Right to collective expression 2 2 0.48% Voting rights 1 1 0.24% 0.17% Privacy 1 1 0.24% 0.17% Right of personal portrayal 1 1 0.24% Other - - - 0.69% Staff working conditions - - - 0.17% Total 367 417 100% 100% 25 18 7 - - The case-files newly opened in 2016 primarily concerned access to health care, as far as penal institutions are concerned; for administrative detention, they concerned dignity and legal information and advice; for health institutions, they concerned dignity and freedom of movement; and for custody facilities they concerned legal information and advice and property rights. The six main fundamental rights on which the newly opened inquiries focused this year are the same as in 2015: access to health care, maintaining family ties, dignity, physical integrity, legal information and advice and access to activities and work. 3.2.3 Verification findings to the closing of the case-file For the second year in a row, the CGLPL is able to give indications on the findings of the verifications carried out with the authorities with which cases are taken up. In order to report these findings, a distinction has been drawn between any violations of fundamental rights, the results obtained for the person concerned and action taken as regards the authorities. The data below shows that a violation has been proven (even partially) in 57.07% of case files closed between 1 January and 30 November 2016 (versus 52.68% in 2015). In 48.70% of case files, the problem has been resolved: either for the person, or for the future, or in a partial manner (versus 52.68% in 2015). Finally, as regards the actions taken, the Chief inspector sent recommendations to the authorities called upon in 13.35% of cases (versus 12.75% in 2015). Corrective measures resulting from the inquiry addressed by the CGLPL to the authorities concerned were taken in 15.71% of cases (versus 9.91% in 2015). No special follow-up was given by the chief inspectorate in 42.14% of inquiry case-files (versus 54.19% in 2015), either because no violation of a fundamental right was proven, or because the person deprived of liberty was transferred or released and the fundamental right in question could not be dissociated from his or her individual situation, or due to a lack of information justifying the issue of recommendations or a call for vigilance. Out of the 386 case-files closed during the first eleven months of 2016, the following results were obtained: Number of casefiles % 2016 (Jan. – Nov.) % 2015 (Jan. – Nov.) Violation not proven 164 42.93% 45.81% Violation proven 131 34.29% 28.02% Violation proven partially 87 22.78% 24.66% Results of the inquiry Violation of a fundamental right Not applicable Total Not applicable 114 - - 1.51% 382 100% 100% 84 21.98% 11.24%