–4– alternative accommodation should be found for the detained person concerned. Naturally, if the report concerns possible ill-treatment by law enforcement officials, the detained person should under no circumstances be returned to their custody. More generally, the CPT considers that the objective should be to end the practice of returning remand prisoners to law enforcement agencies for investigative purposes; in particular, any further questioning of the person concerned which may be necessary should be conducted on prison premises. 81. In addition to the reporting by name of each case in which medical evidence indicative of ill-treatment is gathered, the Committee recommends that all traumatic injuries resulting from all possible causes be monitored and periodically reported to the bodies concerned (e.g. prison management, ministerial authorities) through anonymous statistics. Such information can be invaluable for the purpose of identifying problem areas. 82. To ensure compliance with the standards described above, special training should be offered to health-care professionals working in prisons and other places where persons may be detained for a prolonged period. In addition to developing the necessary competence in the documentation and interpretation of injuries as well as ensuring full knowledge of the reporting obligation and procedure, that training should cover the technique of interviewing persons who may have been illtreated. It would also be advisable for the health-care professionals concerned to receive, at regular intervals, feedback on the measures taken by the authorities following the forwarding of their reports. This can help to sensitise them to specific points in relation to which their documenting and reporting skills can be improved and, more generally, will serve as a reminder of the importance of this particular aspect of their work. 83. Prior to the systematic medical screening referred to in paragraph 73, detained persons will often spend some time in the custody of law enforcement officials for the purpose of questioning and other investigative measures. During this period, which may vary from several hours to one or more days depending on the legal system concerned, the risk of ill-treatment can be particularly high. Consequently, the CPT recommends that specific safeguards be in place during this time, including the right of access to a doctor3. As the Committee has repeatedly emphasised, a request by a person in police/gendarmerie custody to see a doctor should always be granted; law enforcement officials should not seek to filter such requests. 84. The record drawn up after any medical examination of a person in police/gendarmerie custody should meet the requirements set out in paragraph 74 above, and the confidentiality of the examination should be guaranteed as described in paragraph 76. Further, the automatic reporting obligation referred to in paragraph 77 should apply whenever medical evidence indicative of illtreatment is gathered in the course of the examination. All these conditions should be complied with, irrespective of whether the health-care professional concerned has been called following a request by the detained person or is in attendance following an initiative taken by a law enforcement official. The means of implementing the reporting obligation in such cases should reflect the urgency of the situation. The health-care professional should transmit his/her report directly and immediately to the authority which is in the best position to intervene rapidly and put a stop to any ill-treatment taking place; the identity of that authority will depend on the legal system and the precise circumstances of the case. 3 Other essential safeguards include the right to have one’s detention notified to a third party of one’s choice and the right of access to a lawyer.