A/HRC/23/18 • National actors, including NPMs, NHRIs, and NGOs should be encouraged to follow up on international and regional recommendations, taking into account the fact that they are closer to the ground and thus in a better position to do the followup. • Participants have expressed the view that joint advocacy with States aimed at implementing common recommendations of United Nations and European human rights mechanisms on torture could be conducted. • Regional workshops and national round tables, including regional and national stakeholders, could be held to review implementation of recommendations from different mechanisms. • Follow up visits by both United Nations and European human rights mechanisms on torture could be undertaken to States in need of assistance for implementation of recommendations. • It was agreed that NPMs can play a key role in the follow up to recommendations resulting from United Nations and European human rights mechanisms on torture and should be encouraged to do so. For example, NPMs can follow up on CAT and CPT recommendations. It was also proposed that NPMs follow up on CRPD recommendations when relevant. • Participants expressed the view that intergovernmental bodies, like the Human Rights Council and the Council of Europe Committee of Ministers play an important role in persuading States to implement recommendations. For instance, during the Universal Periodic Review, the Human Rights Council can add recommendations to this effect. Similarly, the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe could follow up on the CPT’s public statements. • It was suggested that recommendations should be structured in the order of priorities to facilitate their prompt implementation, as it is being done by CAT. • Given the importance of access to information in the context of prevention of torture and protection of victims of torture at national level, reports from United Nations and European human rights mechanisms on torture could be made available in national languages and accessible formats. • It was proposed that contributions from regional human rights mechanisms to the UPR could be included as a separate section in OHCHR’s summary of stakeholder’s information, similarly to the contributions from A status NHRIs. 4. Role of NPMs • Participants expressed the view that NPMs should increase the exchange of experiences, best practices, lessons learned and methods of work among them. The important role played by the CoE European NPM Project in this regard was underscored. • The NPMs’ role in the follow up to recommendations resulting from both United Nations and European human rights mechanisms on torture was highlighted. Participants encouraged them to always take these recommendations into account in their day-to-day work. • It was proposed that both the CPT and the SPT share internal tools on methodology with different actors working on torture, including NPMs and NGOs, provided that they are not confidential. CPT’s practice of declassifying internal documents was welcomed and other mechanisms were encouraged to do so. 37