Correctional institutions Structural deficits From the very first visits to wards and facilities for the detention of mentally ill offenders, the NPM found serious deficiencies (see NPM Report 2013, p. 56). These include a lack of treatment alternatives, placement among regular prisoners, overly long detentions due to a lack of after-care facilities, too few experts and a lack of quality standards for the preparation of expert opinions. Persons being held in detention frequently told the NPM that they desired more transparency and information regarding decisions to loosen prison rules. Reform has been sought since 2014 Based on these observations, the NPM demanded fundamental, in-depth reform: facilities for the detention of mentally ill offenders should be made more treatment-oriented and humane. In June 2014, the Federal Minister, encouraged by media reports regarding a distressing event (see NPM Report 2014, pp. 86 et seq.), established a working group for this task. More than 40 experts from different areas of detention in facilities of the penitentiary system and detention of mentally ill offenders participated in this working group, including a representative of the NPM. At the beginning of 2015, the group submitted a 96-page final report with a requirements catalogue. Based on the working group’s proposals and recommendations, some organisational improvements were made to better assign prisoners with mental health care needs to facilities where they can receive the best possible treatment. Nevertheless, it took two and a half years before the draft of the Detention of Mentally Ill Offenders Act (Maßnahmenvollzugsgesetz) was presented before the general public at a “Conference to implement a modern form of detention for mentally ill offenders” on 18 July 2017. Draft of the Detention of Mentally Ill Offenders Act The Federal Minister acknowledged that the detention of mentally ill offenders is embedded in criminal law. The criminal courts have full jurisdiction: from temporary imprisonment to a complete refusal to imprison. In the future, persons will be placed into modern forensic therapeutic centres, which will offer care and treatment. Restrictions on personal freedom in prison will be linked to a modern legal protection system. The long-outdated designation of the persons detained in these facilities as “mentally disturbed” is now abandoned. Instead, the draft speaks of “criminal offenders with serious mental disorders”. According to the authors of the draft, more than 90% of the working group’s recommendations from 2014 will be implemented if it becomes law. Two striking weaknesses The NPM notes with approval that therapeutic centres are being established and that preventive measures will only be enforced in facilities specially designed for this purpose. However, two items in the draft do not meet the NPM’s expectations. The first relates to the assessment by which such measures will be imposed on persons. The second relates to the demand that such measures be imposed on juvenile criminal offenders only for a limited period of time, which was rejected. The experts of the working group have taken a clear position on these two items. 102