18 for a visual inspection of genital and anal areas. The Court has confirmed that such examinations may in certain cases be degrading if they are not based on an assessment of necessity.² In the police immigration detention centre at Trandum, several detainees told the NPM that they found it degrading that invasive body searches involving the full removal of clothing were carried out after visits from persons outside the centre, even though the visits were supervised by staff. Routine body searches The European Committee for the Prevention of Torture and Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (CPT) recommends that body searches that involve removal of clothing shall be based on an individual risk assessment.³ This corresponds with Rule 52 of the Mandela Rules, which states that intrusive searches, including strip searches, should only be undertaken if absolutely necessary. — In practice, routine strip searches are carried out in several areas under the Parliamentary Ombudsman’s preventive mandate. — NORWEGIAN PARLIAMENTARY OMBUDSMAN National Preventive Mechanism ANNUAL REPORT 2016 In practice, routine strip searches are carried out in several areas under the Parliamentary Ombudsman’s preventive mandate. For prisons, the guidelines to the Execution of Sentences Act state that an inspection on arrival and before and after leaving the prison may only be omitted if security considerations do not indicate otherwise. Body searches involving the full removal of clothing are also routinely carried out when inmates are transferred to security cells. The Parliamentary Ombudsman has criticised this practice on several occasions. With respect to the police immigration detention centre at Trandum, Section 107 of the Immigration Act provides legal authority for the police to carry out body searches when necessary for maintaining peace, order and security; when necessary for the implementation of a removal order; or if there is reason to believe that the detainee is hiding or withholding information about their own or others’ identity. In practice, the main rule at the police immigration detention centre is that detainees shall undergo a body search on arrival, in connection with transfers to the security section, after visits and after any physical contact with the outside world, and when they are present in their cells during room searches. This routine practice has also been criticised by the Parliamentary Ombudsman. In police custody facilities, the NPM has observed varying practices with regard to routine use of strip searches. For example, the police custody facility in Bergen carried out individual risk assessments before conducting a body search. In a draft of the national custody instructions, the Norwegian Police Directorate has proposed that inspections be limited to superficial searches without the removal of clothing, unless, following a concrete assessment, there is reason to believe that the person is concealing dangerous objects that cannot otherwise be detected. 2 See for example Iwanczuk v Poland, 15 November 2001, Shennawy v France, 20 January 2011, Valasina v Lithuania, 24 July 2001 and Frerot v France, 12 June 2007. 3 CPT’s report after a visit to the Netherlands during 2–13 May 2016, CPT/Inf/(2017)1, page 46, paragraph 110.