Police detention centres Two naked persons in same security cell In the course of this visit, the commission reviewed documentation of the detention of persons in padded security cells. This revealed that several persons were either completely naked or only wearing underwear during their detention in the cells. There was no proof that they had been offered and refused replacement clothing. Moreover, the commission found that two naked persons were held in a padded cell together for more than six hours. The NPM pointed out to the Federal Ministry that the detention of two (unclothed) persons in one security cell was contrary to the objectives of Section 5b (2) (4) of the Detention Regulation. According to this rule, a persons may only be held in isolation in a security cell when there is a risk they might harm tthemselves. It was not possible to make a definitive assessment in this regard at the time of completing this report. Inadequate documentation of outdoor exercise During several targeted visits to Hernalser Gürtel police detention centre, the NPM checked whether detainees held in single cells or specially secured (tiled cells included) were offered daily outdoor exercise (one hour of outdoor exercise) as well. However, the commission could not clarify this matter on site based on the current documentation form. The documentation only provided very general reasons for the lack of outdoor exercise (e.g. “not willing to go for a walk”). Therefore, when there were complaints that outdoor exercise was not being offered or provided, the commission frequently could not determine whether the detainees’ reproaches were justified. Therefore, the working group saw a need to make the current form of documentation more specific. The Federal Ministry gave its assurance that outdoor exercise is being offered to all detainees except for persons in specially secured, padded cells. This exception is understandable since the affected persons are being held in specially secured cells (padded walls or floors) to prevent them from harming themselves or others. Allowing these persons to move about in an unsecured yard would be contrary to the purpose of their detention in such cells. Apart from that, this form of detention may only continue for the period of time that is absolutely necessary. Therefore, the working group formulated the following requirement for inclusion in the standards for special security measures: in the future, the rejection of outdoor exercise by detainees in level 2 security cells (e.g. tiled cells) must be documented. Lockable boxes or containers During visits to Innsbruck, Klagenfurt and St. Pölten police detention centres in 2016, the NPM found that detainees had no possibility to store personal items or clothing in lockable boxes. Due to this criticism by the NPM, the working group found it necessary to develop a uniform solution. It was of particular importance to the NPM that detainees be provided with lockable boxes or containers to ensure a minimum level of privacy. This 146