As such, the co-operation of NPMs and CSOs is key to preventing torture and holding states accountable. In the OSCE region, their interactions can be divided into five different categories: 1. Formal co-operation when CSOs are part of an NPM’s operations, including its monitoring mandate, as per formal agreements – also called the “ombudsman plus” model. 2. Formal co-operation when CSOs are part of an NPM’s advisory body (consultative councils and similar bodies), which usually entails a policy-making role rather than a programmatic one. 3. Ad hoc operational co-operation when the CSO and NPM can decide when and on what to work together (monitoring, reporting, advocacy, training, in some cases joint long-term projects, etc). 4. Informal exchanges and contacts between NPM and CSOs on individual cases or specific issues without regular co-operation. 5. A watchdog role of CSOs towards NPMs. In general, co-operation between NPMs and CSOs as described in points 1-4 is paramount to strengthening the protection of people held in immigration detention. Successful experiences of cooperation exist in most OSCE countries, to different degrees. Practice pointer The Kazakhstani, Ukrainian and UK NPMs involve not only CSOs, but also civilian monitors - also called “lay visitors”- in their monitoring activities. Whilst this poses certain challenges in terms of methodology, it ensures a meaningful, wide and transparent coverage of places of detention with grassroots contributions from the wider society. B. Advantages Participants underlined that the co-operation between NPMs and CSOs allows for a vital exchange of information. All NPMs present at the meeting highlighted the fact that without CSO inputs, they would not be able to correctly identify all issues and implement their mandate properly and strategically. Participants from one OSCE participating State highlighted that in their national context, the strategic collaboration between the NPM and CSOs had led to a change in legislation regarding migrant children in detention. Upon information received by CSOs, the NPM issued a report and recommendations. These were then again used by CSOs during a strategic litigation, resulting in a court finding a violation of human rights, which in turn led to a change in legislation. For the monitoring of immigration detention and on particular issues, such as pushbacks and forced returns, co-operation of monitoring actors across borders is key. Participants shared that prompt communication between NPMs and CSOs of different countries (usually, origin and destination countries) has given interesting results and led to the drafting of joint reports that depict a more comprehensive picture of the phenomenon, including in South Eastern Europe. Good co-operation between monitoring actors not only reinforces actions taken but provides for greater visibility, better information and ultimately better impact of all actors involved. Whilst NPMs have, as per their mandate, unprecedented conditions of access to individuals in detention, CSOs can bring a complementary, multidisciplinary expertise, and key information about individual cases they deal with. NPMs and civil society often have complementary means to address violations - including 16