43 immediately brought to the attention of the European Commission of Human Rights 1. The Commission is better placed than the CPT to examine such allegations and, if appropriate, take preventive action. If an immigration detainee (or any other person deprived of his liberty) interviewed in the course of a visit alleges that he is to be sent to a country where he runs a risk of being subjected to torture or ill-treatment, the CPT's visiting delegation will verify that this assertion has been brought to the attention of the relevant national authorities and is being given due consideration. Depending on the circumstances, the delegation might request to be kept informed of the detainee's position and/or inform the detainee of the possibility of raising the issue with the European Commission of Human Rights (and, in the latter case, verify that he is in a position to submit a petition to the Commission). 34. However, in view of the CPT's essentially preventive function, the Committee is inclined to focus its attention on the question of whether the decision-making process as a whole offers suitable guarantees against persons being sent to countries where they run a risk of torture or ill-treatment. In this connection, the CPT will wish to explore whether the applicable procedure offers the persons concerned a real opportunity to present their cases, and whether officials entrusted with handling such cases have been provided with appropriate training and have access to objective and independent information about the human rights situation in other countries. Further, in view of the potential gravity of the interests at stake, the Committee considers that a decision involving the removal of a person from a State's territory should be appealable before another body of an independent nature prior to its implementation. E. Means of coercion in the context of expulsion procedures 35. Finally, the CPT must point out that it has received disturbing reports from several countries about the means of coercion employed in the course of expelling immigration detainees. Those reports have contained in particular allegations of beating, binding and gagging, and the administration of tranquillizers against the will of the persons concerned. 36. The CPT recognises that it will often be a difficult task to enforce an expulsion order in respect of a foreign national who is determined to stay on a State's territory. Law enforcement officials may on occasion have to use force in order to effect such a removal. However, the force used should be no more than is reasonably necessary. It would, in particular, be entirely unacceptable for persons subject to an expulsion order to be physically assaulted as a form of persuasion to board a means of transport or as punishment for not having done so. Further, the Committee must emphasise that to gag a person is a highly dangerous measure. The CPT also wishes to stress that any provision of medication to persons subject to an expulsion order must only be done on the basis of a medical decision and in accordance with medical ethics. 1 Since 1 November 1998: "European Court of Human Rights"