CAT/OP/KGZ/2 28. During its mission, the Subcommittee gathered information suggesting a possible intention of the parliament to alter the modalities of the appointment of the director of the national preventive mechanism and, more generally, the mandate of the mechanism. 29. In this regard, the Subcommittee wishes to reiterate that any changes made to the law on the national preventive mechanism and affecting its current structure should ensure that the mechanism remains fully independent, in accordance with articles 17 and 18 of the Optional Protocol. 30. As a general observation, the Subcommittee recommends that the national preventive mechanism adopt a more proactive stance in issues relating to its functioning and mandate, and assume its independence as granted to it under the Optional Protocol and national legislation. The Subcommittee also recommends that the mechanism carefully preserve deadlines mentioned in the applicable law for the election of new members from the parliament or from civil society organizations, and work with all stakeholders, including to advocate among them to make sure that the quorum in the coordination council is constantly assured. 3. Human and financial resources 31. The National Centre currently functions with 25 staff, predominantly lawyers, who are in charge of conducting field visits to places of deprivation of liberty. Pursuant to article 25 of the law on the national preventive mechanism, groups conducting field visits should comprise a minimum of two persons, one of which should be a member of the coordination council or an employee of the National Centre. 32. However, since the establishment of regional teams in the Naryn, Talas and Batken regions, the National Centre has been facing challenges in fulfilling its mandate in those regions, due to lack of staff for constituting monitoring teams as prescribed by law. The mechanism must therefore engage external experts from civil society organizations to constitute its teams. The Subcommittee was not able to understand the modalities of recruiting external experts when there was a need, including with respect to selection criteria and remuneration scales, and requests the national preventive mechanism to clarify this matter in its response to the present report. 33. Notwithstanding, special attention should be accorded to the selection criteria of those experts, especially with regard to knowledge and experience in the subject matter and proven independence, as otherwise the exercise could reflect negatively on how the national preventive mechanism is perceived by other stakeholders. 34. The Subcommittee reminds the national preventive mechanism that the evaluation of its financial needs must take into account all its activities mandated under the Optional Protocol, including travel and transportation costs, as well as the costs for collaborating with external experts for field visits and training. It is through a mapping exercise that the mechanism can conduct a real needs-based assessment and request from the State realistic budget provisions that cover all necessities of the mandate of the mechanism. 35. Recalling that article 18 (3) of the Optional Protocol obliges States parties to provide national preventive mechanisms with the resources necessary to undertake their work, the Subcommittee reiterates that the national preventive mechanism should seek to be provided with a budget sufficient for the accomplishment of all its core mandated tasks and to be granted the institutional autonomy to use its resources. Such funding should be provided through a separate line in the national annual budget referring specifically to the mechanism (see CAT/C/57/4 and Corr.1, annex, paras. 11–12). The funding should be at such a level as to allow the mechanism to carry out its visiting programme, to engage outside experts as and when appropriate, to increase its human resources and to regularly benefit from training, in accordance with its workplan. 36. In order to ensure the functional and operational independence of the national preventive mechanism and with a view to clearly identifying the nature and extent of additional needs, the mechanism has to enter into constructive dialogue with the relevant 7