general observations in connection with inspections 30 serving a prison sentence and a placement within the prison service means a much more perceptible restriction to freedom than a stay in a Migration detention centre.23 The 2017 inspections show that migration detainees placed with the Prison and Probation Service are still kept under considerably worse conditions than detainees placed in one of the Migration Agency’s detention centres. The Parliamentary Ombudsmen has also stated that remand prisons and prison establishments are not a suitable environment for detainees.24 The CPT has repeatedly criticised the conditions in Swedish remand centres and has recommended that the authorities cease to place individuals detained pursuant to the Aliens Act with the Prison and Probation Service.25 The 2017 inspections prove that a detainee, placed pursuant to the Aliens Act, with the Prison and Probation Service, is kept under considerably worse conditions than a person placed in a Migration detention centre. Those detained within the prison service do not have the same opportunity to secure their statutory rights. The Prison and Probation Service facility that best meets the requirements in the legislation to the greatest extent, is the Storboda remand prison. The remand prison has common facilities and good conditions for catering for the rights of detainees, including spending time together in common facilities. At the other end of the spectrum there are, for example, the Huddinge and Sollentuna remand prisons, where detainees often stay under conditions applicable to those on remand with restrictions imposed. This means that a detainee may be locked up in a residential room for 23 hours a day. Findings from the seven remand inspections in 2017 led to the Parliamentary Ombudsmen deciding, within the framework of an enquiry, to again follow up on the matter and investigate what measures are required in order to change the situation for migration detainees placed under the Prison and Probation Service.26 Following the inspection of the Storboda remand prison, the Parliamentary Ombudsmen noted that a previous Parliamentary Ombudsmen had stated that the best thing would be, for the Migration Agency, to take on the responsibility for detainees who are not to be expelled after having served a prison sentence, and that the Prison and Probation Service could be relieved of this task.27 This question will be monitored within the same enquiry.28 Follow-up of previous inspections The Parliamentary Ombudsmen has stated that it would be reasonable to request that detainees’ exercise yards are designed in such a way that it is possible for the detainees to observe their surroundings. It is thereby unacceptable for exercise yards to be designed in such a manner that they become 23 JO 2011/12 p. 314, Ref. no. 6090-2009. 24 JO 2014/15 p. 216, Ref. no. 5529-2012. 25 CPT/Inf(2016) 1, p. 72. 26 Ref. no. 416-2017. 27 JO 2014/15 p. 216, Ref. no. 5529-2012. 28 Ref. no. 581-2017, enquiry ref. no. 277-2018.