objective. The main output is written recommendations to the State, but there are also less tangible outputs such as the webcasted dialogue between the Committee and State representatives. This can be used to give increased visibility to the process and issues at the national level, including in the media, and the possibility of using the review as an entry point for NGOs to have direct discussions with the government. The following sections will illustrate how NGOs can work towards the achievement of the two process objectives and their individual substance objectives through working with the different actors involved in the review. Who are the relevant stakeholders? In order to effectively influence any process, it is important to know which stakeholders have a formal or informal influence on whether or not you will achieve your objectives, what kind of decisions they can make and how these are made. The main stakeholders in the State review are: the Committee and its individual members; State representatives; staff in the Committee’s secretariat; and NGOs and NHRIs working to influence the review. The Committee and its individual members The Committee is a key stakeholder, but it makes different types of decisions formally and informally in different formats. All formal decisions made by the Committee are made by majority vote, but the Committee always strives to achieve consensus. In relation to the State review procedure, these 12 decisions include adoption of the LOIPR and adoption of the Concluding Observations. For each State under review, the Committee will appoint two of its members as rapporteurs. These country rapporteurs take the lead in preparing and conducting the review process. Their main responsibilities include preparing the LOIPR, leading the oral hearing with the State representatives and preparing the Concluding Observations. Through these responsibilities, the country rapporteurs have a significant impact on the substantive contents of the LOIPR and Concluding Observations, and they will be given more time than other members to make questions and comments to the State. Furthermore, the Committee appoints one of its members as permanent follow-up rapporteur on all States, with the main responsibility to collect and assess information received from States regarding measures taken to implement the recommendations selected for follow-up within one year. The follow-up rapporteur will assess whether all the issues identified by the Committee for follow up have been addressed and whether the information provided responds to the Committee’s concerns and recommendations. Based on this assessment, the follow-up rapporteur may request additional information from the State or issue reminder letters when no information is submitted. The follow-up rapporteur also plays a more informal role in influencing which recommendations are selected for one-year follow-up. Some Committee members may have specific expertise or interest areas, which lead them to have a stronger focus on certain issues in their evaluation of States’ Engaging with State reviews in the UN Committee against Torture: A practical guide