Human Rights Implementation Centre
Overview of UK NPM Meeting
9th May 2011, Edinburgh
On 9th May 2011, the members of the UK’s national preventive mechanism (NPM) held a
business meeting in Edinburgh, hosted by HM Inspectorate of Constabulary for Scotland.
The meeting was organised in partnership with, and funded by, the Human Rights
Implementation Centre (HRIC) at the University of Bristol. The purpose of the meeting was
to:
 update members on recent NPM-related activity;
 receive feedback on the first annual report and agree plans for the second;
 discuss substantive issues including independence of NPMs and the definition of
‘detention’; and
 consider a proposal regarding the operational structure of the NPM.
Update
The NPM co-ordinator provided an overview of recent activities including:
 the publication of the NPM’s first annual report;
 the creation of an NPM logo;
 an event in Northern Ireland for NPM members operating in Northern Ireland and
relevant stakeholders;
 the NPM’s first thematic workshop, focusing on mental health across all types of
detention;
 various members have represented the UK NPM at workshops held under the
auspices of the Council of Europe’s NPM project; and
 the database of UK NPM members, hosted on the HRIC website, is currently being
updated.
Future activities
 an event solely for lay visiting bodies within the NPM;
 a thematic workshop on restraint; and
 continued participation in the European NPM project. This will include the UK hosting
a workshop in July 2011 on monitoring deportations to be attended by NPMs from
France, Germany, Spain and Switzerland.
NPM annual report
Feedback on the UK NPM’s first annual report was provided by Audrey Olivier (Association
for the Prevention of Torture) and Rachel Murray and Elina Steinerte (both HRIC). Audrey
welcomed the fact that the UK NPM was seeking feedback on its annual report. She said the
objective of the annual report – to introduce OPCAT and the NPM with all its complexities –
had been met. She hoped, however, that the format of the report would develop over time,
for example, by taking a more thematic approach. She also hoped the NPM would follow up
1
on its first recommendation and the issues identified in the report. Audrey welcomed the fact
that some members had addressed issues of OPCAT compliance and had described the
impact of OPCAT on their work.
Rachel noted that the impact of OPCAT on the members of the UK NPM was a key issue,
given that most monitoring work was already underway prior to ratification. She also
wondered how the NPM would follow up on issues about which it had expressed concern.
Rachel welcomed the fact the report addressed the co-ordination of the NPM. She hoped the
report, and OPCAT membership, would continue to be used as a tool by the members. She
also hoped the NPM would think more about its broader preventive mandate, rather than
simply visits.
Elina praised the quality of the report and thought the UK NPM should consider the approach
and structure of the SPT’s own annual reports. The UK NPM should also think about to
whom its report is addressed. She noted an SPT recommendation that reports should be
presented to and discussed in Parliament. The UK NPM should consider this. Elina
wondered whether the UK NPM could consider producing thematic reports as well as an
annual report.
A proposal for the second annual report of the NPM was discussed and approved.
Independence
Rachel (HRIC) introduced a session focusing on the independence of NPMs. She noted that
independence is crucial and is seen as a key factor when designating an NPM. Nonetheless,
the concept of independence is not completely clear. There is an inherent tension – the NPM
must be chosen, established and resourced by the government, yet it must maintain distance
from that government and be seen to be independent. When considering the notion of
independence, Rachel thinks it is useful to separate what is the responsibility of the state,
and what is the responsibility of the NPM. The NPM members broke into two groups to
discuss the notion of independence further.
Definition of detention
Elina (HRIC) introduced a session on the definition of detention in Article 4 of OPCAT. The
members then broke into groups to discuss the definition of detention in more detail. They
considered the points at which detention begins and ends, and whether there are types of
detention not currently covered by the NPM. They also considered the difference between a
deprivation and restriction of liberty.
Proposal: operational structure of the NPM
The idea of establishing an ‘executive committee’ for the NPM was suggested. This would
facilitate decision making and allow work to be taken forward more easily. Members seemed
positive about the idea and it was agreed that a detailed proposal for an executive committee
and its operation would be developed.
2
List of those attending
Bruce Adamson
Scottish Human Rights Commission
Margaret Brown
HM Inspectorate of Prisons Scotland
Paul Bullen
HM Inspectorate of Constabulary Scotland
Patrick Convery
Regulation and Quality Improvement Authority
Jonathan Corbett
Care and Social Services Inspectorate Wales
Sonia Gandhi
Ofsted
Nick Hardwick
HM Chief Inspector of Prisons
Mat Kinton
Care Quality Commission
Rachel Lindsay
Criminal Justice Inspection Northern Ireland
Kate Lloyd-Jones
Healthcare Inspectorate Wales
Donny Lyons
Mental Welfare Commission for Scotland
Joe Mitchell
Independent Monitoring Boards Northern Ireland
Rachel Murray
Human Rights Implementation Centre, University of Bristol
Audrey Olivier
Association for the Prevention of Torture
Laura Paton
NPM Co-ordinator
Brian Pirie
Independent Custody Visitors Scotland
Cecilia Smith
Human Rights Implementation Centre, University of Bristol
Ian Smith
Independent Custody Visiting Association
Elina Steinerte
Human Rights Implementation Centre, University of Bristol
Anna Thomas-Betts Independent Monitoring Boards
Observers
Joe Farha
Bruce Logan
Omega Research Foundation
Association of Visiting Committees (Scotland)
Apologies
Paddy Craig
Kevan Downer
Ross Hendry
Marcia Ramsay
HM Inspectorate of Constabulary
Northern Ireland Policing Board Independent Custody Visiting Scheme
Children’s Commissioner
Social Care and Social Work Improvement Scotland
3