10.3. The authorities’ responses to the major measures taken by the NPM escape or an attack can be expected in his case, or whether it is probable that some other persons may make an attempt at freeing him. In my view, the expression “threat posed by the escorted person” as defined in Section 76(5) of the Staff Regulations for the Police can be assessed as a circumstance that requires the compulsory application of handcuffs on the basis of the grammatical interpretation of the text. (“If this is justified by the level of threat posed by the escorted person, the escorted person shall be handcuffed.”) In one of the cases detailed in my report, this interpretation was valid as well.234 Pursuant to Section 39(1) of the Staff Regulations, “the Police Act stipulates that coercive means can only be applied if the behaviour or the extent of resistance of the person subjected to police measure justifies this according to the Police Act.” The latter provision supports my position on that at the time of adopting a decision on the application of a coercive measure, the current behaviour demonstrated by the detainee should be taken into account. In my view, neither the behaviour of the person subjected to a measure demonstrated several years earlier 235 nor the distant, theoretical threat of an escape are sufficient for substantiating the necessity of handcuffing.236 I proposed that the Minister of the Interior and the Minister of Human Capacities take joint action for allowing independent medical examination for all detainees through the appropriate amendment of government decree No. 217/1997. (XII. 1.) Korm. on the Implementation of Act LXXXIII of 1997 on the Benefits of Compulsory Health Insurance, as well as Interior Minister ’s decree No. 56/2014 (XII. 5.) BM on the Rules of Police Holding Facilities. I was informed by the Minister of Human Capacities that in order to explore the possible legal and professional contents of the law amendments related to allowing the detainees to have independent medical examinations, he started coordination talks with the representatives of the health sector, as well as the National Health Insurance Fund of Hungary and the Ministry of the Interior. The Minister of the Interior stressed that the right to choose a medical doctor was suspended both during detention237 and pre-trial custody.238 234 235 236 237 238 The documents under review suggest that in one of the cases, it was indicated as the reason for applying handcuffs that “the detainee’s behaviour was unpredictable due to his being drunk”. The above-mentioned person did not have to be prevented by the police from self-harming, from an attack or an escape, neither did they have to break any resistance, i.e. in his case, neither of the goals of handcuffing specified in Notes a)-d), Section 48 of the Police Act existed (Report No. AJB-1552/2018, Section 2.6 on the Use of Coercive Means). See my report No. AJB-3604/2016 prepared in my general legal protection competence. See my report No. AJB-2085/2015 prepared in my general legal protection competence. Note e), Section 121 (1) of the Prison Code. Since the effective date of Act XC of 2017 on Criminal Proceedings, i.e. from July 1, 2018, this legal institution has been called “arrest”. 115