In the Minister of Social Affairs and Health's reply dated 24 February 2016, she indicated that Interregional Secure Hospital Units (UHSIs) and Specially-Equipped Hospitalisation Unit (UHSAs), as hospital structures, make no distinction in their accommodation of men and women; mixing between the sexes within such institutions must be encouraged. The Ministry thus encourages the development of mixed therapeutic group activities in prisons, but the constraints associated with facilities significantly hamper the development of mixed activity projects in day hospital settings. For his part, the Minister of Justice states that the number of day-parole places is proportional to the ratio of female prisoners and that this under-representation is not an issue regarding accompanied outing measures, since they are offered other, more appropriate sentence adjustment methods than day parole. The Minister does not consider it appropriate for all structures to accommodate men and women indiscriminately, but maintains that the prison administration is committed to enabling services and facilities in line with women's needs which are equally distributed across France. The Chief Inspector upholds all of her observations on this matter. The particular situation regarding female minors must be carefully considered, and equal treatment to boys ensured. In this respect, the CGLPL underlines the fact that imprisoning young girls in wings for adult women is illegal. They must be able to benefit from care arrangements within structures specially designed for minors. To the extent possible and according to the institution's layout, girls detained in prisons other than prisons for minors (EPM) must be imprisoned in "minor" wings in the same way as boys. On the other hand, their lodgings must abide by the single-sex principle, akin to what is intended in theory for juvenile detention centres (CEF) and EPMs. The comments that the Minister of Justice submitted to the Chief Inspector highlighted two major obstacles to the recommended accommodation of young girls within wings for minors: the institutions are laid out in such a way that it is not possible to create two separate u nits; and there are simply not enough female warders, on day or night shifts. With more particular regard to the treatment of young girls in EPMs, the Minister points out that the decision was made to restrict the number of institutions likely to accommodate female minors because of the solitary confinement and unequal treatment to which they were subject. He nevertheless announced the setup of a working group between the prison administration department and Judicial Youth Protection Service Directorate tasked with assessing the needs in EPMs and looking afresh at the opportunity of reintroducing a unit reserved for young girls in all EPMs. He also mentioned the setup of a unit that can accommodate 24 female minors at the Fleury-Mérogis remand prison. In prisons, the low number of women coupled with the single-sex principle is a hindrance to their individualised treatment (access to a proper "new arrivals" wing and a solitary confinement wing if necessary) and to respect of their fundamental rights. Accordingly, in institutions that accommodate both sexes, women find it difficult to access communal areas in the prison (health block, sociocultural zone, area set aside for sport, etc.) because the times at which they are allowed to access such areas and movements within the prison are too limited, in order to prevent any encounter with male prisoners. The principle of separation between men and women is stipulated in Article 1 of the standard internal regulations of penal institutions, appended to Article R.57-6-18 of the Criminal Procedure Code, which requires measures to be taken to prevent any communication between the sexes. In light of the observations made, it would appear that the rule whereby women must not come across male prisoners or male warders – with the exception of 38