CAT/OP/KGZ/2 5. Visibility and awareness 43. The Subcommittee notes with satisfaction that most of the authorities it met with have a general knowledge about the national preventive mechanism and its existence in Kyrgyzstan. However, the mandate of the mechanism and its raison d’être have not yet been fully grasped by the majority of the State authorities, including parliamentarians and the judiciary. This highlights the lack of sufficient visibility of the mechanism and points towards a lack of understanding of the role of the mechanism and the nature of its work, which has a detrimental effect on its efficiency. There is little knowledge of the mechanism and its mandate among other relevant stakeholders, including persons deprived of liberty, civil society actors and the public in general. Such a lack of understanding can in turn lead to unfounded expectations and therefore tarnish the mechanism’s credibility in the long run. 44. Furthermore, the Subcommittee observed that the nature of the national preventive mechanism as a separate institution from that of the Office of the Ombudsman could be significantly improved. It was clear that persons deprived of liberty did not understand that the mechanism was distinct from the Ombudsman. The Subcommittee is of the view that this lack of visibility as a separate institution may have a detrimental effect on the mechanism’s efficiency and credibility and, therefore, on the prevention of torture and illtreatment. 45. The Subcommittee is also concerned about the confusion between the roles of the national preventive mechanism and the institutions of the Ombudsman and the Prosecutor General’s Office, particularly since both of the latter also have their own visiting mandates to cover places of deprivation of liberty. The national preventive mechanism should be clearly identified as such in all its meetings, written communications with the authorities and visits to places of deprivation of liberty as the legal entity in charge of assisting Kyrgyzstan in fulfilling its obligations under the Optional Protocol.12 46. The Subcommittee recommends that the national preventive mechanism enhance its institutional visibility through public-awareness campaigns and other promotional activities with a broad spectrum of stakeholders, including preparing material on its mandate and activities and distributing it in places of deprivation of liberty, among relevant public authorities and among civil society, lawyers and members of the judiciary. The objective is to ensure an identity for the mechanism that is distinct from other visiting bodies and from civil society. The Subcommittee also recommends that the mechanism take steps to make its mandate and work better known and recognized as the key component in the country’s system for prevention of torture and ill-treatment. 47. In addition, the reports of the national preventive mechanism need to be better publicized in order to encourage and assist the authorities in the implementation of its recommendations. The mechanism should, whenever it is pertinent to its mandate, make its recommendations public in order to raise awareness of the status of the State’s advancement in fulfilling its obligations relating to torture prevention. Annual and thematic reports of the mechanism can foster its identity and promote the image and mandate of the mechanism among the public, and should therefore become public. 48. The Subcommittee also recommends that the national preventive mechanism meet with the relevant public authorities directly, in particular with the parliament, in order to discuss the implementation of its recommendations, in accordance with article 22 of the Optional Protocol. Finally, the mechanism should disseminate its annual reports and make its findings public, including by transmitting them to the Subcommittee, for the purposes set out in the Optional Protocol. Annual reports of the mechanism must be sent to the parliament and published, independently from whether they have been heard by the parliament, as the mechanism is entitled to use its reports in ways it deems appropriate for the advancement of its mandate and in particular the implementation of its recommendations. 12 Article 5 of the law on the national preventive mechanism. 9