CYIL vol. 8 (2017)

CYIL 8 ȍ2017Ȏ PREVENTIVE MECHANISMS UNDER THE OPTIONAL PROTOCOL … the government) of the situation and inform the public. As the author states, during the ten years of Ombuds-institution activity, 365 facilities of various types were visited and the conditions of several thousand persons deprived of personal liberty were screened. In the third part („Subcommittee on Prevention of Torture and National Preventive Mechanisms – Practical Issues“), three contributions are presented. Lukáš Machoň, jurist in the UNHCR Office in Geneva, in his article „Subcommittee on Prevention of Torture and the Systems of Visits in Individual Countries“, describes and analyses the mandate of the SPT given by the OPCAT, whose goal is to establish a system of regular visits by independent international and national mechanisms in facilities where persons deprived of their personal liberty are placed and to cooperate together on unifying objectives to strengthen the prevention of torture and ill-treatment and rights of these persons. The article describes the obligations of the OPCAT parties to facilitate visits, especially the procedure for preparing and organizing visits (program of visits, composition of the delegation, and course of visits). The results of the visits are the OPCAT declaration of the follow-up measures. The author claims that the visits have already resulted in adoption or changes of laws or internal regulations as well as changes in practice that contributed to the strengthening of the safeguards for persons deprived of their liberty. Marie Lukasová from the Office of the Czech Ombudsman, in her chapter „Ill – treatment in Findings of the Defender…and what next?“, analyses some specific misconducts in selected institutions recently identified by the Ombudsman in the Czech Republic – in social services facilities, psychiatric facilities, prisons, and even including the role of judges and doctors (which could under certain circumstances also fall under the NHRIs or even OPCAT). She points out, however, that monitoring itself does not solve the human rights violations – only the state’s active and positive attitude towards the reports and recommendations of the entire NHRIs system (including the Ombudsperson) are necessary. Detection of ill-treatment of the responsible institutions and bodies consequently involves implementing corresponding measures within their sphere of competence. On the other hand, it is necessary to distinguish personal failures of individuals and ill-treatment based on system imperfection. Petr Šustek in his contribution „The Provision of Health Services in the Czech Republic from the Perspective of the UN Convention against Torture“ gives a quite detailed introduction of the selected aspects of providing health care services in Czech Republic. He identifies the most controversial practices with which Czech health care meets and are sometimes even being criticized at the international level (the UN and the Council of Europe). These are particularly some means of restraint (net-beds), inadequate supervision of the security of patients under restraint, and the use of surgical castration in the context of the treatment of sex offenders. He brings analysis of such cases within the prism of the case-law of the European Court of Human Rights. The fourth part includes two contributions focused on the practice within the European Institutions responsible for respecting human rights („European Committee for the Prevention of Torture and the European Court of Human Rights“, hereinafter “CPT”). Senior lecturer from the Department of Public International Law at the Law Faculty, Alla Tymofeyeva focuses on the relationship between judgements and decisions of the Council

635