17 Selected topics from 2016 Body searches – balancing security and dignity All of the sectors visited by the National Preventive Mechanism (NPM) conduct body searches. In many cases, these measures involve a serious interference in the integrity of an individual, and therefore require a clearly defined basis in law. Findings from the NPM’s visits show that the practical implementation of body searches varies greatly, even among institutions that apply the same legal provisions. Each sector covered by the Parliamentary Ombudsman’s preventive mandate, such as police custody facilities, prisons, mental health care institutions and immigration detention centres, have their own legal provisions that provide authority for body searches. — A common aim of the legal provisions is to prevent people bringing objects or substances with them that are illegal or that may be used to injure themselves or others. — 1 The Mandela Rules, Rule 50. A common aim of the legal provisions is to prevent people bringing objects or substances with them that are illegal or that may be used to injure themselves or others. In the immigration field, body searches may be used to try to determine a person’s identity. International human rights standards provide legal authority for body searches in different contexts, and they also set requirements for when and how the intervention should be implemented. In the field of correctional services, the UN’s revised Standard Minimum Rules for the Treatment of Prisoners (the Mandela Rules) state that searches of prisoners and cells shall be carried out in a manner that is respectful of the inherent human dignity and privacy of the individual being searched. Such measures shall be implemented following an assessment of proportionality, legality and necessity.¹ The European Court of Human Rights has pronounced several judgments that have particularly focused on the most invasive form of body searches, where the person is fully undressed and in some cases also asked to squat