of 24 November 2009) and the testimonies of detainees on the opening and lack of sending of their correspondence constituted a violation of the principle of liberty and of the confidentiality of the correspondence. Finally, several concurring testimonies described behaviours contrary to the code of ethics among the warders, as well as concerns regarding possible reprisals, with the prison administration department being unable to make a strong statement against such behaviours. The Keeper of the Seals, i.e. the Minister of Justice, sent her observations by post on 27 April 2015. As regards the absence of effective measures taken by the prison staff to preserve the physical integrity of a detainee after he was subjected to violence from his fellow prisoner, the Minister indicated that the Prosecutor was immediately informed of these facts, concerning which a preliminary investigation is underway, that the victim was placed in a cell with a supportive cellmate and that the alleged instigator was placed in solitary confinement. She contested the emergency nature of the request for changing cells that was made the day before by the detainee who was the victim of the violence, which was relayed by the psychiatrist of the SMPR, who did not use the reporting method required by Article L. 6141-4 of the Public Health Code in the case of a serious risk to the safety of persons within a penal institution. As regards the physical detention conditions, the Minister disputed the observations made; a bailiff was therefore called on 16 April 2015. She stated that the water sources and washrooms were renovated on 23 April (i.e. after the visit) in both yards, that a cleaning schedule of the exercise yard was set up, that a plan for renovating the showers is underway and that each of them will have separating walls. The works for connecting the institution to the urban heating network were executed; in addition, it was specified that the low temperatures in the cells was mainly due to the detainees blocking the air vents. The Minister specified that all of the the cells have been provided with hot water ever since the institution opened, but that the hot water production installations were calibrated for a theoretical number of places, which has been largely exceeded due to overcrowding in the institution. As regards the presence of CCTV cameras in the rooms used for medical activities, the Minister stated that their installation was approved by the SMPR manager and the management of the associated hospital. She specified that the images are not sent to a monitoring station, but to a computer in the crisis room that can be only accessed by members of the administration department, and that the images are not used unless a serious incident occurs that endangers the safety of the healthcare staff and requires the triggering of the “crisis” cell. The Minister disputed the violation of the protected correspondence, stating that only one letter addressed to the CGLPL had been opened. Finally, she denied any failure of the administration department in supervising the staff of the remand prison and highlighted the lack of proof concerning the violation of the code of ethics observed by the surveillance staff. The Contrôleur général upheld the statements that were made and deemed that they constituted serious violations of the fundamental rights of the detainees in this institution. Moreover, she stated that the prison administration department believed it necessary to establish a bailiff’s report contradicting the statements of the inspectors. This was the first time that such a practice was observed ever since the creation of the CGLPL. The Contrôleur général therefore swiftly invited the Minister of Justice to give any useful instructions so that similar behaviour would not occur again. In a reply dated 6 May 2015, the Minister of Social Affairs, Health and Women’s Rights stated that the CCTV cameras had been installed by the prison administration, without receiving an approval from the Regional Mental Health Department for Prisons (SMPR). She confirmed that three nursing staff members had lost their authorisations after they blocked the CCTV cameras using fabric that bore the words “medical privilege”. Finally, she specified that on the day of the 41