This is why NPMs need to engage with a variety of authorities at different levels: • Authorities responsible for running places of detention (i.e. directors of prisons, directors of psychiatric institutions). • Staff working in places of deprivation of liberty, including prison guards, nurses, social workers, police officers and immigration officers. • Line Ministries and supervising authorities of places of deprivation of liberty or services within those places, such as the Ministry of Interior, Ministry of Justice, Ministry of Health, Immigration Service, Penitentiary Service. Within those institutions, it is important for NPMs to engage both at the political/high-level and technical one, with specific departments that are relevant for their work. • Other Ministries or specialised agencies or departments of the executive branch, such as the Ministry of Finance, Human Rights Secretariat, Women Secretariat. When they start to be operational, it is recommended that NPMs map out the institutions - and departments within each institution – that are relevant to their work, and then have a first meeting with them, including to explain their mandate. NPMs would also need to regularly review and update the institutional mapping. Mapping out the relevant institutions allows NPMs to better target their dialogue and be strategic in their engagements. A useful and practical tool to do that is the stakeholder mapping. While the main addressees of NPM dialogue are authorities from the executive branch, NPMs also engage with members of Parliament and judicial actors, such as judges and public defenders. They may be the addressees of some NPMs’ recommendations but, more often, maintaining dialogue with these actors is instrumental to build collaboration, for instance to get NPMs’ recommendations implemented by the executive authorities. When do NPMs enter into dialogue with authorities? NPMs may enter into dialogue with authorities at different moments, in relation to visits to places of detention or beyond visits, depending on the specific objective of the dialogue. Dialogue related to visits to places of deprivation of liberty may take place at different stages. Its timing and process are crucial to maintaining a sustained and constructive relation with the authorities and ensure that recommendations are effectively implemented. Dialogue between the NPM and the authorities starts already before NPMs start carrying out visits to places of deprivation of liberty, to explain their mandate and inform the authorities about their obligation to provide unrestricted access to the NPMs. NPMs’ experience shows that taking the time to introduce their mandate to the authorities at an early stage can avoid problems during visits. During the visit, the NPM engages in dialogue both with the authorities in charge of running the place and the staff working there. It is important that NPMs take enough time to conduct the visit, enabling to build a positive relationship with the authorities since the beginning of the visit, to make sure that they are clear about the methodology and objectives of the visit. At the same time, to ensure compliance of the authorities, NPMs need to maintain their independence and project authority and professionalism. To do that, it is important for NPMs to abide by key principles for monitoring places of detention, including being respectful of the authorities in charge of the place and the staff working there, being accurate and objective, and behaving with integrity. Following the visit, many NPMs send the draft visit report and recommendations confidentially to the authorities. This allows the NPM to receive early feedback and eventually correct any factual errors. It is worth noting that such practice does not mean that authorities would influence the content of the report. It refers to factual information that could be amended, such as the total number of detainees in one place. This information is not the result of the NPM’s analysis and findings, but it refers to objective data that was communicated to them by the authorities. Some NPMs also have face-to-face engagements with the authorities to discuss orally their draft reports and recommendations, promoting transparency, encouraging a constructive relationship and increasing the possibility of implementation NPM Toolkit for Asia Pacific NPM-NHRIs 39