10 8. The CPT continues to pay considerable attention to the treatment of immigration detainees. As well as being a regular feature of programmes of periodic visits, this subject was addressed during two ad hoc visits in 2002, to France and the United Kingdom. In the course of its June 2002 ad hoc visit to France, the CPT examined the treatment of aliens refused entry into France and of asylum seekers, whilst held at Paris-Charles de Gaulle Airport. The CPT’s delegation reviewed the action taken to implement the recommendations made after the Committee’s previous visit to the airport, in May 2000. It also examined procedures for the forcible deportation of foreign nationals by air, a subject dealt with in depth in the substantive section of this General Report. The ad hoc visit to the United Kingdom in February 2002 was organised in order to assess the treatment of suspected international terrorists detained pursuant to the Anti-Terrorism, Crime and Security Act 2001. This Act provides for the administrative detention (by Ministerial decision), for an indefinite period, of foreigners believed to pose a risk to national security and suspected of being international terrorists who, for legal or practical reasons, cannot be removed from the United Kingdom. Such persons are considered as immigration detainees. The report on this visit and the response of the United Kingdom Government were published in February 2003. Replying to the CPT’s criticism of the limited out-of-cell time and activities enjoyed by persons detained pursuant to the 2001 Act, the United Kingdom authorities state that the detainees have been moved to units capable of offering enhanced activities. In reaction to other remarks made by the CPT, the response emphasises that the United Kingdom “…intends that action taken by its institutions and officials to combat terrorism and to preserve a democratic society will at all times be in accordance with the fundamental rights of any person against whom action is taken”. 9. The CPT organised a second ad hoc visit to the Transnistrian region of the Republic of Moldova in February 2003 (the first having taken place in November 2000). This region unilaterally declared itself an independent republic in 1991 and negotiations aimed at resolving the situation are still taking place. The visit focussed on the treatment of persons held in penitentiary establishments and, more particularly, on the level of care provided to prisoners suffering from tuberculosis. As had been the case during the CPT’s first visit to the region, the Committee’s delegation received valuable assistance from the OSCE Mission to Molodova. CPT: 13TH GENERAL REPORT 10. During the ad hoc visits to Portugal and Romania in December 2002 and February 2003, the CPT reviewed developments at Oporto Prison and the General Directorate of the Police in Bucharest since earlier visits to those establishments; this followed invitations to the Committee from the national authorities that it return. The ad hoc visit to Albania in July 2003 was also very much of a follow-up nature (implementation of the Committee’s recommendations designed to combat ill-treatment by law enforcement officials and to improve conditions at Elbasan Psychiatric Hospital ). The same was true of the May 2003 ad hoc visit to Hungary (treatment of remand prisoners in both prison and police establishments, with particular reference to the activities provided). The main purpose of the ad hoc visit to France in June 2003 was to assess the current situation in the prison system, in particular as regards overcrowding and the regimes offered to prisoners serving long sentences. The CPT’s delegation also held in-depth discussions with the national authorities on the safeguards to be offered to persons in police custody and, in particular, access to a lawyer as from the outset of custody. The ad hoc visit to Kaliningrad in March 2003 provided the opportunity to examine the treatment of persons held in a variety of establishments on the territory of this enclave of the Russian Federation (police detention facilities, prisons, psychiatric hospitals, and Federal Border Service establishments). During the July 2002 ad hoc visit to “the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia”, the CPT’s delegation focussed its attention on the treatment of persons detained by law enforcement agencies. The visit report was published in April 2003; it makes clear that the serious problems in this area already identified by the Committee during earlier visits had not been resolved. In their response, the national authorities stress that they are fully committed to complying with the CPT’s recommendations. As for the CPT’s ad hoc visit to Turkey in February 2003, it was triggered by persistent reports that relatives and lawyers of Abdullah Öcalan were experiencing considerable difficulties in gaining access to Imralı island in order to visit him. The Committee’s delegation examined the arrangements for visits, including the means of transport used for this purpose, and discussed in detail with the Turkish authorities means of ensuring that Abdullah Öcalan’s right to receive visits from his relatives and lawyers is fully effective in practice.