Places visited by the National Preventive Mechanism in 2011 all on international standards that apply to detention establishments covered by the scope of its visits. The National Preventive Mechanism shares the opinion of the Minister that the obligations of Police officers executing detention (informing the detainee about the right to complain against detention, the right to contact an attorney, the right to inform a close person about his detention) should each time be separated from their obligations resulting from their duties in PDR (informing the detainee about the rights and duties resulting from the fact of being placed in a PDR as well as about monitoring in the PDR, allowing the detainee to execute his rights connected with detention). The Mechanism notified the Minister that such differentiation was applied during the visits and in postvisit conclusions. In 2011, employees of the National Preventive Mechanism visited 27 rooms for detained persons or persons brought to sober up79. In comparison to earlier years of the NPM’s work, 2011 brought about a significant increase of legal awareness in the visited Police units as to the role and competences of the NPM, expressed in practice by the fact that the NPM’s employees’ waited much shorter to enter PDRs. A problem identified during the visits was the lack of procedure for Police officers on duty in PDRs in the situations of threat to life or health of the NPM’s employees during unsupervised interviews with the detainees present in PDRs during the visit. Such legal gap resulted in Police officers on duty in PDRs warning repeatedly the NPM’s employees of the risk involved in interviewing detainees without witnesses. Despite being assured by the NPM’s employees that such interviews are an indispensable element of each visit and that each of NPM’s employees is prepared to carry them out, Police officers feel obliged to always warn them about possible negative consequences of such interviews. In practice, this prolongs the part of the visit dedicated to interviews with persons detained in PDRs. The activities carried out during prevention visits of the Mechanism in 2011 revealed differences in basic aspects of stay in detention rooms for detained persons or persons brought to sober up. The verification of social and living conditions, as well as rights and duties of detainees placed in PDRs was based in the majority of establishments on visual examination of rooms and on interviews with detained persons, conducted without the presence of Police officers. In 9 PDRs80, due to the absence of detained persons in the premises, the visits of the NPM’s representatives were limited to visual examinations of conditions in PDRs and interviews with their staff.  PDR at the Police Headquarters in Poznań-Stare Miasto, PDR in Oleśno, PDR in Zwoleń, PDR in Grodzisk Mazowiecki, PDR in Żyrardów, PDR in Tarnów, PDR in Oleśnica, PDR in Sochaczew, PDR in Kalisz, PDR in Ostrów Wielkopolski, PDR in Zawiercie, PDR in Oława, PDR in Elbląg, PDR in Katowice, PDR in Bydgoszcz, PDR in Grudziądz, PDR in Sławno, PDR in Słupsk, PDR in Drawsko Pomorskie, PDR in Gorzów Wielkopolski, PDR in Kętrzyn, PDR in Chojnice, PDR in Ustrzyki Dolne, PDR in Sanok, PDR in Lublin, PDR Warszawa VI, PDR in Łódź. 80  PDRs: Oleśno, Oleśnica, Zawiercie, Oława, Sławno, Drawsko Pomorskie, Kętrzyn, Chojnice, Ustrzyki Dolne. 79 51