organised does not allow, in practice, for the purported links between the child and the adult presented as his or her guardian to be verified. When the prefectural departments are called upon to conduct such checks, they do so correctly, but in practice, this only concerns a small proportion of cases. After its on-site visit, the CGLPL noticed that the bill on substantive equality overseas containing other social and economic provisions, adopted by the National Assembly but which was still being examined by the Senate at the time this report was being written, also contained a provision that was likely to introduce discriminatory circumstances in Mayotte. Indeed, since 1 November 2016, pursuant to the amendments brought by the 7 March 2016 Act on the rights of foreigners in France, the liberty and custody judge issues a decision within 48 hours instead of the previous five-day timescale. This change is at least in keeping with a longstanding, repeated request on the part of the CGLPL. But as it has been passed by the National Assembly, the bill contains a provision that is at odds with the goal of substantive equality and which involves bringing back the five-day timescale for the liberty and custody judge to issue a decision, solely for Mayotte. The Chief inspector of places of deprivation of liberty has drawn the Senate's attention to the untimely nature of this provision, which introduces inequality of treatment and is not appropriate for the situation in Mayotte where the widespread existence of detention placements should, on the contrary, lead to closer scrutiny by the judicial authority rather than a limitation in its role. It is necessary to maintain a 48-hour timescale throughout national territory – including in Mayotte – for the presentation of people placed in administrative detention to the liberty and custody judge. 4.2 The operations geared towards "sheltering" migrants based in the Calais region and Paris have not brought about a sharp increase in deprivation of liberty measures. In the autumn of 2016, the CGLPL investigated all of the operations that were performed in the Calais region and Paris to deal with the influx of migrants. In the former region, the investigation conducted by the CGLPL concerned the border police services, Coquelles detention centre for illegal immigrants and temporary police stations set up for dismantling the "Jungle" camp. Evidently well planned and meeting an expectation shared by both the associations and the migrants themselves, these operations were mostly able to take place under calm, orderly conditions. Very few detention procedures were carried out against people in the camp. That said, the inspectors did note an increase in the number of foreigners in the Pale of Calais detained and taken in for questioning. The places of deprivation of liberty in the area received a much greater number of referrals than usual as a result of this situation, but in conditions that had been correctly anticipated. The inspectors' only observations had to do with the fact that, save for a few exceptions, the documents handed to the prisoners were not written in a language they could understand and that the police stations were overly crowded – even if this situation was not unusual. Moreover, lawyers had indicated to the CGLPL that when the "Jungle" camp was being dismantled, they had been prevented from entering the area where the operations were being carried out – a situation which is likely to violate the rights of the foreigners present. On the other hand, the CGLPL had notified the Government of the handling of minors, selected in the queues on the grounds of their appearance, qualified as minors following an interview of dubious technicity and then accommodated in large numbers (1,500 or so) in an interim centre set up specifically for them. 29