3.6 Recommendations and Follow-Up Strategies Recommendations are proposals about the best course of action that an institution (or multiple institutions) should take in order to achieve a positive change in laws, practices or policies. NPMs are given this mandate under Article 19 of the OPCAT. Making recommendations are one of the core elements of their work. NPM recommendations differ from those of other oversight bodies by addressing the risk factors and root causes of torture and ill-treatment, aiming to prevent future occurrences through evidencebased, systemic solutions rather than individual cases. These recommendations, typically formulated after visits to places of detention, are part of a constructive dialogue aimed at resolving issues and effecting change. The OPCAT mandates that authorities review and discuss these recommendations, and some NPM laws require a timely response from the state, reinforcing the NPM’s role in fostering improvements. What types of recommendations are made by NPMs? NPM recommendations may relate to all aspects of deprivation of liberty, including: places of detention, their management and functioning; public policies relating to detention; the relevant legal framework; and the broader institutional frameworks (such as the police force as a whole). The form and content of recommendations depends on their audience, their objectives and the type of situation to which they relate. Recommendations may relate to problems that can be solved in the short, medium and long-term. Recommendations may also deal with both complex, systemic issues and specific topics. NPMs may decide to focus their recommendations on specific priorities or thematic areas, such as: material conditions, procedures and policies, laws and regulations, as well as specific situations and groups at risk. A problem does not have to reach a specific level of severity before an NPM decides to make it the subject of a recommendation; indeed, recommendations may often be aimed at resolving seemingly small issues before they escalate into larger problems. In general, NPMs often make the following type of recommendations: Recommendations following a visit. This type of recommendation relates to the key findings following a visit to a particular place and is usually included in the visit report. Such recommendations usually relate to only one establishment. Thematic recommendations. They usually follow a series of visits relating to either a particular theme (such as use of restraints) or to a series of similar facilities (for example, recommendations could be the result of a series of visits to immigration detention facilities). As such, they usually concern laws, practices and policies that are relevant for a number of places of deprivation of liberty. Usually such recommendations will be contained in a specific thematic report and/or in the annual report. Urgent recommendations. They usually relate to a serious infringement of fundamental rights and are a way for an NPM to quickly notify the authorities and give them a defined period in which to rectify the situation. Recommendations in the annual report. This type of recommendation is often more general than those made in visit reports and will usually relate to broad, systemic issues of particular importance. Because of the higher publicity surrounding the annual report, as well as the fact that national authorities have an obligation to consider the implementation of recommendations therein, NPMs often use these reports as a platform to bring attention to recommendations that are a particular priority. 30 NPM Toolkit for Asia Pacific NPM-NHRIs