authorities concerned express criticism of those who have cooperated with the Committee, for instance by accusing them of providing false or politically motivated information, the Committee could state that it keeps the contact address of those who have cooperated with it so as to receive information on any kind of reprisal to which they might be subjected. 16. A registry with the identifying and other personal data of those who have cooperated with the Committee during an inquiry should be kept by the secretariat. This would make it possible to establish the “history” of those individuals or groups at risk of being subjected to reprisals. 17. The maintenance of such a registry would be particularly important for persons in places of detention interviewed by Committee members. Specific information, such as the date of a meeting with the Committee, as well as other information on treatment, the place of arrest and detention, the charges and the judicial decisions, should be collected on such persons. 18. No name or other information would be disclosed in the event that the security of the person concerned cannot be fully guaranteed. In no circumstance would the name of a minor be made public. 19. On the basis of experience developed during missions carried out under article 20, the ideal method to ascertain if the Committee’s recommendations have been implemented 3