• educational institutions,
• certain social care institutions – retirement homes and special social care institutions,
• psychiatric hospitals,
• the Aliens Centre and the Asylum Centre,
• detention rooms operated by the Slovenian Armed Forces,
• detention rooms at police stations and Ljubljana Police Detention Centre,
• prisons and all their units, including Radeče Juvenile Correctional Facility, and
• all other locations as per Article 4 of the Optional Protocol (e.g. police inter- vention vehicles, etc.).
The Ombudsman has been implementing the duties of the National Preventive Mechanism since the spring of 2008. The work is organised within the Ombuds- man’s internal organisational unit led by Deputy Ombudsman Ivan Šelih. The unit includes three additional officials: a graduate in criminal justice and secu- rity who is a specialist in criminal investigation responsible for visiting prisons, police stations, foreigners and asylum centres, a Master in Law responsible for
INTRODUCTION
visiting social care institutions and psychiatric hospitals, and a law graduate who is, within her work obligations, responsible for visiting residential treatment (ed- ucational) institutions and social care institutions.
Each group conducting a visit consists of the representatives of the Ombuds- man and the selected organisations. Non-governmental organisations, coop- erating with the Ombudsman in 2019 when performing the tasks of the NPM, include: Novi paradoks with four members, Humanitarno društvo Pravo za VSE with seven members, Caritas Slovenia with two members, SKUP – Community of Private Institutes with five members, Legal-Informational Centre for NGOs – PIC with four members, the Peace Institute with five members, the Slovenian Feder- ation of Pensioners’ Associations with seven members and now also Spominči- ca – Alzheimer Slovenija with four members and the Slovenian Foundation for UNICEF with three members.
In 2019, the NPM visited 63 locations in Slovenia where persons deprived of liberty are accommodated on the basis of an act issued by the authorities, i.e. 27 police stations, six prisons and Radeče Juvenile Correctional Facility, the Aliens Centre, two psychiatric hospitals, 19 retirement homes and four residential treatment in- stitutions or youth homes, and several residential groups operating within these institutions. All visits (except the visit to the Intensive Child and Adolescent Psy- chiatry Unit of Ljubljana University Psychiatric Clinic, which was the NPM’s first visit to the institution) were conducted without prior notification. There were 37 regular visits, 13 control ones (during which we particularly examined the reali- sation of NPM recommendations given during past visits) and 13 thematic visits (which focused on a certain topic selected in advance). Of 63 visits, 50 were con- ducted in the morning and 13 in the afternoon. For the first time, we also visited three locations where the Dolfka Boštjančič Education, Work and Care Centre of Draga pri Igu operates.
The NPM drafts a comprehensive (final) report on the findings established at the visited institution after each visit. The report also covers proposals and recom- mendations to eliminate established irregularities and to improve the situa- tion, including measures to reduce the possibilities for improper treatment in the future. The report is submitted to the competent authority (i.e. the superior body of the visited institution) with a proposal that the authority take a position on the statements or recommendations in the report and submit it to the Ombudsman by a determined deadline. The institution concerned also receives the report, and a preliminary report is drafted in certain cases (when visiting social care institu- tions, psychiatric hospitals and residential treatment institutions).
All recommendations and responses from competent authorities regarding the NPM visits in 2019 are published in special tables on the Ombudsman’s website in accordance with the institutions visited.3 The full recommendation is listed in the table, followed by a brief explanation of the recommendation if necessary. The key word is used for a clarification of the type of recommendation (systemic, general, or targeted), including a response to the recommendation and the comment on the response if necessary, findings from the control visit,
INTRODUCTION
3See:https://www.varuh-rs.si/en/about-us/organisational-units-and-hro-council/ombudsman-as-a-nmp/
and the response to these findings. Good practice and commendations provided during our work are also entered into the table. On the basis of the responses (from the institution visited or their superior body) to our recommendations, we take into consideration that a visited institution and/or its line ministry has ac- cepted an NPM recommendation, carried it out, or has not accepted it. The real- isation of our recommendations is regularly verified during our subsequent visits to the institutions in question and, if necessary, by way of control visits.
The National Preventive Mechanism drafts a report on its work every year. The report of the NPM for 2019 is its twelfth and is printed in a separate publication, but it forms an integral part of the regular Annual Report of the Human Rights Ombudsman of the Republic of Slovenia for 2019. Both reports are published on the Ombudsman’s website.
The NPM may also submit proposals and comments regarding applicable or draft acts (Article 19 of the Optional Protocol). This option is implemented by the Om- budsman in the role of the NPM during the drafting of individual recommenda- tions, directly in the procedure of preparing individual acts or their amendments in the field of restriction of personal freedom. In 2019, we thus participated in the working group of the Ministry of Health when drafting the amendments to the Mental Health Act (ZDZdr), and we also provided our comments and proposals to the drafts of the Liability of Minors for Criminal Offences Act and the Act on the Intervention for Children and Teenagers with Emotional and Conduct Disorders and Problems in Education. We also submitted our comments when drafting the Rules amending the Rules on the Implementation of Prison Sentences and other regulations.
INTRODUCTION
1.9 CHILD ADVOCACY
Child advocacy became the Ombudsman’s regular task when an amendment to the Human Rights Ombudsman Act was passed in 2017. The advocacy was described in more detail in the 2018 Report, and it was introduced to the ex- pert public at five consultation session (Maribor, Koper, Murska Sobota, Celje and Novo mesto) where we were surprised by the positive response from expert work- ers of social work centres, courts, and also schools, kindergartens, health care, police and NGOs.
During the consultations, we focused particularly on showcasing individual cas- es in an anonymised form as the advocacy’s advantages and also its (limited) possibilities are presented best with concrete examples from everyday life. Every year, the Ombudsman receives several unfounded proposals for appointing an advocate, which are rejected since a child either requires an advocate in a cer- tain legal procedure or an authority conducting the procedure assesses that an advocate could successfully replace a required expert opinion. In its work, the Ombudsman ascertains that the familiarisation with, and understanding of, the child advocacy still varies greatly, and it is thus determined that it would continue to educate the broader expert public about the advocacy in 2020 as well.
INTRODUCTION