Part II Preventing torture: NHRIs in action | Section III Acting as a control mechanism 3.2. The role of NHRIs in the regional complaint mechanisms NHRIs can make use of regional complaints mechanisms in a number of ways. They can assist individuals to submit complaints or they can file cases directly. They can also present amicus curiae briefs. In addition, NHRIs can seek affiliated or accredited status before regional mechanisms to present evidence and advocate their views. In April 2008, the Irish Human Rights Commission, on behalf of the European Group of NHRIs, submitted an amicus curiae brief to the European Court of Human Rights in the case of DD v. Lithuania. This was the first such application before an international Court made by a regional grouping of NHRIs. Following on from this submission, the European Group of NHRIs developed a procedure for monitoring cases before the European Court of Human Rights. Cases involving priority areas of concern dealing with systemic human rights issues are now tracked and reviewed on a periodic basis, helping identify strategic cases suitable for an amicus curiae intervention. Where a case meets these criteria, the Irish Commission on Human Rights, as Chair of the regional group, refers the case to the relevant NHRI of the respondent State, or to the European Group if no NHRI exists in that country. NHRIs also have a role to raise public awareness of the outcome of complaints at the national level and to disseminate case law to legal and judicial stakeholders. In addition, NHRIs should closely monitor the implementation of the decisions and judgements by the authorities. The Guatemalan Ombudsman (Procurador de los Derechos Humanos) is assisting individuals to bring cases to the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights. 4. Visiting mechanisms Most international mechanisms are reactive and intervene only after torture or ill-treatment has already occurred. Recently, however, mechanisms have been established that perform an important preventive role, especially through a system of visits by independent experts to places of detention. 4.1. Optional Protocol to the Convention against Torture The Optional Protocol to the Convention against Torture was adopted by the United Nations General Assembly in December 2002 and came into force in June 2006. The Optional Protocol establishes a system of regular visits to all places of detention undertaken by two types of mechanisms: • the Subcommittee on Prevention of Torture • “national preventive mechanisms” (NPMs) established in each State that has ratified the Optional Protocol. The Optional Protocol breaks new ground in the human rights system for three main reasons. Firstly, the emphasis is placed firmly on prevention, through a proactive system of visits to place of detention, rather than reacting once violations have occurred. Secondly, it establishes a complementary approach between preventive efforts at the international and the national level, creating an innovative “triangular” relationship between State authorities, the Subcommittee on Prevention of Torture and the NPM. Finally, the approach is based on working cooperatively with States to prevent violations and to improve the protection of persons deprived of their liberty, rather than on public condemnation. States are required Chapter 7: Cooperating with international mechanisms | 77