APPENDIX Dnr O 7-2018 Page 9 (15) restrictions together with inmates placed in association places that are not in association departments (see pp. 3–4). There should be a support system to be able to follow this category. Based on experience, it takes five years’ work before such a support system can be in use. The Chief Parliamentary Ombudsman stated that it is extremely serious that statistics are reported in this way. She further emphasised the importance of the Prison and Probation Service's staff understanding the difference between an inmate whose right to associate is not met by the Prison and Probation Service and as a consequence is isolated with no basis in law, and an inmate who is isolated due to restrictions or decisions on placement in association in accordance with the Remand Prisons Act. In all these situations, the Prison and Probation Service offers inmates isolation-breaking measures. The fact that the staff record and report isolation-breaking measures for all these categories of inmates means that confusion arises and, as such, an incorrect picture is presented concerning how many inmates have restrictions. In addition, the agency does not fulfil its commitment but keeps inmates in conditions which lack a legal basis. Inmates with restrictions and inmates placed in segregation This section addressed the following issue: a) The conditions for implementing isolation-breaking measures should increase when the occupancy rate in remand prisons decreases. Despite the fact that the occupancy rate on some of the occasions surveys were taken was as low as 79 per cent, there has been no increase in the use of isolation-breaking measures. What is the reason for this? The representatives of the Prison and Probation Service stated that the premise is that inmates with restrictions and inmates placed in segregation should be offered isolation-breaking measures. Other inmates must be in association with other inmates. The results of the surveys of the use of isolation-breaking measures should be better at lower levels of occupancy. It is somewhat misleading to focus only on the average occupancy, as there are some remand prisons with an occupancy rate of 60 per cent and other remand prisons with an occupancy rate of over 90 per cent. The representatives of the Prison and Probation Service stated that they unfortunately believe that the amount of time inmates receive isolation-breaking measures will not increase more than marginally, despite the fact that Sweden has a relatively high staff rate per inmate when compared internationally. The agency will only be able to achieve ‘marginally’ better results unless something drastic happens regarding the occupancy rates. Furthermore, the agency needs better premises. The result for 2018 is however good, as occupancy increased whilst the results of the surveys of the average time that inmates received isolation-breaking measures were largely unchanged. – 75 – B