A/HRC/4/33/Add.2 Page 116 organizations and persons nominated by human rights organizations, to visit and report publicly on any place of deprivation of liberty should be set up as soon as possible. 652. According to information received from NGOs and other sources, so far no independent visiting body has been established. Whereas Turkey has signed the Optional Protocol to the Convention against Torture, it has not ratified it yet. In 2001, Human Rights Boards were established in all districts; however, they are not independent. 653. In addition to the information contained in the report E/CN.4/2006/6/Add.2, the Government informed that Turkey has signed the United Nations Optional Protocol to the Convention against Torture on 14 September 2005. The ratification process is underway. However, it should be underlined that Turkey became a party to the European Convention for the Prevention of Torture (CPT) in 1988 and undertook to cooperate with the “European Committee for the Prevention of Torture”, which is the monitoring body of the afore-mentioned Convention. CPT is entrusted with carrying out unannounced visits to places of detention in the countries of States parties, in order to meet with persons who are deprived of their liberties. CPT is an effective and institutionalized regional monitoring mechanism for places of detention. On the other hand, the signing of the Optional Protocol to the “Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment” by Turkey, is yet another step forward in the progress achieved in the prevention and elimination of torture and ill-treatment, within the framework of the “zero-tolerance” policy of the Government of Turkey against torture, as part of an ongoing comprehensive reform process. Parallel to the ratification process, preparatory work has been undertaken by the relevant authorities in Turkey in order to identify as to how the mechanism foreseen by the Optional Protocol can be best incorporated in the domestic system to ensure its effectiveness. At this stage, inter-departmental consultations are underway and different models to be set up by other State Parties are being examined. 654. Provincial and District Human Rights Boards have been established to protect human rights, promote human rights awareness among civil society and the public sector, investigate allegations of human rights violations and make recommendations with a view to preventing violations. These boards have gone through an institutional restructuring process with the adoption of a new Regulation in 2003 that introduced amendments to the “Regulation of the Procedure and Principles of the Establishment, Functions and Operation of Human Rights Advisory Boards”. With these legislative amendments, the Human Rights Boards have been transformed into a more civil society oriented and dominated formation. Human Rights Boards are now composed of an average of 15 members, only two members of which are public officials. The remaining members are from different segments of the society, including civil society organizations, trade unions, professional associations, academia, human rights experts, local press and political party representatives. Human Rights Boards convene at least once a month with simple majority of members constituting the quorum and decide by a simple majority of the members present and voting. The explanation of votes against a decision is registered in the written text of the decision. The chair has one vote and does not have the power to veto or change any decision. 655. Pursuant to the “Regulation of the Procedure and Principles of the Establishment, Functions and Operation of Human Rights Advisory Boards” Human Rights Boards are entrusted with visiting places of detention and other penitentiary institutions in order to observe, on-site, the human rights practices, to examine the inspection forms at the places of detention, to